Posted on 04/10/2008 2:36:00 PM PDT by The_Republican
Judging by his agile performance at Tuesday's Iraq hearings, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) now is opting for the famous George Aiken formula from Vietnam days: Declare victory and get out.
Or, rather, as an update on the late Vermont Republican's 1966 idea, Obama would declare the situation in Iraq "manageable" and drastically reduce American forces -- possibly, he suggested, to just 30,000.
Of the three presidential candidates displaying their intellectual wares in questioning Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, Obama surely was the most subtle and shrewd.
He also gave a bit of a hint of how he would practice his much-promised bipartisanship if he were elected president: He would coordinate and cooperate with Republicans when they agree with him.
By contrast, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) basically delivered dueling campaign speeches over which was more "irresponsible" -- too-hasty troop withdrawals or continuing present policy.
Clinton, who has rushed from Obama's right on Iraq policy to his left in a desperate attempt to salvage her presidential campaign, joined other Democrats in refusing to acknowledge any progress achieved by President Bush's troop surge.
Clinton said Tuesday that she favored a "responsible and carefully planned withdrawal," but her communications director, Howard Wolfson, told reporters last month that she favored withdrawal regardless of conditions prevailing in Iraq.
But it was Obama who took most advantage of the televised hearings to render a nuanced -- even silken -- performance.
In a statement rare among Democrats, he declared "we all have the greatest interest seeing a successful resolution to Iraq." The party line is that Iraq is a "quagmire" or (Clinton's words) a "failed policy."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Mort, the American people made it clear in 2004 we do not want nuance in foreign policy.
I recall Obama previously saying that he would have all troops out of Iraq by the end of 2009, with a “quick reaction force” on standby (presumably in Kuwait, since all troops to be out of Iraq). Do I remember this wrong or is he flip-flopping?
Mort is too impressed with Obama’s political skills. We want substance, not gamesmanship!
Why 30,000, as opposed to 25,000 or 35,000? Why not 15,000 or 45,000? Where does this number come from?
He evidently agrees that the situation is "manageable", but it is manageable with Petraeus at the helm, with the troop numbers Petraeus has demanded, with a president who is backing him up all the way, whatever happens. Is it still manageable with some cypher in command of a rump force that could be withdrawn in the wake of some ugly Mogadishu-style video report? Is it still manageable when your friends and enemies both know full well your rump force may be pulled out upon a moment's bad news?
I’m Aiken to see Mr. Obamalamadingdong get his arse kicked in November.
Mort is a drooler.
I recall him saying he would withdraw troops on DAY 1.
LOL, wow, what a surprise that an article is written praising Hussein for saying nothing.
Actually Obama misspoke during the hearings. When speaking about the influence of Iran on Iraq, he accidently said Iraq instead of Iran - - just as he accused McCain of doing.
30,000 American targets is what you’d have. A force that small would have trouble controlling 1 major city. They’d be hunkered down around a single airport with the enemy lobbing Stinger-type missles at the transports trying to keep them supplied. Dien Bien Phu, anybody?
I watched it and laughed at B. Hussein. After the General knocked his uninformed questions out of the park in seconds, Hussein twice tried the “let me rephrase my question” because he looked dumb, foolish and naive. It was embarrassing.
I’ve been listening to the unabridged book on CD version of “Write This After I’m Gone” — Jerry Ford didn’t see eye to eye with Ronald Reagan, but in 1980 campaigned for him, pointing out that four more years of Carter would be a disaster.
Can Republicans Win On Iraq?
The New Republic | April 10th, 2008 | Jonathan Chait
Posted on 04/10/2008 3:57:51 PM PDT by The_Republican
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1999758/posts
National Security Is THE Issue
davidlimbaugh.com | 04/10/08 | david limbaugh
Posted on 04/10/2008 4:06:24 PM PDT by lancer256
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1999764/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.