Posted on 07/15/2008 9:07:59 AM PDT by Reagan Man
(CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama on Tuesday called the war in Iraq a "dangerous distraction," and said more emphasis must be placed on the battle in Afghanistan.
Sen. Barack Obama said he would take the country in a new direction, should he become president.
"As should have been apparent to President Bush and Sen. [John] McCain -- the central front in the war on terror is not Iraq, and it never was," Obama said in what his campaign called a major policy address on Iraq, Afghanistan and national security.
Obama said part of his new strategy will be "taking the fight to al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
What`s the messiah`s position this week?
Too many flip-flops:
Obama: ‘I Had No Doubt... We Would See a Reduction in Violence’ With Surge
The two most glaring contradictions in Obama’s statements on the surge are bolded.
Rush noted Obama’s position in January 2007:
OBAMA: We cannot impose a military solution on what has effectively become a civil war. And until we acknowledge that reality, uh, we can send 15,000 more troops; 20,000 more troops; 30,000 more troops. Uh, I don’t know any, uh, expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to, uh, privately that believes that that is gonna make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.
Dan Riehl notes Obama’s position in July 2007:
“Here’s what we know. The surge has not worked. And they said today, ‘Well, even in September, we’re going to need more time.’ So we’re going to kick this can all the way down to the next president, under the president’s plan.”
A Democratic debate in September 13, 2007:
After putting an additional 30,000 troops in, far longer & more troops than the president had initially said, we have gone from a horrendous situation of violence in Iraq to the same intolerable levels of violence that we had back in June of 2006. So, essentially, after all this we’re back where we were 15 months ago. And what has not happened is any movement with respect to the sort of political accommodations among the various factions, the Shia, the Sunni, and Kurds that were the rationale for surge and that ultimately is going to be what stabilizes Iraq. So, I think it is fair to say that the president has simply tried to gain another six months to continue on the same course that he’s been on for several years now. It is a course that will not succeed. It is a course that is exacting an enormous toll on the American people & our troops.
Democratic debate, January 5, 2008:
I had no doubt, and I said when I opposed the surge, that given how wonderfully our troops perform, if we place 30,000 more troops in there, then we would see an improvement in the security situation and we would see a reduction in the violence.
The reaction to this year’s State of the Union address:
When Bush proclaimed, Ladies and gentlemen, some may deny the surge is working, but among terrorists there is no doubt, Clinton sprang to her feet in applause but Obama remained firmly seated.
Obama’s released statement that evening: “Tonight Pres. Bush said that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know that’s just not true. Yes, our valiant soldiers have helped reduce the violence. But let there be no doubtthe Iraqi government has failed to seize the moment to reach compromises necessary for an enduring peace. That was what we were told the surge was all about. So the only way we’re finally going to pressure the Iraqis to reconcile and take responsibility for their future is to immediately begin a responsible withdrawal.”
The recently-scrubbed portion of Obama’s web site: “The surge is not working.” Greg has the whole sections that were deleted.
UPDATE: Even more, from the Powerline guys:
January 10, 2007, on MSNBC:
I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.
On May 25, 2007, in a speech to the Coalition Of Black Trade Unionists Convention, Obama said:
And what I know is that what our troops deserve is not just rhetoric, they deserve a new plan. Governor Romney and Senator McCain clearly believe that the course that we’re on in Iraq is working, I do not.
On July 18, 2007, on the Today show, he said:
My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now.
On November 11, 2007, two months after General David Petraeus told Congress that the surge was working, Obama doubled down, saying that the administration’s new strategy was making the situation in Iraq worse:
Finally, in 2006-2007, we started to see that, even after an election, George Bush continued to want to pursue a course that didn’t withdraw troops from Iraq but actually doubled them and initiated a surge and at that stage I said very clearly, not only have we not seen improvements, but we’re actually worsening, potentially, a situation there.
We never know what the future holds, and those who supported the invasion of Iraq made their own erroneous predictions about WMDs, etc. But less forgivable to deny progress as it’s occurring right in front of you. That suggests the candidate is wedded to ideology and oblivious to the consequences of policy changes. And a candidate who has the... well, audacity to claim that he always said the surge would result in an “improvement in the security situation and a reduction of violence” when he said the opposite many times thinks that A) voters are gullible and B) the media have the attention span of an over-caffeinated ferret.
07/15 10:28 AM
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjNmZTY2YjE0MzQ0ZjdkMTUwNDI3NGIzNDExM2Y3ZWI=
.
.
Iraq???? that was last months news .... we are kicking butt and taking names... nobody is looking at Iraq. It is anon issue. Gas prices ... that is an issue.
But like all marxists the magic Negroe will egnore that ... that would demand a statement that he would have to flip flop again. Or .. just say we need “Change”
Totally worthless
Iraq???? that was last months news .... we are kicking butt and taking names... nobody is looking at Iraq. It is anon issue. Gas prices ... that is an issue.
But like all marxists the magic Negroe will egnore that ... that would demand a statement that he would have to flip flop again. Or .. just say we need “Change”
Totally worthless
Nobama (or any democrap) couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag, and now he's a brilliant military strategist?
I'll take "talking out of his @$$ for $100" Alex.
IMHO, Obamassiah’s TELEPROMPTER is this country’s most “dangerous distraction”.
RUSH: Name one thing that The Messiah Lord Barack Obama has done to contribute to the US Military’s efforts in the WOT!!!
It would be way too easy for me to say that Barack Hussein Obama is a dangerous distraction...so I’m not going to do it.
In fact, in keeping with this political season, I am going to repudiate the idea that I think Barack Hussein Obama is a dangerous distraction, because I think that stating the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is a dangerous distraction...is a dangerous distraction from the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is a dangerous distraction.
Ok, I went a little overboard saying (and then saying again, in my “self-repudiation”) that Barack Hussein Obama is a dangerous distraction, but I think I made my point.
(For those in Rio Linda, my point was that Barack Hussein Obama is a dangerous distraction.)
I found it absolutely amazing that Obammy has the balls to state unequivocally, what needs to be done in the ME prior to going over there and getting current status from those on the ground.
This jerk is a total, but frightening, ass!
Obama is the feel good sound good candidate. No substance what so ever.
Strategic importance of Iraq: Right in the middle of the Persian Gulf geographic region that contain 70% of the world's known oil reserves.
Strategic importance of Afghanistan: Geographic area where al Qaeda used to hang out before it moved its operations to Iraq.
Barack Obama is dangerously clueless.
Hmmmm ..... let me think on that ....
Potty break ...
Lunch Break ...
Still thinking.....
Still thinking ....
Okay .. I give up zip point zilch. Or in english.
Nuttin!!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
They were wrong then and they are wrong now. How is it a "distraction" from the war against al-Qaeda to have killed tens of thousands of al-Qaeda fighters... in Iraq? Because we haven't turned up Osama bin Laden yet? Well, here's a news flash for terminally stupid Democrats: he isn't running things any more, certainly not on a day-to-day basis. In fact, he never really did: al-Qaeda is far less centralized than popularly supposed, and now has a lot fewer members due to the fact that we've, uh, killed a whole lot of them. And Osama may very well be one of them.
Personally, I think bin-Laden's no more than cave dust right now, but it doesn't really matter. Drive the bastards into the mountains in Afghanistan and leave them there. We ought to lob a cruise missile or drop a MOAB on them every now and then to keep them honest, but understand they are far less dangerous hiding in cold, high-altitude caves in a barren wasteland than they would be roaming the urban streets of Arab nations.
Is this a sick spoof?
Nobody is that out of touch.
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.