Posted on 09/15/2008 5:01:12 PM PDT by Roscoe Karns
McCain Responds to Obama's Reported Undermining of the Commander-In-Chief During Wartime [Andy McCarthy]
The McCain Campaign has issued a statement responding to the report from Amer Taheri (see today's web briefing) that Sen. Obama secretly negotiated with the Iraqi government regarding U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. McCain spokesman Randy Scheunemann stated as follows:
At this point, it is not yet clear what official American negotiations Senator Obama tried to undermine with Iraqi leaders, but the possibility of such actions is unprecedented. It should be concerning to all that he reportedly urged that the democratically-elected Iraqi government listen to him rather than the US administration in power. If news reports are accurate, this is an egregious act of political interference by a presidential candidate seeking political advantage overseas. Senator Obama needs to reveal what he said to Iraq's Foreign Minister during their closed door meeting. The charge that he sought to delay the withdrawal of Americans from Iraq raises serious questions about Senator Obama's judgment and it demands an explanation.
Good. I’m glad to see they’re not letting this slide. They’ve tempered their comments nicely, not sounding accusatory but demanding an explanation.
KEEP UP THE HEAT!
I hope McCain and the rest of us keep pushing this until these questions are answered.
LOL. “Nip me in the bud.” - Perfect.
Yup, just saw John on Fox and Friends, he wasn’t asked about this, and he didn’t bring it up.
Amazing how the Democrats and moveon.org can say horrible things about General David Petraous . . . . and now to find out who the real betrayer is their own the ONE.
I hope and pray their is some audio of this somewhere. Maybe after the Iraqi’s saw Obama on BOR and still not admitting the surge worked and blaming the Iraqi’s they decided to speak out on this.
BTTT
LOL!!
Which is exactly why he and his buffoon squad... should have stayed home. He has no diplomacy experience... therefore should keep his trap shut. Did he think he could go over there and play games.... and that the Iraqi's (ever so grateful) would do anything for an American pol?
It sounds like it could be illegal.
hehehe!
Tanks. :^D
CG’s concept for that pic.
Not at all. Did it read as sarcasm?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2083021/posts
TAHERI ARTICLE ON OBAMA INTERFERENCE IN WITHDRAWAL CORROBORATED BY NY TIMES 6/18/08
New York Times ^ | 6/18/2008 | Jeff Zeleny
Posted on Monday, September 15, 2008 2:58:55 PM by johncocktoasten
Edited on Monday, September 15, 2008 4:59:29 PM by Jim Robinson. [history]
FLINT, Mich. – Senator Barack Obama said today he intends to visit Iraq and Afghanistan before the November election.
Mr. Obama, who spoke to the Iraqi foreign minister by telephone this morning, said he was “encouraged” by the reductions in violence in Iraq. But he said the United States still must begin gradually withdrawing troops, at a pace of one to two brigades a month, with a goal of removing most combat troops in 16 months.
“We have no interest in permanent bases in Iraq,” Mr. Obama said. “I gave him an assurance that should we be elected, an Obama administration will make sure that we continue with the progress that’s been made in Iraq – that we won’t act precipitously, but that we will move to end U.S. combat forces in Iraq.”
As Mr. Obama arrived in Michigan for a campaign stop on the economy, he shared details of his morning telephone call with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. On Sunday, Mr. Zebari had a face-to-face meeting with Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee.
Among the issues being discussed with the two presidential candidates is the long-term security accord between Iraq and the United States. While the Bush administration would like to see an agreement reached before the summer’s political conventions, Mr. Obama said today that he opposed such a timetable.
“My concern is that the Bush administration, in a weakened state politically, ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it’s my administration or Senator McCain’s administration,” Mr. Obama said. “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made.”
Mr. Obama, who has not been to Iraq for more than two years, told the New York Times last month that he intended to visit Iraq. His comments today after talking to Mr. Zebari underscored that desire, saying: “I told him that I look forward to seeing him in Baghdad.”
Late last month, Mr. McCain invited Mr. Obama to embark on a joint trip to Iraq, a gesture that Mr. Obama dismissed as a political stunt. The Republican National Committee started a clock, keeping track of the days it has been since Mr. Obama’s visit in January 2006.
“In the nearly 900 days since Barack Obama visited Iraq, the facts on the ground have changed dramatically – but his ideologically-driven position has not,” said Alex Conant, a Republican spokesman. “When Obama visits Iraq, he’ll see that he was wrong to oppose the surge, wrong to continue to ignore our commanders’ advice and wrong to demand premature withdrawal.”
Today, Mr. Obama did not say specifically when he intended to take his foreign trip.
“You know, we’ll make an announcement about that,” he said. “But as I said, I’m interested in visiting Iraq and Afghanistan before the election.”
Done and done. I bookmarked the page and made available offline.
We, also, have confirmation from another liberal source of Snobami’s violation of the Logan act in Iraq, MSNBC:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/16/1146192.aspx
Obama to visit Iraq, Afghanistan Posted: Monday, June 16, 2008 1:41 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Obama
From NBC/NJ’s Athena Jones
Obama said today the campaign would be making an announcement as to when, but he said he he wanted to visit both Iraq and Afghanistan before the election in November.
“I told him that I look forward to seeing him in Baghdad,” Obama said of his conversation with Iraq’s foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari. “You know, we’ll make an announcement about that [as to when], but as I said, I’m interested in visiting Iraq and Afghanistan before the election.”
VIDEO: A Race for the White House panel debates: Are Americans more patient about progress in Iraq?
Obama spoke briefly (about 10 minutes) with reporters about his telephone conversation with Zebari. He said he was encouraged by the progress made in reducing the violence in Iraq, but believed troops should be withdrawn, and they should do so carefully.
Obama also told Zebari, he said, that Congress should be involved in any negotiations regarding a Status of Forces agreement with Iraq. He suggested it may be better to wait until the next administration to negotiate such an agreement.
Asked by NBC’s Lee Cowan if a timetable for the status of forces agreement was discussed, Obama said, “Well he, the foreign minister, had presented a letter requesting an extension of the UN resolution until the end of this year. So that’s a six-month extension.
“Obviously we can’t have U.S. forces operating on the ground in iraq without some sort of agreemnt, either a further extension of the U.N. resolution or some sort of Status of Forces agreement, some strategic framework agreement. As I said before, my concern is that the Bush administration—in a weakened state politically—ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it was my administration or Sen. McCain’s administration.
“The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made, but I think the only way to assure that is to make sure that there is strong bipartisan support, that Congress is involved, that the American people know the outlines of this agreement, and my concern is that if the Bush administration negotiates, as it currently has, and given that we’re entering into the heat of political season that we’re probably better off not trying to complete a hard and fast agreement before the next administration takes office, but I think obviously these conversations have to continue. As I said my No. 1 priority is making sure that we don’t have a situation in which us troops on the ground are somehow vulnerable to, are made more vulnerable, because there is a lack of a clear mandate.”
Excellent :)
Please help me here. First, I totally understand interference in negotiations. Second, I don’t understand, though, how interfering in the Status of Forces agreement would delay withdrawal. After research, it seems that the SOFA mainly would outline the legal status of the troops and may identify the particular missions the troops will have. It does not seem to cover force size.
Am I wrong?
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.