Obama on Iraq

Guest Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:21 am

Looks like Obama was right all along huh? Obama says set a timetable, of oh ... 16 months to withdraw. PM Maliki AGREES with Obama's plan. Now the WH is talking about a time "horizon" to withdraw from Iraq and McCain agrees with the WH. Obama says more brigades are needed in Afganistan because that is the FRONT on the war on terrorism and McCain disagreed at first. Now McCain says he would send 3 more brigades to Afganistan.

Looks like to me Obama HAS the judgement and knowledge to our President and Commander in Chief. His world tour has been GREAT so far, our image abroad is improving moment by moment now that he is speaking for this country.

Chuck Todd said today on Meet the Press that the Obama freight train is going to be leaving Denver and McCain had better do something to stomp on it fast. cheers

Markwes Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:16 pm

Bman wrote:Looks like Obama was right all along huh? Obama says set a timetable, of oh ... 16 months to withdraw. PM Maliki AGREES with Obama's plan.

Not so fast there bud.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/iraq_maliki_obama_dc

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:19 am

After the WH asked for that comment ... sure Maliki did not come out and endorse Obama but he agrees with the 16 months time frame which proved Obama was right.

Get ont this FREIGHT train before it leave Denver folks. Times are going to improve 1-20-09 when Barack Obama takes the world stage on our behalf. The world will respect and trust us again. No more cowboy diplomacy and knee jerk reactions.

cheers

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:55 am

gotta love it.. even when someone says they don't agree with what Obama says it can't possibly be for any reason other than the evil white house.

What a joke.

PM al-Maliki came out a while ago and asked for a timetable... from what I read he wanted to sit down and say if we do A you will do B and we do C you will do D and E.. etc.

Besides... Obama wants out of Iraq so he can go start a new war with Pakistan.

Markwes Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:03 am

Hmmm, way back (2 or 3 years ago?) you said we needed to get out of Iraq NOW. Seems like you have changed your tune a bit since Obamaco says so.

I don't have a problem with this timeline if he has done all his homework, checked with the joint chiefs and others involved, and they are in agreement that this would be best. However, if it's all a ruse to befriend all the Bush haters and keep with his "change" mantra, then it's a problem. It is okay to have a goal, but a timeline set in stone is destined to fail. If you were building a house and thought it would take 16 months to build, would you stop after 16 months even if it wasn't quite finished?

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:05 am

Markwes wrote:Hmmm, way back (2 or 3 years ago?) you said we needed to get out of Iraq NOW. Seems like you have changed your tune a bit since Obamaco says so.

I don't have a problem with this timeline if he has done all his homework, checked with the joint chiefs and others involved, and they are in agreement that this would be best. However, if it's all a ruse to befriend all the Bush haters and keep with his "change" mantra, then it's a problem. It is okay to have a goal, but a timeline set in stone is destined to fail. If you were building a house and thought it would take 16 months to build, would you stop after 16 months even if it wasn't quite finished?

NOW did not mean pull every troop our at a drop of the hat ... 16 months if fine, I hope it can start the first month Obama is in office. NOW means to start now, not to do it ALL right now. Come on Mark, you need to stop drinking the right wing kool-aid that Rush force feeds you guys.

LTRT Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:42 am

BHO knows about as much on Iraq as he knows about the length of the presidency.

Obama: I'll Be President For 'The Next 8 to 10 Years'?
By Warner Todd Huston | July 20, 2008 - 20:20

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, the reputed "Constitutional scholar," just today said on CBS's Face the Nation that he went to Iraq to talk to important leader that he expects to be "dealing with over the next eight to 10 years." So, does this "Constitutional scholar" not realize that there is this little thing called the 22nd Amendment that holds a president to only two, four year terms? Um, that would be a grand total of only 8 years, Barack, not 8 to 10. Of course, the big question is, will we see this idiot gaffe race through the MSM as it would if a Republican had said it?

At the very least ABC's Jake Tapper, one of the best political reporters in the biz, sure noticed. Tapper has a blog entry on his "Political Punch" blog all about it with an amusing side note about time travel added in just for fun.

Canuck Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:07 pm

Markwes wrote:

I don't have a problem with this timeline if he has done all his homework, checked with the joint chiefs and others involved, and they are in agreement that this would be best. However, if it's all a ruse to befriend all the Bush haters and keep with his "change" mantra, then it's a problem. It is okay to have a goal, but a timeline set in stone is destined to fail. If you were building a house and thought it would take 16 months to build, would you stop after 16 months even if it wasn't quite finished?

They all do this Mark. I think this tactic is universal when it comes to politics. They make all the glorious promises and when they get in, it is forgotten. Regardless of which party it is.
Politicians are full of hot air. Smile

Markwes Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:14 pm

Canuck wrote:
Markwes wrote:

I don't have a problem with this timeline if he has done all his homework, checked with the joint chiefs and others involved, and they are in agreement that this would be best. However, if it's all a ruse to befriend all the Bush haters and keep with his "change" mantra, then it's a problem. It is okay to have a goal, but a timeline set in stone is destined to fail. If you were building a house and thought it would take 16 months to build, would you stop after 16 months even if it wasn't quite finished?

They all do this Mark. I think this tactic is universal when it comes to politics. They make all the glorious promises and when they get in, it is forgotten. Regardless of which party it is.
Politicians are full of hot air.

Very true. Unfortunately honesty and reality are harmful in getting elected.

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 3:15 pm

So here's a quick poll questions... let's pretend BO is elected, what happens when 18 months down the road we are still in Iraq, and haven't pulled out? Think this will turn into the famous "Read my lips" comment? Or will he get a pass because "he's trying"?

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:08 pm

cardinal5150 wrote:So here's a quick poll questions... let's pretend BO is elected, what happens when 18 months down the road we are still in Iraq, and haven't pulled out? Think this will turn into the famous "Read my lips" comment? Or will he get a pass because "he's trying"?

I think that as long as we are close to be out of Iraq (he said there will be some (very limited) number of troops left behind for some time in a role of 100% protecting our assets there so I am guessing that people like Card, MarkWes, LTRT and Cincy will in 24 months from now be trying to complain that the 16 month window is up and we still have 5,000 troops there or something that Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity or Coulture tell them to rail about!

**Cincy Fan 44** Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:11 pm

Bman wrote:
cardinal5150 wrote:So here's a quick poll questions... let's pretend BO is elected, what happens when 18 months down the road we are still in Iraq, and haven't pulled out? Think this will turn into the famous "Read my lips" comment? Or will he get a pass because "he's trying"?

I think that as long as we are close to be out of Iraq (he said there will be some (very limited) number of troops left behind for some time in a role of 100% protecting our assets there so I am guessing that people like Card, MarkWes, LTRT and Cincy will in 24 months from now be trying to complain that the 16 month window is up and we still have 5,000 troops there or something that Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity or Coulture tell them to rail about!

You think I'm NOT voting for that guy who's middle name gets everyone in a tizzy? Right now, if the election were today, I'd vote for him...probably. Let's just see how the next several months shake out...

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:14 pm

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:
You think I'm NOT voting for that guy who's middle name gets everyone in a tizzy? Right now, if the election were today, I'd vote for him...probably. Let's just see how the next several months shake out...

For the record, I'm right beside you. I think there's a chance he could end up like JFK, but McCain hasn't really been performing all that well in this race AFAIK.

**Cincy Fan 44** Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:19 pm

meta4 wrote:
Cincy Fan 44 wrote:
You think I'm NOT voting for that guy who's middle name gets everyone in a tizzy? Right now, if the election were today, I'd vote for him...probably. Let's just see how the next several months shake out...

For the record, I'm right beside you. I think there's a chance he could end up like JFK, but McCain hasn't really been performing all that well in this race AFAIK.

By that I hope you DON'T mean assassinated...or sleeping with Hollywood movie stars...or swimming after his PT109 was sunk...

LTRT Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:21 pm

Bman wrote:
cardinal5150 wrote:So here's a quick poll questions... let's pretend BO is elected, what happens when 18 months down the road we are still in Iraq, and haven't pulled out? Think this will turn into the famous "Read my lips" comment? Or will he get a pass because "he's trying"?

I think that as long as we are close to be out of Iraq (he said there will be some (very limited) number of troops left behind for some time in a role of 100% protecting our assets there so I am guessing that people like Card, MarkWes, LTRT and Cincy will in 24 months from now be trying to complain that the 16 month window is up and we still have 5,000 troops there or something that Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity or Coulture tell them to rail about!

So Bman, he's out of Iraq, but in Afghanistan, humm, job well done. Rolling Eyes

Maybe he ought to recruit move foreign policy advisors, the what, 300 aren't doing him any justice so far.

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:24 pm

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:
meta4 wrote:
Cincy Fan 44 wrote:
You think I'm NOT voting for that guy who's middle name gets everyone in a tizzy? Right now, if the election were today, I'd vote for him...probably. Let's just see how the next several months shake out...

For the record, I'm right beside you. I think there's a chance he could end up like JFK, but McCain hasn't really been performing all that well in this race AFAIK.
By that I hope you DON'T mean assassinated...or sleeping with Hollywood movie stars...or swimming after his PT109 was sunk...

I hope I don't mean that either, wasn't making a direct reference to scrambled eggs and hot sauce... but every time a "savior" candidate has appeared and swept public approval polls, bad things have happened.

LTRT Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:28 pm

meta4 wrote:I hope I don't mean that either, wasn't making a direct reference to scrambled eggs and hot sauce... but every time a "savior" candidate has appeared and swept public approval polls, bad things have happened.

Think before ya type, you're starting to sound like Hillary. Razz

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:32 pm

LTRT wrote:
Bman wrote:
cardinal5150 wrote:So here's a quick poll questions... let's pretend BO is elected, what happens when 18 months down the road we are still in Iraq, and haven't pulled out? Think this will turn into the famous "Read my lips" comment? Or will he get a pass because "he's trying"?

I think that as long as we are close to be out of Iraq (he said there will be some (very limited) number of troops left behind for some time in a role of 100% protecting our assets there so I am guessing that people like Card, MarkWes, LTRT and Cincy will in 24 months from now be trying to complain that the 16 month window is up and we still have 5,000 troops there or something that Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity or Coulture tell them to rail about!

So Bman, he's out of Iraq, but in Afghanistan, humm, job well done. Maybe he ought to recruit move foreign policy advisors, the what, 300 aren't doing him any justice so far.

I want us in Afganistan until that job is done and won ... that is the REAL front on terrorism (the Afghan and Pakistan border). Glad you think Iraq is more important than Afghanistan. Shocked

LTRT Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:36 pm

Bman wrote:I want us in Afganistan until that job is done and won ... that is the REAL front on terrorism (the Afghan and Pakistan border). Glad you think Iraq is more important than Afghanistan.

You change your tone about as quick as BHO. As if Iraq was NEVER part of the "front on terrorism".

Guest Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:45 pm

LTRT wrote:
Bman wrote:I want us in Afganistan until that job is done and won ... that is the REAL front on terrorism (the Afghan and Pakistan border). Glad you think Iraq is more important than Afghanistan.

You change your tone about as quick as BHO. As if Iraq was NEVER part of the "front on terrorism".

It wasn't until we freakin' invaded ... what tone changed? Barack never supported the war in Iraq and neither have I. Bring out soldiers (not kids since that pissed all of you off) home.

Guest Tue Jul 22, 2008 7:37 am

Markwes wrote:
Bman wrote:Looks like Obama was right all along huh? Obama says set a timetable, of oh ... 16 months to withdraw. PM Maliki AGREES with Obama's plan.
Not so fast there bud.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/iraq_maliki_obama_dc

New article out today ... looks like Obama and Iraqi Govt do agree ... US troops should come home.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25786952

O ...... BAMA

O ....... BAMA

Markwes Tue Jul 22, 2008 7:52 am

Bman wrote:
Markwes wrote:
Bman wrote:Looks like Obama was right all along huh? Obama says set a timetable, of oh ... 16 months to withdraw. PM Maliki AGREES with Obama's plan.
Not so fast there bud.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/iraq_maliki_obama_dc

New article out today ... looks like Obama and Iraqi Govt do agree ... US troops should come home.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25786952

O ...... BAMA

O ....... BAMA

Let's see. The Iraqi prime minister who has never talked about a timetable before, now all of a sudden tries to get on he good side of potentially the next president. No, nothing fishy there.

Guest Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:02 am

Markwes wrote:Let's see. The Iraqi prime minister who has never talked about a timetable before, now all of a sudden tries to get on he good side of potentially the next president. No, nothing fishy there.

Sorry, not sure I follow you. What's fishy about a candiate for president meeting the new leader of a toppled nation that we, uhm... toppled? How do you envision things to look? Didn't GWB get the nod for a "withdrawl horizon" as well this week?

Markwes Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:27 am

meta4 wrote:
Markwes wrote:Let's see. The Iraqi prime minister who has never talked about a timetable before, now all of a sudden tries to get on he good side of potentially the next president. No, nothing fishy there.

Sorry, not sure I follow you. What's fishy about a candiate for president meeting the new leader of a toppled nation that we, uhm... toppled? How do you envision things to look? Didn't GWB get the nod for a "withdrawl horizon" as well this week?

Nothing fishy about the 2 of them meeting. It's just that you have a leader who wants to stay on good terms with the U.S. since we are the reason he is in power. Barack comes out with this 16-month plan. The Iraqi leader, to my knowledge, has never made any suggestions for troop withdrawal, but supposedly decides to agree with the guy who could very well be our next president. Maybe I'm just a skeptic.

Guest Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:31 am

Everyone agrees on a timetable.. the difference is BO is proposing 16 months period, everyone else is proposing a timetable of "if we get to A, you'll do B, and if accomplish C, you'll do D" and then setting out time lines for B and D.

So BO supporters can blindly claim they are right... as long as you don't actually read what is being said and just go with headlines.

I do find it interesting though that we must get out of Iraq but no one is bothering to talk about how we are going to invade Pakistan who has tested and proven Nuclear weapons to use (and a powder keg neighbor in India that wants to see them gone). Can't imagine anything bad could happen there....

Sponsored content

Obama on Iraq

Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Sorry my friend, I gotta quote Lee Corso here ... NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq

Re: Obama on Iraq