« The Things You Miss In the Heat of the Moment | Main | Interesting Question »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I would point out that sticking to a single plan of bringing the troops home immediately, no matter what the situation is on the ground during the war, is pacifism. Or a preference for unconditional surrender in the face of victory. Whether it's a moral failure on the part of Obama or just that he thinks this is his winning issue really doesn't matter to me. Either way, he is dead wrong.

You can contend it's pacifism all you want. It's not.

It may be bad policy, but then Obama has never advocated "immediate" pull out, so it's bad imaginary policy.

Isn’t that how we all at certain points tend to discuss policy? Sticking labels to certain policies (“Socialism!”, “Pacifism!”, “Nationalism!”, “Racism!“) is just so damn convenient.

Well maybe we should ask Obama.

"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is calling for the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. combat brigades from Iraq, with the pullout being completed by the end of next year.

"Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was," Obama said in excerpts of the speech provided to The Associated Press.

"The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year — now," the Illinois senator says."

I found that in about, I don't know, 5 seconds. I'm sure I can provide a nice, long list of quotes from Obama advocating the immediate withdraw of our troops if you would like to see it.

Wishing he hadn't said it is not the same as him not saying it.

Of course, now he has a more nuanced approach saying that we will phase out 1 to 2 brigades a month, with all troops gone in 16 months. Only we'll be leaving behind a "a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel." My questions is this, just how, exactly, is this new plan any different than what George Bush or McCain have been advocating? Because their plan has resulted in their being labeled war mongers, murderers and war criminals.

“Because their plan has resulted in their being labeled war mongers, murderers and war criminals.”

Not by Obama.

"Not by Obama."

No, not by Obama, but good ol' Joe made sure to appease their base by saying that yes, they will be pursuing criminal charges against Bush and/or anyone else in the administration.

The comments to this entry are closed.