Obama's ill conceived Iraq policy in flux
Jeff Zeleny, The Caucus:
This year he claims he knew all along that an increased force would bring down the violence. His statements on the Anbar awakening are at best incoherent and at worst just flat ignorant and wrong. All that leaves him with is his 2002 statement when he favored leaving a genocidal despot in place in Iraq.
His statements today show a further incoherence on his current policy which may or may not require a withdrawal regardless of the military situation. It is a dumb policy based on the false premise of late 2006 that the war was hopeless and that we needed to retreat our way to victory. Since the surge has exposed the false premise of the Democrat and MoveOn position he is trying to fudge some wiggle room that the kook left is not willing to give him. As a result he is coming across as a con man always having to explain why you misunderstood him.
After Senator Barack Obama said Thursday that he might “refine” his Iraq policies after meeting with military commanders there later this summer, he hastily held a second news conference to emphasize that he remains committed to his central proposal for withdrawing all combat troops from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.In 2004 Obama was not for a precipitous withdrawal, but that was when Rezko had hopes of getting a big contract in Iraq. When that went away in the fall of 06, Obama was back to thinking it was a bad idea to be in Iraq. By January 2007 he was clearly stating that the surge would fail and that the additional troops could not bring down the violence in a sectarian civil war.“I have said throughout this campaign that this war was ill-conceived,” Mr. Obama said. “That it was a strategic blunder and that it needs to come to an end. I have also said that I would be deliberate and careful in how we got out. That I would bring our troops home at a pace of one to two brigades a month and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position.”
...
This year he claims he knew all along that an increased force would bring down the violence. His statements on the Anbar awakening are at best incoherent and at worst just flat ignorant and wrong. All that leaves him with is his 2002 statement when he favored leaving a genocidal despot in place in Iraq.
His statements today show a further incoherence on his current policy which may or may not require a withdrawal regardless of the military situation. It is a dumb policy based on the false premise of late 2006 that the war was hopeless and that we needed to retreat our way to victory. Since the surge has exposed the false premise of the Democrat and MoveOn position he is trying to fudge some wiggle room that the kook left is not willing to give him. As a result he is coming across as a con man always having to explain why you misunderstood him.
Comments
Post a Comment