Obama coming around on Iraq War strategy? - Jets Insider.com Forums

jetstream23 · 07-23-2008, 02:10 AM

[QUOTE]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama was pinned down on Tuesday on whether he credits an increase in U.S. troop levels in Iraq -- known as the "surge" -- for helping stabilize the country.

Obama was asked repeatedly on "CBS Evening News" whether the surge has worked.

He explained why he would still oppose a troop increase in Iraq, saying it does not meet the long-term U.S. strategic goal and that the emphasis on Iraq had taken a toll on the U.S. effort in Afghanistan.

"If we have shifted away from the central front of terrorism as a consequence of enormous and continuing investments in Iraq, then that's a poor strategic choice," the Illinois senator continued.

Pressed once more on whether he gives the surge any credit for reducing violence in Iraq, Obama said he did, as one factor of many.

""No, no of course I have," he said. "There is no doubt that the extraordinary work of our U.S. forces has contributed to a lessening of the violence, just as making sure that the Sadr militia stood down or the fact that the Sunni tribes decided to flip and work with us instead of with al-Qaeda -- something that we hadn't anticipated happening. All those things have contributed to a reduction in violence."

On the campaign trail, Republican John McCain once again rebuked Obama for his opposition to the surge.

"When we adopted the surge, we were losing the war in Iraq, and I stood up and said I would rather lose a campaign than lose a war," McCain said in New Hampshire.

In a separate CBS interview, the Arizona senator hammered home the point.

"Sen. Obama said the surge would fail. He said that it couldn't succeed. He was wrong," McCain said. "He said he still doesn't agree that the surge has succeeded now that everybody knows that it has succeeded."
[/QUOTE]

I'd be less concerned and more supportive of Obama if he could simply say that recent strategy has been effective and that the lack of a hard timetable for withdrawal thus far as supported our recent success in stemming the violence. It's fine if he says we went to war based on bad intelligence and that the war effort was hampered by early strategic blunders. It was, and even many conservatives recognize that. But we have to look from this point forward. The surge is working and we're seeing real progress.

There is no shame in having Obama say, "now that I've been to Iraq, spoken with commanders and troops on the ground, I agree with the current direction we're taking." I'd respect him more for that. He doesn't have to advocate a different approach simply to be different than McCain and to appeal to the mass population who is tired and mentally fatigued from this war. It's about doing the right thing, not the popular thing. His on-the-job foreign policy training continues and that is a good thing.

I think this trip was educational for him. He heard a lot, [U]but did he listen[/U]?

rbstern · 07-23-2008, 02:22 AM

If you don't like Obama's position on an issue, sleep on it, because it may well be different the next day.

jetstream23 · 07-23-2008, 02:40 AM

[QUOTE=rbstern;2640943]If you don't like Obama's position on an issue, sleep on it, because it may well be different the next day.[/QUOTE]

No doubt. He might own more pairs of flip-flops than John Kerry, but I hope he is at least flopping in the correct direction as I think, unfortunately, that he's going to be the next POTUS.

kennyo7 · 07-23-2008, 06:43 AM

[QUOTE=jetstream23;2640940]I'd be less concerned and more supportive of Obama if he could simply say that recent strategy has been effective and that the lack of a hard timetable for withdrawal thus far as supported our recent success in stemming the violence. It's fine if he says we went to war based on bad intelligence and that the war effort was hampered by early strategic blunders. It was, and even many conservatives recognize that. But we have to look from this point forward. The surge is working and we're seeing real progress.

[B]There is no shame in having Obama say, "now that I've been to Iraq, spoken with commanders and troops on the ground, I agree with the current direction we're taking." I'd respect him more for that. [/B] He doesn't have to advocate a different approach simply to be different than McCain and to appeal to the mass population who is tired and mentally fatigued from this war. It's about doing the right thing, not the popular thing. His on-the-job foreign policy training continues and that is a good thing.

I think this trip was educational for him. He heard a lot, [U]but did he listen[/U]?[/QUOTE]

What makes you think he supports this idea? Yes there has been a reduction in violence since the surge, but whether there has been any true political progress is very debatable. Even more debatable is whether we are closer to achieving our goal of achieving a "model western style democracy allied with the USA in the WOT". There is no doubt that Iraq today is very tight with Tehran. Was that our goal? To extend Iran's spectrum of influence? Its also no question that Iraq has failed to enact a reconciliation policy that is acceptable by the Sunnis. Iraq continues to have the worse refugee crisis in the world. There are many serious problems that Iraq faces that the surge has not and can not fix.

PlumberKhan · 07-23-2008, 07:13 AM

WOW! You put 20,000+ more of the best trained soldiers in the world in a city and the violence goes DOWN?!?

Bush is a regular f*cking genius, Gump. A real strategic guru. Sun Zu has nothing on this guy. How the hell did he think that up? Put more soldiers in area...watch violence go down. Jesus man! It's freaking brilliant!

Wait wait wait. Let's say we had a crime problem in the city where I live. Are you telling me that if we added more cops to patrols, violence and crime would go down? Un-freaking-believable...

cr726 · 07-23-2008, 09:08 AM

Forgetting why we invaded in the first place and how the last 5 years went. Should anyone be bragging about a surge? Rumsfield is a jerkoff.
[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2640979]WOW! You put 20,000+ more of the best trained soldiers in the world in a city and the violence goes DOWN?!?

Bush is a regular f*cking genius, Gump. A real strategic guru. Sun Zu has nothing on this guy. How the hell did he think that up? Put more soldiers in area...watch violence go down. Jesus man! It's freaking brilliant!

Wait wait wait. Let's say we had a crime problem in the city where I live. Are you telling me that if we added more cops to patrols, violence and crime would go down? Un-freaking-believable...[/QUOTE]

jetstream23 · 07-23-2008, 01:51 PM

[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2640979]WOW! You put 20,000+ more of the best trained soldiers in the world in a city and the violence goes DOWN?!?

Bush is a regular f*cking genius, Gump. A real strategic guru. Sun Zu has nothing on this guy. How the hell did he think that up? [B]Put more soldiers in area...watch violence go down. Jesus man! It's freaking brilliant![/B]
Wait wait wait. Let's say we had a crime problem in the city where I live. Are you telling me that if we added more cops to patrols, violence and crime would go down? Un-freaking-believable...[/QUOTE]

But Obama wouldn't have sent them in. So, he's not brilliant?

07-23-2008, 02:10 AM	#1
jetstream23 recovering from turf toe Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Phoenix, AZ (New Jets Stadium Section 246) Posts: 31,610	Obama coming around on Iraq War strategy? [QUOTE]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama was pinned down on Tuesday on whether he credits an increase in U.S. troop levels in Iraq -- known as the "surge" -- for helping stabilize the country. Obama was asked repeatedly on "CBS Evening News" whether the surge has worked. He explained why he would still oppose a troop increase in Iraq, saying it does not meet the long-term U.S. strategic goal and that the emphasis on Iraq had taken a toll on the U.S. effort in Afghanistan. "If we have shifted away from the central front of terrorism as a consequence of enormous and continuing investments in Iraq, then that's a poor strategic choice," the Illinois senator continued. Pressed once more on whether he gives the surge any credit for reducing violence in Iraq, Obama said he did, as one factor of many. ""No, no of course I have," he said. "There is no doubt that the extraordinary work of our U.S. forces has contributed to a lessening of the violence, just as making sure that the Sadr militia stood down or the fact that the Sunni tribes decided to flip and work with us instead of with al-Qaeda -- something that we hadn't anticipated happening. All those things have contributed to a reduction in violence." On the campaign trail, Republican John McCain once again rebuked Obama for his opposition to the surge. "When we adopted the surge, we were losing the war in Iraq, and I stood up and said I would rather lose a campaign than lose a war," McCain said in New Hampshire. In a separate CBS interview, the Arizona senator hammered home the point. "Sen. Obama said the surge would fail. He said that it couldn't succeed. He was wrong," McCain said. "He said he still doesn't agree that the surge has succeeded now that everybody knows that it has succeeded." [/QUOTE] I'd be less concerned and more supportive of Obama if he could simply say that recent strategy has been effective and that the lack of a hard timetable for withdrawal thus far as supported our recent success in stemming the violence. It's fine if he says we went to war based on bad intelligence and that the war effort was hampered by early strategic blunders. It was, and even many conservatives recognize that. But we have to look from this point forward. The surge is working and we're seeing real progress. There is no shame in having Obama say, "now that I've been to Iraq, spoken with commanders and troops on the ground, I agree with the current direction we're taking." I'd respect him more for that. He doesn't have to advocate a different approach simply to be different than McCain and to appeal to the mass population who is tired and mentally fatigued from this war. It's about doing the right thing, not the popular thing. His on-the-job foreign policy training continues and that is a good thing. I think this trip was educational for him. He heard a lot, [U]but did he listen[/U]?

07-23-2008, 02:40 AM	#3
jetstream23 recovering from turf toe Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Phoenix, AZ (New Jets Stadium Section 246) Posts: 31,610	[QUOTE=rbstern;2640943]If you don't like Obama's position on an issue, sleep on it, because it may well be different the next day.[/QUOTE] No doubt. He might own more pairs of flip-flops than John Kerry, but I hope he is at least flopping in the correct direction as I think, unfortunately, that he's going to be the next POTUS. Last edited by jetstream23; 07-23-2008 at 03:02 AM.

07-23-2008, 02:22 AM	#2
rbstern Board Administrator Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,549	If you don't like Obama's position on an issue, sleep on it, because it may well be different the next day.

07-23-2008, 06:43 AM	#4
kennyo7 All Pro Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 7,404	[QUOTE=jetstream23;2640940]I'd be less concerned and more supportive of Obama if he could simply say that recent strategy has been effective and that the lack of a hard timetable for withdrawal thus far as supported our recent success in stemming the violence. It's fine if he says we went to war based on bad intelligence and that the war effort was hampered by early strategic blunders. It was, and even many conservatives recognize that. But we have to look from this point forward. The surge is working and we're seeing real progress. [B]There is no shame in having Obama say, "now that I've been to Iraq, spoken with commanders and troops on the ground, I agree with the current direction we're taking." I'd respect him more for that. [/B] He doesn't have to advocate a different approach simply to be different than McCain and to appeal to the mass population who is tired and mentally fatigued from this war. It's about doing the right thing, not the popular thing. His on-the-job foreign policy training continues and that is a good thing. I think this trip was educational for him. He heard a lot, [U]but did he listen[/U]?[/QUOTE] What makes you think he supports this idea? Yes there has been a reduction in violence since the surge, but whether there has been any true political progress is very debatable. Even more debatable is whether we are closer to achieving our goal of achieving a "model western style democracy allied with the USA in the WOT". There is no doubt that Iraq today is very tight with Tehran. Was that our goal? To extend Iran's spectrum of influence? Its also no question that Iraq has failed to enact a reconciliation policy that is acceptable by the Sunnis. Iraq continues to have the worse refugee crisis in the world. There are many serious problems that Iraq faces that the surge has not and can not fix.

07-23-2008, 07:13 AM	#5
PlumberKhan BRACE YOURSELVES FOR 12... Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Van down by the river Posts: 21,029	WOW! You put 20,000+ more of the best trained soldiers in the world in a city and the violence goes DOWN?!? Bush is a regular f*cking genius, Gump. A real strategic guru. Sun Zu has nothing on this guy. How the hell did he think that up? Put more soldiers in area...watch violence go down. Jesus man! It's freaking brilliant! Wait wait wait. Let's say we had a crime problem in the city where I live. Are you telling me that if we added more cops to patrols, violence and crime would go down? Un-freaking-believable...

07-23-2008, 09:08 AM	#6
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	Forgetting why we invaded in the first place and how the last 5 years went. Should anyone be bragging about a surge? Rumsfield is a jerkoff. [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2640979]WOW! You put 20,000+ more of the best trained soldiers in the world in a city and the violence goes DOWN?!? Bush is a regular f*cking genius, Gump. A real strategic guru. Sun Zu has nothing on this guy. How the hell did he think that up? Put more soldiers in area...watch violence go down. Jesus man! It's freaking brilliant! Wait wait wait. Let's say we had a crime problem in the city where I live. Are you telling me that if we added more cops to patrols, violence and crime would go down? Un-freaking-believable...[/QUOTE]

07-23-2008, 01:51 PM	#7
jetstream23 recovering from turf toe Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Phoenix, AZ (New Jets Stadium Section 246) Posts: 31,610	[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2640979]WOW! You put 20,000+ more of the best trained soldiers in the world in a city and the violence goes DOWN?!? Bush is a regular f*cking genius, Gump. A real strategic guru. Sun Zu has nothing on this guy. How the hell did he think that up? [B]Put more soldiers in area...watch violence go down. Jesus man! It's freaking brilliant![/B] Wait wait wait. Let's say we had a crime problem in the city where I live. Are you telling me that if we added more cops to patrols, violence and crime would go down? Un-freaking-believable...[/QUOTE] But Obama wouldn't have sent them in. So, he's not brilliant?