Lance
Sam James
Josh Adams
fooser
jslef
Terry Woods
Ryan
davenate
Mike O
Brian McConnell
bleport
halldg
Reading on Walden Bookstore
Tyler D.
Hugo
Jon
goesdownbitter
jack3566Obama’s evolving stance on the Iraq War
A quick look at The Boston Globe’s report on Obama and his evolving stance on the Iraq war will quickly show that we will not be withdrawing out of Iraq in 2009. Or 2010. Or 2011. Obama himself said in a debate in 2007 that he will not commit to withdrawal by 2013. The reason? He is not against foreign intervention, it is simply a political tool to be ‘antiwar’. Take a look at this excerpt and I encourage you to read the entire article:
But this week, Obama adviser Samantha Power caused a stir when she told BBC’s “Hard Talk” that Obama “will revisit” the plan when he becomes president.
“You can’t make a commitment in March of 2008 about what circumstances are going to be like in January 2009,” said Power, who resigned from the campaign yesterday over separate comments insulting Clinton. “He will, of course, not rely upon some plan that he has crafted as a presidential candidate or a US senator. He will rely upon an operational plan that he pulls together in consultation with people on the ground.”
Obama insisted yesterday he would stick to his plan. But Walter Russell Mead, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said voters should expect Obama’s views on the war to shift.
“If you look at Obama’s stands, he has taken different stands, or differently nuanced stands, based on his perceptions of the changing realities on the ground,” Mead said. “As a rational human being, [if he is elected president] nine months from now, he’ll have to do the same thing. He’ll have to look carefully at the situation as it is, and make the best policy calls that he can.”
(Photo: David Zalubowski/Associated Press)
Filed under: Barack Obama, Election 2008, Geopolitics, Iraq, Politics
When it comes to an Antiwar/Non-Interventionist candidate, Obama looks like the best of a bad lot. (Failing a strong-enough-to-win 3rd-party run by Paul.) Old “100-year” McCain isn’t going to be in a hurry to get us out of Iraq, or anywhere else for that matter, nor is Miz Billary. Neither have met an ill-advised intervention they didn’t like.
I think Obama put it best with his “bus in the ditch” analogy when Clinton called him on his voting record in the Senate with regard to the war. He was opposed to going into Iraq, from his vantage point on the side of the road, he advised against it. Meanwhile McCain & Clinton were sitting near the front, urging Dubya to drive the bus into the ditch. Once it was in there, you have to deal with that fact.
Another analogy is the “open wound”. Dubya stuck a rusty, crooked knife in the back of the Republic on 3/19/03. Since then he’s been twisting it, pouring in salt, sand and feces and generally doing anything he can to prevent healing. We now have an infected mess.
Right now we’re in a place were the knife probably can’t be just pulled out to make things all better. (I want to choke someone everytime I hear the phrase “precipitous withdrawal” in response to any position that isn’t “much more of the same”.)
I’m not all that uncomfortable with a very smart guy who is willing to let the facts on the ground determine the path forward. After 7+ years of letting the path forward determine which facts we’re going to ignore, it’s time.