comment #1

dinther says ...

More troubling is the U.S. Government's response:

"In a response to Mr Maliki’s remarks, the Pentagon said the US had made clear “that we have no long term desires to have forces permanently stationed in Iraq”, but any timetable for a US withdrawal from the war-torn land would depend on conditions on the ground there.""

Essentially, the U.S. is ignoring the sovereign will of the Iraqi government: it's position is, "we'll leave when we decide we want to leave, not when you want us to leave. This contradicts Bush's earlier promise:

"We are there at the invitation of the Iraqi government. This is a sovereign nation. Twelve million people went to the polls to approve a constitution. It's their government's choice,’’ the president said during a Rose Garden news conference. "If they were to say leave, we would leave."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/24/politics/politico/thecrypt/main2848888.shtml

comment #2

Jack Price says ...

Something more pertinent to this site's greater interests:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/07/07/dnt.family.off.plane.kiro

comment #3

Geoff says ...

I heard Bill O'Reilly (I'm not a fan) spout out someting like...it's an election year for Maliki and it makes him look tough...but then he'll turn back around and say NOT YET! to the troops. He said something like that.

comment #4

Edward says ...

How much more evidence do we need that this administration does whatever it wants to further their twisted agenda. They are criminals and liars and should be impeached.

comment #5

roman says ...

The MSM may not be running with this, but if this is legit they will have to because it sounds an awful lot like Maliki just endorsed Barack.

Axelrod needs to get moving on this immediately. Enough "moving to the center" (because only people over 60 think that's an effective strategy. Way to pander to the 9% of Americans who still believe in the Dem congress).

But I digress, get the surrogates out in front of the GOP damage control machine and choke them with this.

All McCain has is the "surge". He's now on the ropes. Time for the KO.

comment #6

MovieBob says ...

NOT good for Obama. Not one bit. The MSM will miss this, naturally, until it becomes cartoonishly obvious.

Barack Obama, Presidential Candidate's ENTIRE political existance is premised on a single note: I will get us out of Iraq. If something ELSE gets us out, or makes it a moot point, who is he?

comment #7

D.Z. says ...

Bob: You honestly think Bush is going to leave Iraq now, even though the Iraqis have long demanded it through their resistance? Hell, he won't leave when the American people demand it. But let's say he magically changes his tune. He's still got a hellhole of an economy to salvage, and that alone should be enough to help Obama win.

comment #8

MovieBob says ...

DZ
"Bob: You honestly think Bush is going to leave Iraq now, even though the Iraqis have long demanded it through their resistance?"

Not a chance, though if he did it'd be just about the most brilliant risky political move of the modern era so far. Imagine if Bush got up in front of the press and announced "withdrawal begins now" with less than a month to go before the election? Obama would be looking at "victory" parades of returning soldiers (and, if he's REALLY unlucky, Code Pink kiddies crashing the party to cuss at the soldiers... yikes!) in rotation on the news with only days-old anti-war speeches made by him.

Either way, the way announcing a timetable NOW would hurt Obama is chiefly reliant on McCain's people finessing a way for him to say that it was the McCain-supported surge that allowed this "victory" (here to be defined as: "hey, the Iraqis stood up, that means we did it!") to occur.

In order to win decisively on his sole and sufficient rationale for running, i.e. "I was against this war from the start and I'll end it NOW!", Obama needs Iraq to stay where it is RIGHT NOW: Steadily bad enough for it to be a quagmire that people are sick of. If it gets even a hair WORSE - if there's a massive loss of territory or troops all at once, that helps McCain because it's scary and he's "the tough guy" running. If it gets even a hair BETTER it ALSO helps McCain because then "the strategy is working."

comment #9

D.Z. says ...

Bob: "Either way, the way announcing a timetable NOW would hurt Obama is chiefly reliant on McCain's people finessing a way for him to say that it was the McCain-supported surge that allowed this "victory" (here to be defined as: "hey, the Iraqis stood up, that means we did it!") to occur."

You have a point, but whether or not we "win", people are still going to remember the McCain who screwed over the troops to get there. Not to mention that if Bush chooses to extend the war into Iran, I imagine he'll bring McCain's potential approval ratings back down again.

"In order to win decisively on his sole and sufficient rationale for running, i.e. "I was against this war from the start and I'll end it NOW!", Obama needs Iraq to stay where it is RIGHT NOW: Steadily bad enough for it to be a quagmire that people are sick of. If it gets even a hair WORSE - if there's a massive loss of territory or troops all at once, that helps McCain because it's scary and he's "the tough guy" running."

Actually, that kind of scenario has lead to the opposite result, because Americans are more likely to support a candidate who wants to end the war.

comment #10

hcat says ...

"and, if he's REALLY unlucky, Code Pink kiddies crashing the party to cuss at the soldiers... yikes!)"

Have you heard of any confrontations between Code Pink and returning soldiers? Or any anti-war group for that matter? The soldiers that do get to come home will be greeted with open arms and misty eyes by everyone.

comment #11

Edward says ...

hcat says ... The soldiers that do get to come home will be greeted with open arms and misty eyes by everyone.

Then they'll get screwed over by the VA. The government knows how to take care of those who serve.

comment #12

Count Thread says ...

Stick to movies, because you're wrong.

1. It's always been our policy that the sovereign government of Iraq can ask us to leave, and we will leave.

2. This isn't about American politics, it's about Iraqi politics-- provincial elections are in the fall, and Maliki knows he can't look like a U.S. puppet. Arguing for discussions over something everyone agrees is inevitable (the departure of the majority, but not all, U.S. combat forces) is good Iraqi politics.

3. McCain spokesman: " "We are dealing with a sovereign government, ... If that sovereign government asks us to leave, we will leave. And if that sovereign government wants to continue to work cooperatively with us until they are able to provide their own security, we will stay. What we will not do is set an arbitrary timeline to withdraw irregardless of conditions on the ground or agreement with the sovereign Iraqi government."

4. What is the Obama position on Iraq? It's either "leave immediately, regardless of the situation on the ground, regardless of whether the Iraqis want us to stay or not, " or it's "stay until the situation improves and/or the Iraqis ask us to leave."

The former position was Obama's primary position.

The latter position has always been John McCain's position.

Obama can come to agree with that position, but it's the biggest nail in his political coffin. After abandoning everything he supported in the Democratic primary, he will have abanoned the raison d'etre of his campaign-- in fact, the *only* thing that he had going for him.

If Obama's sole claim to desirability is that he has better "judgement" than all of his political opponents, what happens when he admits his judgment was wrong?

Triangulate *that*.

comment #13

dangovich says ...

It's always been our policy that the sovereign government of Iraq can ask us to leave, and we will leave.

Hah! Nice one, count thread.

comment #14

D.Z. says ...

Thread: "It's always been our policy that the sovereign government of Iraq can ask us to leave, and we will leave."

Doubtful. If we cared what Iraqiswanted, we'd have left at the sign of the first suicide bomber.

"This isn't about American politics, it's about Iraqi politics-- provincial elections are in the fall, and Maliki knows he can't look like a U.S. puppet."

He can't look like it, but that doesn't change the fact that he is one.

"We are dealing with a sovereign government, ... If that sovereign government asks us to leave, we will leave. And if that sovereign government wants to continue to work cooperatively with us until they are able to provide their own security, we will stay. What we will not do is set an arbitrary timeline to withdraw irregardless of conditions on the ground or agreement with the sovereign Iraqi government."

That sounds like he's having it both ways to me. He can argue that unless the Iraqis officially ask him to leave, he won't bother with a timetable.

"What is the Obama position on Iraq? It's either "leave immediately, regardless of the situation on the ground, regardless of whether the Iraqis want us to stay or not, " or it's "stay until the situation improves and/or the Iraqis ask us to leave." The former position was Obama's primary position. The latter position has always been John McCain's position."

I think the latter position has always belonged to McCain, actually. Obama just said he wants to assess the situation, which probably means pulling out while saving enough face.

"Obama can come to agree with that position, but it's the biggest nail in his political coffin. After abandoning everything he supported in the Democratic primary, he will have abanoned the raison d'etre of his campaign-- in fact, the *only* thing that he had going for him."

You seem to forget this awful economy and skyrocketing prices.

"If Obama's sole claim to desirability is that he has better "judgement" than all of his political opponents, what happens when he admits his judgment was wrong?"

Even if he admits his judgment was wrong, he'll still be leagues ahead of the denial-based GOP.

comment #15

D.Z. says ...

Also, assuming the people against pulling out end up being right about the place turning into chaos, then a pre-election evacuation from Iraq will make it look even less promising for McCain and Bush.

comment #16

bb says ...

Great, Obama can refine his policy a bit more.

Forgetting his upcoming elections, I wonder what would cause Maliki to decide that timetables can now be discussed. What happened to change his position?

comment #17

cobhome says ...

since we want the Iraqui's to agree to allow permanent US military bases in Iraqui - Maliki is playing his trump card - he wont sign off on the bases til we give him a timetable - and yeah - make it look like he has some backbone