When top Democratic leaders visited him at the White House this week, President Bush told them he wanted to "find common ground" on Iraq. But when the president said he planned to "start doing some redeployment ," the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, cut him off.Tonight, the president will do his best to try and convince a television audience that this stale bread is "New and Improved!" but what's new about it, exactly? That we've now armed Sunni militias who have decided it's in their self-interest to rat out Al-Qaida? They still despise the Shia, and now they're better armed. Sounds promising.
"No you're not, Mr. President," Ms. Pelosi interjected. "You're just going back to the presurge level."
If the surge has worked, as Bush and Patraeus insist, wouldn't it be more logical to keep surging? Instead, to build on whatever success we've seen in Anbar, we'll be removing troops. They aren't even following their own strained logic at this point. The real problem, of course, is that the surge hasn't done what we'd hoped. While it may have quelled pockets of violence, its larger objectives remain dramatically void. Today, in fact, we learned that the Iraqi Parliament's attempt at an oil-revenue deal has collapsed.
Well, Barack Obama, among others, has heard and seen enough. On the campaign trail yesterday, he detailed what he would and would not do if he were in charge:
Senator Barack Obama yesterday presented his most extensive plan yet for winding down the war in Iraq, proposing to withdraw all combat brigades by the end of the next year while leaving behind an unspecified smaller force to strike at terrorists, train Iraqi soldiers and protect American interests....You can read the full speech here. While there are no easy choices in Iraq, this difficult one is certainly better than Mr. Bush's "Back to the Future" plan.
"What's at stake is bigger than this war: it's our global leadership," Mr. Obama said. "Now is a time to be bold. We must not stay the course or take the conventional path because the other course is unknown."
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 2)
1. If the president and the Republican party truly believe this war in Iraq is the life and death struggle it is, then why is Bush agreeing to withdraw troops by next summer? Just in time for the 2008 elections in November?
Gen. Patraeus by no means said all is going well. The GOP cannot have it both ways...saying we have to stay and fight to the end, but we can WITHDRAW 30,000 troops? Either this is an all out war or it is not.
Bush may not be the brightest bulb in the pack, but he knows the war is unpopular and with 2008 elections looming (and 22 GOP Senate Seats having to be defended)he probably feels he has little other choice..stay and MAYBE succeed or drag his party down to defeat.
David S. at 2:35PM on Sep 13th 2007
2. ^absolutely correct David. Lets just hope that the American people aren't fooled by Bush saying he's going to take out 30,000 when 30,000 were scheduled to come home anyway.
for political commentary, visit:
http://www.politidose.com/
Patrick at 4:17PM on Sep 13th 2007
3. ^absolutely correct David. Lets just hope that the American people aren't fooled by Bush saying he's going to take out 30,000 when 30,000 were scheduled to come home anyway.
for political commentary, visit:
http://www.politidose.com/
Patrick at 4:17PM on Sep 13th 2007
4. Obama isn't the only one that has had enough, that's part of the reason why he's got my vote. It's time to get someone in the White House that gives a damn about the American people. Bush could't care less, and Hillary is the same way. The level of corruption between the both of them is unbelievable. Hurry up and save America President Obama!
KineticSunGod at 7:34PM on Sep 13th 2007
5. President Bush is ex-military (fighter pilot) and understands far more about listening to your military commanders than the previous president. The idea of fighting the battles "over there" appears to be working. Since 9/11 the AlQueda have been kept off balance. The second guessing posed by President Bush's detractors is invective fueled by rank hatred. The desired outcome is to regain power and they will stoop to any method to achieve this.
Bill at 9:21PM on Sep 13th 2007
6. Bill,
President Bush is a draft dodger - how quickly we forget. Anybody can enlist and serve at home on a base so no props there please. Anyway, AlQuaida existed long before 9/11 and terrorized other countries before America. Are you crediting Bush b/c they are lying low, for now? Based on what? He escalated the tensions to begin with by initiating an unnecessary "war" in IRAQ (to get Saddam) and what might have been a ONE sect, extremist muslim effort of a horrific act on 9/11 has now become an all out war on America by a once sleeping AlQuaida (who's NOW based in Iraq). So spare me the singing of the praises. Pandora's box has been opened by the war on Saddam Hussein/WMD (which had absolutely NOTHING to do with AlQuaida, remember?) How quickly you forget all of the confusion, denial and unaccountability spurred by Bush over what war we were fighting and why - stay away from the polls in 2008. You will do damage.
Nicole at 9:41PM on Sep 13th 2007
7. How can the surge help? We can kill more insurgents,
sure. Some people will feel safer, this is all good.
But the bottom line is that there is no Iraq, except
in our own imaginations. There are Sunnis, Shias,
and Kurds. Everybody knows that. There are also 100
armed militias over there, each with there own allegiance to a leader, that might control a few
city blocks. Sounds like the middle ages.
These people do not want a democracy, and do not
want a country. The Kurds are already indpendent,
and the Shiittes are next. The Shia and Sunnites
don't talk with one another.
When we ask for them to get along, they have no
incentive to. They know we are leaving, and don't
care what we think. Lets' end the game and get out.
michael at 4:23PM on Sep 14th 2007
8. WE've had 20 years that's right 20 years of the Clintons and two different Bush's as Presidents. We don't need Hilliary and any more of the Clintons. We need new leadership. Who's got the character, experience, and guts to do the job? And keep this country and our economy safe from the terrorists? Who??
Michael McClure at 7:58PM on Sep 14th 2007
9. Given his muslim background it's unsurprising barack obama wouldn't be too interested in fighting other muslim killers. Next he'll probably want to take taxpayer dollars to "save" the always suffering africans from famine/ethnic cleansing/drought/disease/each other. In that obama,in his own words, encourages and condones illegal immigration by mexicans maybe he can develop a plan to send the illegal mexicans to africa to help with construction/reconstruction.
designersrus15 at 9:47PM on Sep 14th 2007
10. is bush doing what is right for the country,and to a larger extent, the world???..or,...is he doing what he thinks is best for the Gay Old Party???
suoires at 12:33PM on Sep 15th 2007
11. Designersrus and michael mcclure -
Our country has become the most unsafe its ever been during THIS president's tenure. So spare us all your inability to be reasonable or objective. When will you will wake up and see that the ongoing threat of terrorism has been ingrained into your mind by our government and media (over and above things more immediate like HEATLHCARE, ECONOMY, JOBS, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, PORT SECURITY, etc.) Its an overhyped issue designed to keep you in fear and playing right into the hands of people who then PROMISE they will deliver you from the same threat (terrorists sects) that has existed for DECADES. This is nothing is new - its just the newest brainwashing technique. Vote for Republicans we'll keep you safe or maybe they'll lead us straight into a nuclear war. Gone are the cowboy days and simple ground invasions - wars (long range missiles, stealth bombers, etc) now have the potential to obliterate entire countries with an order and the touch of a button.
We need a leader who won't antagonize people that we are not equipped to handle at the moment (and even so could lead to disastrous consequences overall). This fake war on terror (saddam had nothing to do with terrorism, duh) has cost us BILLIONS and stretched our military thin leaving us open to attacks from others and surely sending the message that we are only blowing hot air at IRAN and KOREA when we couldn't even muster enough troops to reach Katrina victims in under 5 days. Go away and think - my friend. Terrorism will take YEARS to eradicate - we are fighting a sick mindset..we are fighting people(some of which) we trained, provided weapons to and money or didn't you know that...Our country must be lead by someone who will not only be tenacious in this battle but intelligent and strategic in how the battle is waged -
(1. clean up America's image globally cause we WILL need the help of other countries in ferreting out terrorists who hide there..we will need to unite/get on the same page with those countries (Bush's arrogance after 9/11 cost us much needed global support - why go it alone when it is a worldwide problem for everyone to handle)
2. you can't just shoot everyone - for each terrorist you kill, 10 more surface with furthered beliefs that the US is evil and must be stopped..so what kind of war do we wage?
3. you can't continue to waste OUR money and the lives of OUR soldiers on an unclear enemy..(our enemies either suicide bomb or plant bombs and are long gone by the time those bombs take alife)
4. you can fight the war but NOT to the extent that you CONTINUE to sacrifice the immediate needs of Americans at home with social security, healthcare, jobs, etc. all of which weakens us from within - all on a war that could last for decades)
What a tight rope - now who's smart enough to walk it? Romney? Thompson? Guiliani? Yeah right - jr. Bushes who will provide more of the same double talk/unacountability we've already suffered for 8 years I say b/c their campaigns center around terrorism. THERE ARE OTHER NEEDS TO BE SATISFIED. We need foreign diplomacy, patience, reliable intel, reliable/accountable./trustworthy congressional members who take out their own trash (like Rumsfeld, Gonzales should have been forced out by the GOP, not covered for) and attention to our own backyard first. America has plenty of other problems and this war (that has been front and center with little progress for SIX years) has to go on more of a back burner for now - seems like voters shared that same sentiment in the '06 elections. We have intelligence agencies and the TSA working like crazy which have thwarted at least two potential attacks. That is their purpose and they will continue to serve it but our Congress needs to get back to fixing issues within our country that have been falling through the cracks for the sake of "this war."
You need to think carefully about who you vote for and why - terrorism is a scary problem but America is one of many targets. We have gone about this the wrong way and UNITED our enemies instead of diffusing the threat altogether. Vote for the ultimate PROBLEM SOLVER (regardless of political party affiliation) not the warmonger. Vote for the country uniter - Bush has us nearly hating/labeling each other based on conservative views vs. liberal views when we are all Americans first, period. Our country needs to run free of propaganda and nasty EXTREMIST political mudslinging (ala FOX and msnbc) which confuses/divides voters and makes us no better than battling Shiites and Sunnis who can't get along within their own country b/c they can't see past each other's differences and constant struggles for power. Sounds like Democrats and Republicans only without the killing, huh? Be aware - vote for a PORBLEM SOLVER b/c the next world war could be our last.
Nicole at 12:34PM on Sep 15th 2007
12. Congratulations on Obama campaign managers they got the old white retired military General on PBS TV news to say he endorses Obama. His name ends with . . .sky work with some academic stink tank. Shows how weak Obama and friends are on national defense and military issues. Poor Poor presidential material.
Alan Klaus at 4:24PM on Sep 15th 2007
13. Alan Kraus -
Huh?
Nicole at 5:44PM on Sep 15th 2007
14. To Designersrus....what difference does it make whether the money goes to Africa or Iraq. Whats wrong with it going to securing America. It does not matter who's elected to spend it...as long as it's a Democrat!
Ed at 8:35PM on Sep 16th 2007
15. "what is at stake is our global leadership" WOW!! powerful statement from a man who took his oath with his hand on the koran and whose father and step-father were muslim. Not to mention that Obama was educated in muslim schools in Indonesia. Don't let him fool you by saying "i went to catholic schools" that was only two years of his education. Muslim radicals swear to take over the world... what better way to rope in America than to have an undercover radical muslim political figure... or worst yet-- a president. That's how they get in to rule UNDERCOVER!! think about it people!!! Serial killers don't live their lives everyday as a killer.... BTK? everyone was in shock...he fooled his own family! whose to say Obama can't fool everyone and underneath all his politically correct bull#$%^ he is really a radical muslim trying to get power of the United States to be able to destroy us!
Kim at 1:47PM on Sep 17th 2007