Obama: Iraq war to end in 2011

[sabra]

Source: The Hill

President Barack Obama said Monday that U.S. troops will stick to the schedule for withdrawing completely from Iraq by the end of 2011, and "for America, the Iraq war will end."

Addressing the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) in Phoenix, Obama warned that those "who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again" and said that by ending the war in Iraq, the U.S. can shift focus to Afghanistan.

"The insurgency in Afghanistan didn’t just happen overnight," Obama said. "And we won’t defeat it overnight. This will not be quick. This will not be easy."

Read more: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-iraq-war-to-end-in-2011-2009-08-17.html

[endless october]

1. how do we "win" in Afghanistan?

i mean, honestly, isn't there someone in government who was paying attention during Viet Nam or the Soviet Afghanistan campaign 30 years ago?

you can't "win."

is interventionism ever going to be stopped? who can i vote for to make that happen?

[Dogmudgeon]

3. "Win" is not in Obama's published remarks

"Winning" was more of a Bush/Republican obsession.

--d!

[endless october]

5. exactly my point.

so what is the exit strategy?

we can't stay there forever. and nation building requires something very close to that. i would just like to see our people coming home form that entire region.

[timeforpeace]

9. Harry Reid said last year that we won or that it was over. No longer operative?

[hugo_from_TN]

16. From Obama's remarks in the OP:

"The insurgency in Afghanistan didn’t just happen overnight," Obama said. "And we won’t defeat it overnight. This will not be quick. This will not be easy."

If you are claiming that there is a difference in 'winning' and 'defeating' your stated enemy, I must disagree. This is just semantics. He is stating that his goal is to 'win'.

[harun]

17. You can vote for Kucinich, only person I know who would stop it.

[Mari333]

18. thats who i vote for next time.

[readmoreoften]

25. Vote for Kucinich and prepare for a revolution. Because the global capitalists

will never accept a challenge from the US State. The US State exists to support capital and manage the people in their favor. If Kucinich were elected, he'd either have to tow the line or he'd be set up and deposed.

The only power we have is the fact that WE produce the world. Capitalists don't know how to work the checkout lines. They don't know how to change bedpans. They don't know how to handle customer service or install digital cable. They don't know how to run a printing press or deliver mail. They don't know how to book hotel rooms and they don't know how to clean them.

A mass strike and a state take over by the people is the quickest way to ending this garbage, but we're not there yet.

Maybe protesting and blockading FOXNEWS is the first step.

[endless october]

28. would definitely vote for him.

[Ocotillo]

2. The light at the end of the tunnel

Might just be a train coming at you.

[Oregone]

4. Why is that news?

We've been following Bush's SOFA agreement thus far. I warn anyone to get too happy, as "the conditions on the ground" may change before then. There is a big ass embassy we don't simply want to leave behind there...not without taking all the oil first.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/19/iraq.sofa/index.html

[Xicano]

6. What happened to ending the war in Iraq now?

And why talk about ending it at the end of 2011? Sounds to me like he never intended to end the war in Iraq until the powers at be who are the real controllers have decided to end it, and, talking about ending by the end of 2011 is nothing more than a calculated, preemptive statement so when he's rightly accused of using ending the war in Iraq as a political football for 2012's election, he can say "naaaa, I've mentioned this a couple years ago back in 09".

Not buying it Obama. We elected you to end the war NOW!!!! FUCKING GET IT? END THE WAR NOW!!.



Fucking liar!

[jaxx]

10. OMG

[avaistheone1]

22. This admin just like the previous one keeps dragging it out another 12 months and another 18 months

at a time. Let's be honest these wars with Iraq and now with Afghanistan are wars without end.

No one is talking about the troops coming home anymore. No one much cares.

[Zhade]

31. Indeed. He lied.

NT!

[lanlady]

7. Color me skeptical

The generals already are arguing to send more of our troops to Northern Iraq. We'll never leave that place.

Oh, and Obama has waffled and backtracked on all his campaign promises. So I'm not much inclined to believe what he says anymore.

[Bragi]

8. "This will not be quick" It's been EIGHT YEARS already!!!!

Obama has screwed himself by making Afghanistan "his" war.

This war is a mistake. No good will come from it. He should declare victory and leave.

[seabeckind]

11. For us math challenged...

How much is Jan 2009 plus 16?

(on edit) or was that in dog months?

[Xicano]

12. Obama is in no way compared to MLK

Sorry but this sig is full of shit! Obama is NOTHING like Martin Luther King. That sig is an insult to Martin Luther King.


What MLK was and what Obama is not: >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlZ8nUijmQg





The way things are turning out. This is being a more accurate way of depicting that sig:

[avaistheone1]

20. You unfortunately are correct.

[Winterblues]

13. "Beginning on Day One"...."One Brigade a Month"

Why should I believe anything he says now? I believed him when he made those statements and guess what? :shrug:

[Qutzupalotl]

27. "subject to conditions on the ground and advice from our generals."

Conditions sucked, so they had to pull back from cities first, then the whole country.

[Winterblues]

29. That is complete balony

The deal to withdraw from cities by June 31st was signed by the Bush* Administration and conditions on the ground have been the best in seven years. He flat out did not follow through on what he said he would do..

[Qutzupalotl]

30. President Obama has more information than candidate Obama.

I think Obama's original plan was too naive. Things are improving, but not enough to withdraw quickly. He has to think about saving our soldiers' lives, and that means an orderly, if too slow, withdrawal.

I'm not disputing that what is happening is different from what he wanted. I am disputing that it's a deliberate lie. I think he got in and could not do what he wanted. No politician, especially a first-term president, looks forward to breaking campaign promises. That can bite him. He knows that.

[seabeckind]

14. As far as Af/Paki?

As I posted the other day: The only way out is the same every other country used. You get the map you used to get in and you go the other way.

[ConcernedCanuk]

15. And they will turn that massive embassy into homes for some of the thousands they destroyed

.
.
.

and replace all the soil they polluted with their munitions

and rebuild all the infrastructure they destroyed during their invasion

and replace all the loved ones they slaughtered in their illegal invasion

and so on

I BELIEVE IN THE TOOTH FAIRY TOO!!

[d_b]

19. yay?

[gorfle]

21. Pull out of Iraq just to pull into Afghanistan.

How about bring them home? If the Soviets couldn't make any headway there, what makes anyone think we can?

[progressoid]

24. Well, yes and no.

I'm not trying to defend our presence there but back in the 80's, the Soviets were also fighting us at the time. We spent between 3-20 billion to fund, train and equip the Mujihadeen.

[gorfle]

26. And guess what...

Odds are just like the Soviets were fighting us by proxy in Afghanistan, we'll be fighting someone else by proxy in Afghanistan.

[readmoreoften]

23. Oh he says that every year.

:eyes:

We'll be there as long as necessary to defend that new 80 football field long embassy. If he has so many troops in Afghanistan that he can only spare a few tens of thousand "peacekeepers" for Iraq then he'll supplement with contractors. He'll keep our hold on it no matter how many troops it takes. His corporate masters will make sure of it.

But the new game--the game he's hungry for--is in Afghanistan. That's why he and Clinton threatened the careers of junior congressmen a few months back if they didn't support the slaughter over there.

We could secure a modern government for Afghanistan by rebuilding and offering jobs. That is ALL it would take. Period. There is 100% unemployment everywhere except for Kabul. The Taliban pays a $500 to $2000 a month salary for people with no other choice but to sell their children to rich, (often international) pedophiles. (Yes, according to reporter Anand Gopal, all around Kabul, men are sobbing walking around with their tiny daughters for sale so that the rest of their families don't starve.)

If we took the billions of tax dollars we spend on rebuilding (0.048% of never leaving the US and lining the pockets of subcontractors) and put 10% of it into hiring LOCALS to build schools (maybe as reparations) we'd end this war in month.

But we have no interest in ending war. It's a profit machine for contractors even if *we* don't win. It's the direct theft of US taxpayer dollars.