All of our combat troops were once supposed to be out of Iraq by today.

[Lasher]

The first thing we have to do is end this war. And the right person to end it is someone who had the judgment to oppose it from the beginning. There is no military solution in Iraq, and there never was. I will begin to remove our troops from Iraq immediately. I will remove one or two brigades a month, and get all of our combat troops out of Iraq within 16 months. The only troops I will keep in Iraq will perform the limited missions of protecting our diplomats and carrying out targeted strikes on al Qaeda. And I will launch the diplomatic and humanitarian initiatives that are so badly needed. Let there be no doubt: I will end this war.

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/10/02/remarks_of_senator_barack_obam_27.php

Today it's been 16 months since Obama was inaugurated.

[Enrique]

1. Obama said a lot of things n/t

[Cha]

4. That's right and he and Biden have

done a lot of things for our country.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jenmito]

2. You're taking a quote of his from 2007??? n/t

[Lasher]

14. Yes. I thought it worthy of reflection. n/t

[harkadog]

49. Do quotes have a shelf life now?

[jenmito]

55. The one in the OP does. He was a senator at the time and spoke about the facts

on the ground back THEN. In Jan. 2009, I'm SURE the facts were different, and he became privy to the new situation for which he HAD to adjust his timeline.

[zipplewrath]

63. He CHOSE to

There was nothing to stop him, other than the desire to try to achieve some goals which he didn't state in the original quote.

[freddie mertz]

91. He was campaigning then.

He had to say things to get us to vote for him.

Now that he won, things have changed.

:mad:

[jenmito]

96. He was campaigning by giving his position. At the time, he thought he could get the troops out

in 16 months. Now that he's President, and the conditions have changed, he modified his position by a few months. His mission is the SAME. But keep up the fake outrage.

[LakeSamish706]

3. Sorry, but just another politician selling his BS to get elected. n/t

[DJ13]

5. We arent supposed to remember, nor hold politicians to their word

Didnt you get the memo?

[zipplewrath]

17. Goals

Some one told me the other day that campaign promises are just "goals" and they don't have to keep them. They can even completely reverse themselves and that's okay, 'cause it was "just a goal".

[amborin]

62. +1000

[MissDeeds]

65. +1001

:shrug:

[BklnDem75]

6. "Let me say this as plainly as I can:

by August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end," he said in a speech at the Marine Corps base at Camp Lejeune. "As we carry out this drawdown, my highest priority will be the safety and security of our troops and civilians in Iraq."

But then again, you already knew that.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29371588/

[zipplewrath]

9. So will he mean it THIS time?

Which quote is the "right" one? And there is a heck of a difference between pulling all of them out, and "ending our combat mission".

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lasher]

53. That's not very nice, Nicholas. n/t

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

54. I wasn't trying for "nice". (nt)

[BklnDem75]

59. You tell me

Would you prefer the less informed candidate or the more informed president. Think this one through.

[zipplewrath]

64. I'd prefer a more consistent President

consistent with his candidacy.

Mandates
Gitmo
Cadillac Taxes
DADT (he said first 100 days)
Torture
Iraq

[BklnDem75]

76. Seems to me you want a more consistent candidate

Guess what? Simply because you didn't like his solutions doesn't mean he was inconsistent.

[zipplewrath]

79. You're right

Saying one thing, and doing the opposite is the pillar of consistency.

[BklnDem75]

81. Ah, so you want him to be more like Bush

Unchanging, unmoving, despite the information telling him otherwise. Nice!

[zipplewrath]

85. Has he explained?

Did he make his case? THAT was one of my primary complaints about Bush. He wouldn't make his case. He just made declarations and we were suppose to follow blindly. The president has never explained what changed between '07 and '09. The thing we DO know is that Bush negotiated the SOFA.

[BklnDem75]

86. He did make his case in 2009

You just didn't like the answer.

[zipplewrath]

107. Actually, he didn't.

I listened quite carefully. But he never explained what changed that made the 16 months unattainable and the 18 months necessary. He also never really was forced to justify the 16 in the first place, when many were advocating 9-10.

[stevenleser]

69. I take it then that if the August deadline is met you will be the first one with an OP praising him?

:mad:

[zipplewrath]

73. Um, you realize that's just to get to 50K

There's no real "accomplishment" then. We'll still be spending millions and there will still be 50K troops there. The accomplishment will be when the last one comes home and the money stops flowing.

[BklnDem75]

77. Luckily, he's being consistent with his speech

So you have no problem with this, right?

[zipplewrath]

78. We all should have a problem with it

The war was wrong from the start. The reason we're still there is vague. It's costing way too much money. It's killing too many soldiers. It's killing too many innocent Iraqis. And he made a promise to be out of there by now. I think everyone around here would have a problem with that.

[BklnDem75]

82. He gave a date as president

You want him to keep his promise as a less informed candidate. He's keeping his promise despite your impatience. One word you keep leaving out of his original speech is 'responsibly.' What you're demanding is irresponsible.

[zipplewrath]

84. What is irresponsible about it?

The extra dead soldiers?
The extra money?
The extra dead innocent Iraqis?

What are these reasons that is worth all of this expenditure?

And when is he going to explain it?

[BklnDem75]

88. He already did. You missed it?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29371588/#hybrid_video

Here you go

[Lasher]

30. Yes, I already knew that.

And I also knew that in 2008 he changed the 16 month withdrawal to a reduction.

“We should end this war responsibly. We should do it in phases. But in 16 months we should be able to reduce our combat troops, provide some relief to military families and our troops and bolster our efforts in Afghanistan so that we can capture and kill bin Laden and crush al Qaeda.”

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/26/debate.mississippi.transcript/

It was in February 2009 that the 16 months became 19 months and 10 days, as shown by the link you supplied. I knew these things.

[BklnDem75]

57. So let me get this straight...

You want a president making decisions based on his feelings with very limited information as a candidate RATHER than a president with detailed information who can make a better, informed assessment of the situation? Am I reading that right?

[Lasher]

68. Did you mean to reply to someone else?

Because you couldn't have gotten that from anything I've offered in this thread. Unless you're a victim of fallacious reasoning, of course.

[BklnDem75]

72. You posted a 2008 article

of something he said during one of his debates before he became president. Please clarify what you're trying to say by posting it, because it seems to me you're trying to hold a candidate to his word long before he was able to make a full assessment of the situation as president.

[zipplewrath]

74. And what do you think changed?

He said nothing in Iraq could be accomplished by military actions. So what changed?

[BklnDem75]

80. I don't pretend to be privy to any information he receives in Iraq

President Obama doesn't read news articles to keep abreast of what's going on out there. I'm pretty positive he knows just a little bit more than you think you know about Iraq.

[zipplewrath]

83. And he isn't telling because?

Because we don't have a need to know? Because he doesn't want us on board so to speak? What are these mythical reasons?

[BklnDem75]

87. Because some of you will go back to his 2007 speech

Obviously!

[chrisa]

31. It will never happen.

There will always be a military presence in Iraq. There are no plans to remove the military from the country completely.

[ej510]

35. Ding, ding, ding!

[BklnDem75]

56. Moving goalposts...

Combat troops and military presence are two different things.

[Cha]

7. And, Pres Obama is ending this

war and he and his Team have done an incredible amount of work in the 16 months since he's been inaugurated.

In spite of all the lies and cheap shots swirling around him on the internet and the corporatemediawhoredome.

[zipplewrath]

10. you mean the direct quote is a lie?

I'm confused. He quoted Obama directly. I can get more quotes, and from Axelrod as well. Which one is the "lie and cheap shot"?

[arcadian]

13. Don't bother

If Obama said the sky was paisley, they'd be twisting themselves into knots to try and prove it to everybody else.

[elehhhhna]

58. Yes, b/c BO evidently lied when he said it.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. August 31, 2010 was the revised date, and we're currently on schedule.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2010-02-16-iraq-troops_N.htm

[Carolina]

11. I'm not

holding my breath.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

12. I'm not holding my breath either.

I feel rather comfortable knowing that he'll do everything he can to meet the commitment. He's already proven that he's doing just that and there's no reason to suggest that he won't finish the job.

[zipplewrath]

16. Other than all the loop holes right?

I mean, his current commitment is to "end the combat mission". How many does that leave there? 50,000?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

18. Well, he did say "combat troops" all along.

So that's really not a loophole from his commitment. And yeah, 50k is the idea. Believe it or not, troops do a lot more than just fight.

[bvar22]

97. What's the difference between a "combat troop" and a "non-combat troop"?

Answer: Nothing much.
The "non-combat troops" are fully combat trained, still carry weapons, and still shoot at whoever they call the "enemy."
This is more of an accounting trick than any REAL change. The troops will have their label changed, but still do pretty much all the same things that George Bush tasked them to do.

"What's the difference between combat and non-combat troops? The former are assigned to offensive operations while, as Amy Zalman puts it, non-combat troops "may provide training and mentoring, assist Iraqi troops, conduct intelligence and communications functions, among other tasks."

It is worth noting, however, that the troops left behind are good enough at combat to "provide training and mentoring," not to mention their ability to "assist Iraqi troops" that presumably will want, from time to time, to engage in combat. Writes Zalman, "The New York Times notes that the plan may seek to meet Obama's plan by 'remissioning' combat troops as non-combat forces and, moreover, that some may continue to conduct patrols with Iraqi forces, which is essentially a combat function.

Admittedly the Status of Forces Agreement provide for a total departure by the end of 2011, but that's a long way off. In any case, what is clear is that Obama's verbal sleight of hand is more than a little misleading.

http://www.prorev.com/2009/01/non-combat-troop-trick.html

[Lasher]

39. Yes, 50,000 are to remain as 'noncombat' troops.

That means according to the current schedule 42,000 need to be withdrawn in the next 3 months and 10 days.

[zipplewrath]

41. Technically

The other 50K have to be gone by the end of the year IIRC. Although that is easy enough to change.

[Lasher]

45. No, the others are supposed to be out by the end of 2011.

According to current plan.

[zipplewrath]

48. That's right

I'm getting my years mixed up. Do wonder what 50K guys will be doing for that long.

[Cha]

15. Which would make more sense in reality than

something from 2007..even that is not far off.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

19. If people can't begrudge him 3 months, that's a problem with them...

...and not Obama.

[zipplewrath]

22. I'll mention that to the dead

Not to mention the amount of money that 3 months is costing us.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

26. Tell me, just how long do you believe a withdrawal should take place?

Furthermore, please detail for me all of the steps that goes into a smooth withdrawal of around 170,000 troops and the infrastructure that supports those troops. I suspect your understanding of what goes into this is minimal, at best.

[zipplewrath]

32. One brigade a month

was mentioned some where as I recall. The DoD admitted they could be removed in 9 months. They wanted to stay longer to be there through the election and formation of the new government. It has nothing to do with how quickly and "smoothly" they want to get out.

Truth is, they are being "thrown" out, in that there was internal pressure on the Iraqi government to negotiate a departure date.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

34. Who cares if they're being "thrown out"?

They're getting out, one way or another. And they've stuck to exactly that schedule - if not stayed ahead of it, so I'm not sure what your problem really is.

[zipplewrath]

38. Look, you asked

You wondered how fast they could get I out. I told you and explained that the current schedule didn't have anything to do with the ability, or lack thereof, to get out faster. They are there because Obama WANTED them to be there this long. Without the SOFA, none of us, including Obama, know how long he would have stayed.

[stevenleser]

70. LOL, oh the melodrama, oh the humanity... of course this isnt about that

its about any opportunity to bash Obama.

[Cha]

23. Let's get real..they would

begrudge him one second.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Radical Activist]

21. So we're a little behind the schedule he intended in 2007.

That's not too surprising. Anything like this is going to be dependent on circumstances and what Bush was doing in 2008. I don't expect a candidate in the primary to have all the knowledge to make decisions that a sitting President has. Troop levels have been going down steadily since Obama took office and there's every indication the occupation will soon be over.

I'd rather focus on getting out of Afghanistan and make Obama's administration feel that there's a positive political payoff for getting out of Iraq. That requires giving Obama at least a little credit for pulling troops out of Iraq, which I know some people will never do.

[zipplewrath]

28. Well, let's be clear here

What is happening is that the SOFA is being followed. That's not exactly an Obama accomplishment. Bush negotiated that. Now, I'll grant you, the time table to achieve it was accomplished as much under Obama as Bush, but the basic goal and outline was Bush's. So this isn't a case of "his idea taking 3 months longer". It's a case of deferring to the plan already in place.

And some of us are now viewing these commitments through a different lense now that he has claimed "he never campaign on the public option". He now had demonstrated that he is willing to parse his words and so one has to consider the details of what he says. So when he commits to "ending the combat mission", what does that mean? Especially since that "old" quote had words about leaving troops to engage Al Queda. How do the troops engage them, without combat, and determine who are Al Queda and who are "Iraqi insurgents".

[Radical Activist]

37. It's pretty clear

that no matter what Obama does, you'll rationalize a way to not give him any credit or praise for even the slightest accomplishment. Duly noted.

Hey, I wonder if Bush's last plan for withdrawal was a reaction to public pressure and the support Obama received for his stance on Iraq?

I have expected all along that no matter who's President we'll have some troops in Iraq for many years just like we still have troops in Germany, Korea, Japan etc where there's no actual fighting. That was a primary reason for the invasion. I guess I could work myself up raking Obama over the coals for that, but it's not going to change anything and there are more pressing issues to work on if combat is over. The last non-combat troops will leave Iraq when a truly independent Iraqi government demands it.

[zipplewrath]

40. I'm not going to get out pom poms if that's what you mean

Look, when the guy does something of which I approve, I'm likely to mention it.

But he has reversed himself on a number of campaign promises, and he has missed some of his own goals, by his own choice.

I'm not sure why it is so radical to point this out.

[Radical Activist]

43. You seem much more dogmatic than that on this board. n/t

[zipplewrath]

44. Maybe in the eyes of the beholder?

Really, one has to remember that it is the threads that people disagree upon that will get the most activity, and attention. That alone will skew perceptions.

[treestar]

92. hear hear! I wouldn't want to do any work for some of these posters!

And I hope the people they work for treat them with the same strictness!

I can imagine them frothing at the mouth over any construction projects they hire. Those always go over deadline!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

25. so, by August 2010 there will be about 50,000 troops still in Iraq

I wonder where they will go next?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

27. No where for a long time, probably. (nt)

[greencharlie]

42. oh don't be so LITERAL!!!!

They're working REALLY hard at getting them out of there so they can be sent to Afghanistnam. Oh and some will be needed in Iran soon, too. Or maybe NKorea?

Imagine the military contracts for action on the Korean peninsula!!!

:sarcasm:

[Moochy]

93. Think of the Branding Opportunities of a New Overseas Conflict!

The neoliberal heart swells with patriotic opporunities for Hope and Change ™

[ProSense]

46. This is

hilarious. Does this mean that every comment he made after 2007 doesn't count?

:rofl:

[Lasher]

51. No.

It means they would have been out of Iraq by today if Obama had stuck to his 2007 promise.

[ProSense]

60. "to his 2007 promise"

Maybe you could go back a few more years and hold him to his promise not to start the war?

[Lasher]

66. And maybe you can go take your happy pills.

Apparently you forgot to do that today.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

52. IT'S ALL OBAMA'S FAULT!

He lied and people died!
Impeach him and end the war now!

[Lasher]

67. So I guess it's futile to just encourage a little quiet reflection on what might have been today.

Sorry.

[mkultra]

105. i think most have reflected and decided not to give a shit

I know i have.

[The Damned]

61. S of S Agreement

[stevenleser]

71. Very instructive. There is no point in taking serious anyone who would think this way

I've just found more people to add to my ignore list.

[zipplewrath]

75. Ignorance is bliss I hear

Did you also stick your fingers in your ears and go "La la la"?

I mean, really, this is a DISCUSSION forum.

[Lasher]

90. Ooo look, my OP made the 'on the fence' list!

One of my favorite places to look for rousing discussion.

[Cha]

89. So? The admin has been winding down the

Troops in Iraq and he's working toward that goal.

"I am not a perfect man and I won't be a perfect President. But my own American story tells me that this country moves forward when we cast off our doubts and seek new beginnings.

I'm more than satisfied they are doing their best to reach their goals.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cha]

98. Quit trying to make this personal.

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cha]

100. Keep digging.

[Moochy]

101. Keep alerting and replying.

its what you do.

[mkultra]

106. looks like deleting your as is whats the mods do

[Cha]

111. Watch out for flying dirt.

[uponit7771]

95. BULLSHIT ass'd post of the month, this is from 2007 and he changed the date during the election

[Lasher]

109. No he didn't.

He changed the date during February 2009. That was after the election. Looks like you've bumped me into second place for bullshit ass'd post of the month.

[Moochy]

102. Democratic "Underground"

a "discussion" board.

[Clear Blue Sky]

103. Wasn't Gitmo supposed to be closed too?

[Moochy]

104. These arent the hope and change you were looking for

[salguine]

108. "The first thing we have to do is end this war." Okay, but like Sean Connery said in

"The Untouchables", "What are you prepared to do?"

We already know that the Republicans would love to keep it going in perpetuity.

But with the numbers the Democrats currently have in Congress, it's also possible for them to end it without input from the Republicans. The fact that this hasn't happened, and isn't going to happen, has also made it painfully evident that this White House is not interested in ending this war, nor are enough Democrats in Congress.

So, in short, if you really want to end this war, you're going to have to cut the electoral legs out from under the ones who are keeping it going. Are you willing to primary whatever Democrats are perpetuating this war, including the President? And primary them hard? Put all your effort into basically unseating them? Because that's what is going to have to happen before these wars will end.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.