pudge's Journal: Obama's Current Iraq Policy

It must be a tough job being a speechwriter for Obama. I tried my hand at writing this press conference speech about his Iraq policy.

"What I've said before is always what I've said and what I'm still saying, that we need to be careful and deliberate about how we bring the troops home. That's my policy, and it's always been my policy.

"When I said that we would do it in 16 months, and made this promise repeatedly in order to become the presumed Democratic nominee, what I meant -- and I've said this all along -- is that we might NOT do it in 16 months. The timeline really doesn't matter, as any military expert will tell you.

"I mean -- and I respect Senator McCain's military service -- but when he says his goal is to get the troops out of harm's way and make sure that we don't leave behind an unstable Iraq, but that he won't set a timeline, that is very different from my goal to get the troops out of harm's way and make sure that we don't leave behind an unstable Iraq, because I do have a timeline, even though I will readily sacrifice that timeline if it might risk an unstable Iraq or put our troops in harm's way.

"I haven't changed anything. The confusion here is the fault of the McCain campaign, which has deliberately twisted my words ... I mean, I've been very consistent, nothing has changed at all ... if anything, it's McCain who has changed, since he supported the war from the beginning, but NOW he wants to get the troops out of harm's way! Right? ... WILL YOU ALL PLEASE JUST STOP LOOKING AT ME?!??! I mean, COME ON!!!! I thought you LIKED me!"

Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.

The usual tension

[smittyoneeach]

...exists between the internal views of the politician and the aggregate views of the consituency.
Powerline, as usual, hits the nail right on the thumb:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/020905.php [powerlineblog.com]

Re:

[pudge]

But I thought Obama was for CHANGE. I mean, apart from changing all his positions, including (predictably) copying McCain's position on Iraq.

Wait, if McCain is a clone of Bush, and Obama copied McCain's position on Iraq, does that mean Obama == Bush?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

In the first place, how anyone would buy that the Chicago Machine was producing anything besides "more of same" escapes me.
In the second place, assuming a devil's advocate role, the foreign policy situation defys a bumper-sticker reduction for an election.
Thus, reaching a Machicavellian conclusion, the proper route to a win is to sell a veneer of change to win the party nomination, then drift centarward to capture the election.
Or do you see another possibility?

Re:

[pudge]

Well no, that's it, but it's just beside my point, really, which is that I don't think it will work. He ONLY had a good chance, I think, as someone who stood for overall change, even if you and I didn't believe. But at this point, he will have a tough time making ANYONE believe it.

But that is the struggle of all recent Democratic candidates for President: you're damned if you're not on the left, since you can't win the nomination, and damned if you come back to the center, because you're a flip-flopper, a

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

The hidden truth about the Democratic Party is that its symbol is really a pony [i-want-a-pony.com].

Re:

[pudge]

Mmmmm pony.

Re:

[ncc74656]

Umm...whoever the Obamasturmabteilung member is who's seen fit to mod down a poster in a JE because he's posting stuff you don't like, here's a message for you: You're a flaming douchebag. This post is offtopic, but I have karma to burn and don't give a damn. In what way is a post linking to a blog entry [powerlineblog.com] documenting Obama's flip-flopping in a thread about said flip-flopping offtopic? Your boy sucks [patterico.com], and so do you. (There...now you get to choose between Offtopic and Flamebait.)

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

It was part of a larger outburst maturity from some very, very special friends:
http://slashdot.org/~smitty_one_each/journal/206445 [slashdot.org]
The stormtrooper reference might be a little bit misplaced.

Meh ...

[ces]

Well, I think Obama is much more likely to disentangle the US from Iraq and to do so much more rapidly. I also think he is much less likely to take direct military action against Iran.

With McCain we get someone who is going to feel a need to exorcise his Vietnam demons in Iraq and who wants to "bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran".

While I will admit the GOP could have done much worse than McCain and that Obama isn't exactly my ideal candidate the choice is fairly clear for me unlike some past elections (1988) where I fe

Re:

[pudge]

Well, I think Obama is much more likely to disentangle the US from Iraq and to do so much more rapidly.

Shrug. I don't believe so, but your belief is not apparently based on Obama's actual policy.

I also think he is much less likely to take direct military action against Iran.

That is not based on any facts.

With McCain we get someone who is going to feel a need to exorcise his Vietnam demons in Iraq and who wants to "bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran".

Neither of those things is remotely based on fact.

Let me also say at this point I find a politician who is willing to change his mind in light of new facts somewhat refreshing.

The problem is there are no new facts. The policy before was "get out in 16 months." The policy now is "get out as soon as we can without risking the security of Iraq." Which is McCain's view (and has been my view, and probably McCain's as well, since, oh, 2003). Was the security of Iraq not an issue before now? Of course it was.

So

Re:

[multimed]

So tell me, what facts have changed to warrant his change in position?

The fact that he is now the nominee and front runner.