That’s a bit of burying the lede, no? He basically endorses Obama’s policy approach (which sort of leaves McCain’s claims that Obama’s take is naive hanging in the wind), and then the US directly pressures his government to issue a highly implausible retraction.
Given that they deny endorsing Obama’s plan and have repeatedly made it clear that they don’t want us out before they’re ready, and the only timeline they’ve suggested has us there for another 4-5 years with wiggle room for more if necessary, I fail to see that. If anything, all I see is Obama moving closer and closer to the Bush and McCain position.
When I saw the headlines, the first thing I thought was that Maliki & crew were playing hardball with the negotiations, and shows that Iraq is ready to play in the majors. I’m impressed with how far they’ve come and under the conditions they’ve operated under. Anyone who’s studied Japan and Germany under occupation shouldn’t be surprised.
But they don’t actually deny it. Maliki said it three different times, three different ways. His spokesperson got a stern talking to from the US, and then (not Malaki) said that it had been mistranslated. But it hadn’t been, as has been perfectly obvious from the start.
And now, even more bizarrely that very same spokesman is apparently todaybasically saying the same thing: that he’s hopeful US forces could be out by 2010. That’s a lot closer to 16 months than 4-5 years.
I never expected this is how it would end up.
We have some people saying that things in Iraq are going great… and thus we need to stay around as long as possible, even if the elected Iraqi government doesn’t really want us to. And then we have people who say that we haven’t made enough progress… and so now it’s time to finish up and leave, job done.
The leaders of the Iraqi government would perhaps like US forces to stick around as insurance against renewed Sunni resistance or a coup d’état, but it will be very hard to sell that to the Iraqi people.
Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani advised the Shiites to work with the US because he understood what happened in Iraq in the 1920s when the Shiites resisted British rule. The British installed a Sunni government that led to Sunni domination of the country for the next 80 years. Sistani wanted to avoid repeating that mistake. It was Sistani that demanded the quick elections of the current Iraqi government. Now it appears to be Sistani that is suggesting it is time for US forces to leave Iraq.
In reality I do not think Iraq has a functioning air force, and it will take many years to train and equip an Iraqi air force. I expect the US will have some air bases in Iraq for many years. These may end up being in the Kurdish area in the north and in Kuwait in the south. However the bulk of the US ground forces will have to leave Iraq in the next few years, baring some unforseen event, no matter who is elected US president.
The Iraqi people are responsible for their government. They elected it, and they will do so again in a few months time.
If that government wants us to leave, we leave. While anti-American Leftists rant about American Imperialism, we prove the rant is baseless by only staying where we are wanted.
I’ve supported this war from the beginning, and it’s done. We have defeated al-Qaeda, a Sunni insurgency, and a Shiite insurgency fueled by Iranian expansionism. The Kurds - who deserve a state - finally have the seed of one that may someday grow. We have put a democratic government and a free economy in place that is one of the fastest growing in the world.
To use an analogy we have given the Iraqi people fishing poles and bait and taught them to fish. Now it is up to them to fish for themselves.
Unlike true empires, American occupations end. Germany’s lasted 10 years, Japan’s 8 years but they all ended. If the Iraqi government believes it is ready to shoulder the burden of ruling then it is time to let it.
If they want us to stay, we stay. If they want us to go, we go. Our objectives have been met, and there is plenty for us to do elsewhere.
More to the point, a look at any responsible survey of Iraqis shows that the majority of Iraqis not only want a united Iraq under a single government, but they also want troops out when the situation is stable and not before. And gee, that’s what the Maliki government is saying, and it’s also what the current administration is saying. It would seem to me that, somehow, there’s an awfully strong consensus there that we shouldn’t leave too quickly.
Maliki specifically said that Obama and his plan, which he named by name, unprompted, was more reasonable. He and his government have repeatedly stated dates and expectations that are basically dead on with Obama: if they’re saying 2010, and he’s saying 16 months, then his timeline isn’t "too quickly," of if it is, it’s a matter of a few months.
Everytime they’ve done this, defensive conservatives come out and claim that what they really mean is the complete opposite. It’s getting silly.
Subscribe to Dean's World by Email
8 comments
That’s a bit of burying the lede, no? He basically endorses Obama’s policy approach (which sort of leaves McCain’s claims that Obama’s take is naive hanging in the wind), and then the US directly pressures his government to issue a highly implausible retraction.
Bad’s last blog post..James Dobson Shocks No One With McCain Flip-Flop
Given that they deny endorsing Obama’s plan and have repeatedly made it clear that they don’t want us out before they’re ready, and the only timeline they’ve suggested has us there for another 4-5 years with wiggle room for more if necessary, I fail to see that. If anything, all I see is Obama moving closer and closer to the Bush and McCain position.
When I saw the headlines, the first thing I thought was that Maliki & crew were playing hardball with the negotiations, and shows that Iraq is ready to play in the majors. I’m impressed with how far they’ve come and under the conditions they’ve operated under. Anyone who’s studied Japan and Germany under occupation shouldn’t be surprised.
But they don’t actually deny it. Maliki said it three different times, three different ways. His spokesperson got a stern talking to from the US, and then (not Malaki) said that it had been mistranslated. But it hadn’t been, as has been perfectly obvious from the start.
And now, even more bizarrely that very same spokesman is apparently today basically saying the same thing: that he’s hopeful US forces could be out by 2010. That’s a lot closer to 16 months than 4-5 years.
I never expected this is how it would end up.
We have some people saying that things in Iraq are going great… and thus we need to stay around as long as possible, even if the elected Iraqi government doesn’t really want us to. And then we have people who say that we haven’t made enough progress… and so now it’s time to finish up and leave, job done.
Bad’s last blog post..?DNA-Based? Perfume Scam Gathers Steam
The leaders of the Iraqi government would perhaps like US forces to stick around as insurance against renewed Sunni resistance or a coup d’état, but it will be very hard to sell that to the Iraqi people.
Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani advised the Shiites to work with the US because he understood what happened in Iraq in the 1920s when the Shiites resisted British rule. The British installed a Sunni government that led to Sunni domination of the country for the next 80 years. Sistani wanted to avoid repeating that mistake. It was Sistani that demanded the quick elections of the current Iraqi government. Now it appears to be Sistani that is suggesting it is time for US forces to leave Iraq.
In reality I do not think Iraq has a functioning air force, and it will take many years to train and equip an Iraqi air force. I expect the US will have some air bases in Iraq for many years. These may end up being in the Kurdish area in the north and in Kuwait in the south. However the bulk of the US ground forces will have to leave Iraq in the next few years, baring some unforseen event, no matter who is elected US president.
The Iraqi people are responsible for their government. They elected it, and they will do so again in a few months time.
If that government wants us to leave, we leave. While anti-American Leftists rant about American Imperialism, we prove the rant is baseless by only staying where we are wanted.
I’ve supported this war from the beginning, and it’s done. We have defeated al-Qaeda, a Sunni insurgency, and a Shiite insurgency fueled by Iranian expansionism. The Kurds - who deserve a state - finally have the seed of one that may someday grow. We have put a democratic government and a free economy in place that is one of the fastest growing in the world.
To use an analogy we have given the Iraqi people fishing poles and bait and taught them to fish. Now it is up to them to fish for themselves.
Unlike true empires, American occupations end. Germany’s lasted 10 years, Japan’s 8 years but they all ended. If the Iraqi government believes it is ready to shoulder the burden of ruling then it is time to let it.
If they want us to stay, we stay. If they want us to go, we go. Our objectives have been met, and there is plenty for us to do elsewhere.
More to the point, a look at any responsible survey of Iraqis shows that the majority of Iraqis not only want a united Iraq under a single government, but they also want troops out when the situation is stable and not before. And gee, that’s what the Maliki government is saying, and it’s also what the current administration is saying. It would seem to me that, somehow, there’s an awfully strong consensus there that we shouldn’t leave too quickly.
Maliki specifically said that Obama and his plan, which he named by name, unprompted, was more reasonable. He and his government have repeatedly stated dates and expectations that are basically dead on with Obama: if they’re saying 2010, and he’s saying 16 months, then his timeline isn’t "too quickly," of if it is, it’s a matter of a few months.
Everytime they’ve done this, defensive conservatives come out and claim that what they really mean is the complete opposite. It’s getting silly.
Bad’s last blog post..CBS Deceptively Edits McCain Interview?
You must log in to post a comment.