Posted by: iam0nly1 | June 12, 2008

Obama’s Favorite Pair of Flip-Flops: Iraq

I would like to give credit where credit is due. Senator Obama has indeed been the most consistent about his disapproval of the War in Iraq and the need to bring our troops home…

Here he is in April of 2004:

Oops! I guess he’s only consistent in his inconsistency.

In July of 2004 he seemed to be channeling George W. Bush a lot.

The Weekly Standard reported:

In July of 2004, the day after his speech at the Democratic convention catapulted him into the national spotlight, Barack Obama told a group of reporters in Boston that the United States had an “absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success.

“The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster,” he said at a lunch sponsored by theChristian Science Monitor, according to an audiotape of the session. “It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.”


Concerning his stance on the war, he even told the Chicago Tribune in July of 2004:

“There’s not that much difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage.”

So where did the Obama of 2004 go? According to his website, that Obama is long gone, making way for a new Obama, who’s truly committed to bringing the troops home.

From his website (which I will not link to):

Bringing Our Troops Home

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.

But, while that is the Obama he wants us to know, we have certainly gotten a glimpse of the good ol’ 2004 Obama via his advisors.

We heard from Samantha Powers, one of his top foreign policy advisors at the time, that the new Obama is just espousing a “best case scenario” and he will “of course” not rely on the plan he’s been selling to Americans on the stump:

But that wasn’t the only one…lest we forget:

Adviser Colin Kahl wrote in a policy paper for the Center for a New American Security that the United States should transition to an “over-watch” force of between 60,000 and 80,000 troops by the end of 2010, according to an article Friday in the New York Sun.

That appears to be at odds with Obama’s public position of removing all combat brigades from the country within 16 months of taking office.

So much for all the “I’ve always been against the war” rhetoric…

If you’d like to read more on the subject, Peter Wehner, over at Commentary Magazine did an awesome write up on this back in April. 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: