Is Obama really a "peace candidate"?

[Faryn Balyncd]

What are the actual policy implications of Obama's words?



O-bomb-a and the War Party - - Barack Obama: He's more of the same

"Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw.'.....This course of action will help to focus our efforts on a more effective counter-insurgency strategy and take steam out of the insurgency. … I believe that U.S. forces are still a part of the solution in Iraq. The strategic goals should be to allow for a limited drawdown of U.S. troops, coupled with a shift to a more effective counter-insurgency strategy that puts the Iraqi security forces in the lead and intensifies our efforts to train Iraqi forces. At the same time, sufficient numbers of U.S. troops should be left in place to prevent Iraq from exploding into civil war, ethnic cleansing, and a haven for terrorism.............

"On Iraq, on paper, there's not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago. There's not that much difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who's in a position to execute."



Bush and Obama still hew to the same unattainable goal: a military victory. The only question is who has a better strategy to bring it about.


........his real loyalties are with the Democratic Party Establishment – the Democratic Leadership Council/Lieberman wing – and this came through in the party primaries, when his political action committee donated many thousands of dollars to defeat antiwar candidates. He supported Joe Lieberman over Ned Lamont, donating $4,200 to the eventual candidate of the "Connecticut for Lieberman" Party. He also gave $10,000 to defeat antiwar stalwart Christine Cegelis, who nonetheless came within a few thousand votes of winning against a decorated war hero.

How about Iran?

Does Obama still believe this?


Chicago Tribune: Obama Would Consider Missile Strikes on Iran

U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama suggested Friday that the United States one day might have to launch surgical missile strikes into Iran and Pakistan to keep extremists from getting control of nuclear bombs...........

Is this the best we can do?

Perhaps Obama/Lieberman?



What do you think?

[Tom Joad]

1. I think he should withdraw his donkey from the Presidential race.

we got to do better than this.

[karynnj]

2. This seems pretty unfair

I went back through the links and found that the quote on the Bush and Kerry position's being more similar was from before the convention in 2004 - and there is no original source just "Counterpunch". Playing with Obama's name is juvenile.

[Dawgs]

6. Agree.

This is the kind of stuff I would expect to read from a freeper.

[J Miles]

12. Oh, the irony

Intellectually lazy freepers very often use pejorative auto-responses in an attempt to discredit people they disagree and/or can't argue with. We've all heard them:

-"Why do you hate freedom?"
-"Why do you hate America?"
-"You're a terrorist sympathizer."

You're essentially doing the same thing. Rather than addressing the comments made by the OP, you're attempting to discredit him by saying that his comments are very freeper-like. "This is the kind of stuff Iwould expect to read from a freeper" as a response to criticism of your favorite candidate is no different from the "you're a terrorist sympathizer" response right-wingers use when the left criticizes the so-called war on terror.

[karynnj]

3. This seems pretty unfair

I went back through the links and found that the quote on the Bush and Kerry position's being more similar was from before the convention in 2004 - and there is no original source just "Counterpunch". Playing with Obama's name is juvenile.

[Tom Joad]

10. Playing the we may need to bomb Iran game is unfair to millions of people.

That is far, far, worse.
Saying US troops must stay in Iraq should be a criminal offense for anyone in political office.

[karynnj]

11. I don't think Obama is for bombing Iran

at least from anything I saw him say. I am not an Obama supporter and could have missed something - but am leary of anyone quoting Counterpunch

[SteppingRazor]

4. The small bits you have here are a little disingenuous, though...

First, I'd suggest reading Obama's whole speech, rather than relying on someone else's opinion of it. Here's the full text:

http://www.barackobama.com/2006/11/20/a_way_forward_in_iraq.php

As you can see, Obama and Bush's positions are quite a bit different, given that Bush wants to add troops and OBama wants to get our troops out of immediate harm's way.

The second bit you have is again a writer's summation of Obama's words rather than the man's words themselves. Additionally, it's from more than two years ago. But regardless of that, Obama does call for tactical missile strikes on terrorist camps if they should get nuclear weapons. Are you saying you would not bomb a terrorist camp if they had nukes? He also calls for possible missile strikes if Iran has a provable nuclear weapons program -- this also doesn't seem so far-fetched to me.

I guess I feel like a mountain is being made out of a molehill here. :shrug:

[lwcon]

5. Gore/Feingold in '08! n/t

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[antiimperialist]

7. Most Iraqis disagree with Obama

Obama thinks his country, the one that invaded Iraq based on a lie, is part of the solution there. He says this without even wondering how Iraqis feel about the issue.
Most Iraqis disagree, according to several polls showing that most Iraqis want us out immediately.

[skipos]

8. Yawn. nt

[ripple]

9. Nice spin job.

I don't believe I've seen so much pejorative in a single article in quite some time. I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that attribution wasn’t given to the author.

If you really want to know Obama's views on Iraq and war in general, you might want to read his (new)book, as well as the recent speech he gave in Chicago about the issue.

Obama was very outspoken in his opposition to the invasion, well before the IWR and the actual invasion. This link from the same site provides Obama’s actual words:

www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkpg=http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10181&linkid=27787

Also, the Lieberman thing needs to be put to rest once and for all. Obama and virtually every other Senate democrat supported Lieberman when it appeared that he would be the democratic nominee. Once Lamont became the nominee, Obama and other dems endorsed Lamont and contributed to his campaign. It was and is a non-issue.

[skipos]

13. How dare you interrupt our circular firing squad with facts!!! nt

[Moderator]

14. locking

link is to article by raimondo from antiwar.com, and links to that site are not allowed here