Obama Adviser Calls for 60,000-80,000 U.S. Troops To Stay in Iraq Through 2010

[Metric System]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/04/858675.aspx

Posted: Friday, April 04, 2008 8:56 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Obama

Is this more proof that no matter who is elected, some troops won't be leaving Iraq anytime soon? The New York Sun: "A key adviser to Senator Obama’s campaign is recommending in a confidential paper that America keep between 60,000 and 80,000 troops in Iraq as of late 2010, a plan at odds with the public pledge of the Illinois senator to withdraw combat forces from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.”

“The paper, obtained by The New York Sun, was written by Colin Kahl for the center-left Center for a New American Security. In ‘Stay on Success: A Policy of Conditional Engagement,’ Mr. Kahl writes that through negotiations with the Iraqi government ‘the U.S. should aim to transition to a sustainable over-watch posture (of perhaps 60,000–80,000 forces) by the end of 2010 (although the specific timelines should be the byproduct of negotiations and conditions on the ground).’”

“Mr. Kahl is the day-to-day coordinator of the Obama campaign’s working group on Iraq. A shorter and less detailed version of this paper appeared on the center’s Web site as a policy brief. Both Mr. Kahl and a senior Obama campaign adviser reached yesterday said the paper does not represent the campaign’s Iraq position. Nonetheless, the paper could provide clues as to the ultimate size of the residual American force the candidate has said would remain in Iraq after the withdrawal of combat brigades. The campaign has not publicly discussed the size of such a force in the past."

[DefenseLawyer]

1. To call the New York Sun a rag

is an insult to rags everywhere.

[PA Democrat]

8. Not to mention that the devil is in the details. I read the entire article and

what is not mentioned by the OP nor by the other 2 people who posted the same article, is that this is NOT the Obama campaign's position, but rather the privately offered opinion of ONE of many advisors on Iraq. From the article:

In an interview yesterday, a senior Obama foreign affairs adviser, Susan Rice, said the Iraq working group is not the last word on the campaign’s Iraq policy.

“We have experts and scholars with a range of views and Barack appreciates this range of views. They are in think tanks and like me they write in their own voice, they are people who do their independent scholarship. Barack Obama cannot be held accountable for what we all write,” she said. Ms. Rice said she had not seen the paper, which is marked as a draft and “not for attribution without author’s permission.”

Mr. Kahl yesterday said, “This has absolutely zero to do with the campaign.” He added, “There are elements that are consistent with the Democratic Party’s approach, and I will leave it to others to find out if there are elements that are not.”

[DefenseLawyer]

11. Heaven forbid!

Getting divergent views of a problem from multiple experts? That's just crazy talk.

[Texas Hill Country]

2. that is not much of a reduction in forces...

[LSparkle]

3. About half of the troops there now -- not bad for the first year or so

As he's always said, we have to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in.

I don't think the troops or the country are going to care that there are still some troops
in Iraq in a couple of years, just as long as we are CONSISTENTLY DRAWING DOWN FORCES, and
not sending in MORE troops.

[Cant trust em]

4. Obama's plan says to start drawing down when he takes office in 2009

that process should take about 16 months. Doesn't that take him into the middle of 2010?

[MadBadger]

5. Samantha Power is not a key advisor

Hillary got her fired, remember?

[Zachstar]

6. We have had a topic about this already!

[QC]

7. That's not very changealicious! n/t

[anonymous171]

9. "Does not represent the campaign's Iraq Positions" /thread

[MNDemNY]

10. delete

wrong spot.