Key advisor on Iraq for Obama recommending 60-80k troops until 2010.

[jillan]

snips -

WASHINGTON — 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.

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.

This is not the first time the opinion of an adviser to the Obama campaign has differed with the candidate’s stated Iraq policy. In February, Mr. Obama’s first foreign policy tutor, Samantha Power, told BBC that the senator’s current Iraq plan would likely change based on the advice of military commanders in 2009. She has since resigned her position as a formal adviser.

The political ramifications of the disclosure are yet to be seen. The perception of a harder line in Iraq could help Mr. Obama combat charges by Senator McCain in a general election that Mr. Obama favors a hasty surrender and retreat in Iraq. But it could hurt the Obama campaign with anti-war voters in the Democratic primaries. Mr. Obama’s rival for the Democratic nomination, Senator Clinton, has called for withdrawing troops from Iraq, but an architect of the surge has told the Sun that she has been wary of a precipitous withdrawal. In a situation with some parallels to this one, Mr. Obama suffered some political damage on the trade issue when he called publicly for a renegotiation of NAFTA while a policy adviser reportedly met with Canadian officials and downplayed the chances of a NAFTA retreat.

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.



Mr. Obama’s policy to date also allows for a residual force for Iraq. In early Iowa debates, the senator would not pledge to remove all soldiers from Iraq, a distinction from his promise to withdraw all combat brigades. Also, Mr. Obama has stipulated that he would be open to having the military train the Iraqi Security Forces if he received guarantees that those forces would not be the shock troops of one side of an Iraqi civil war.

But the Obama campaign has also not said how many troops would make up this residual force. “We have not put a number on that. It depends on the circumstances on the ground,” Ms. Rice said. She added, “It would be worse than folly, it would be dangerous, to put a hard number on the residual forces.”

http://www.nysun.com/politics/obama-adviser-calls-troops-stay-iraq-through-2010

Has Obama ever answered the question how many troops he plans to keep in Iraq :shrug:

[ShaneGR]

1. That would represent around half what we have now....

And since a 6 month withdrawal would result in the mother of all bloodbaths, it makes sense.

[jillan]

6. What do you mean by a 6 month withdrawal?

Who is going to do that?

[ShaneGR]

25. I think that's generally the view a lot of people have about the next president

Get the war over, pull everyone out, if that order was given it would take about six months to complete. Unfortunately, it's just not gonna happen that way. It will take years to draw down forces, and even then you have to keep 30-50k in the country. Mainly to protect the capital and the north.

[jillan]

27. I agree.

We have to leave carefully, or else we will have to go back in at a later date.

[2rth2pwr]

2. That's his "Strike Force" that he will keep in the region to go after Al Queda.

[GarbagemanLB]

3. and Obama has clearly stated he will not waver from his stance. Keep flinging that poo as Obama cont

inues to rise past Hillary.

[jillan]

8. Flinging that poo?

Questioning Obama's real plans for Iraq is not poo.

[Cali_Democrat]

4. If Obama doesn't pledge to withdraw all troops I will not continue to support him

I know Hillary won't withdraw all troops because she's an even bigger hawk than him, she voted for this bullshit war. I don't care what she says, I know her DLC crew. Her husband used military force far too often for my liking. I will probably just stay home this november if Obama doesn't pledge to withdraw ALL troops.

[2rth2pwr]

7. He has already said he would not withdraw all troops.

[Cali_Democrat]

10. acutally

nevermind

[2rth2pwr]

19. And he is very vague about withdrawing contractors like Blackwater

Obama said this is different from his proposal for withdraw troops in Iraq but then leaving a small force to protect embassies and to maintain a strike force in the region http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/03/obama-claims-ch.html

“What I said was I would have a strike force in the region, perhaps in Iraq, perhaps outside Iraq so we could take advantage of or we could deal with potential problems that might take place in the region,” http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/01/mccain-obama-spar-over-spending-100-years-in-iraq/

____________________________

AMY GOODMAN: Can you call for a ban on the private military contractors like Blackwater?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: I’ve actually—I’m the one who sponsored the bill that called for the investigation of Blackwater in , so—

AMY GOODMAN: But would you support the Sanders one now?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Here’s the problem: we have 140,000 private contractors right there, so unless we want to replace all of or a big chunk of those with US troops, we can’t draw down the contractors faster than we can draw down our troops. So what I want to do is draw—I want them out in the same way that we make sure that we draw out our own combat troops. Alright? I mean, I—

AMY GOODMAN: Not a ban?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Well, I don’t want to replace those contractors with more US troops, because we don’t have them, alright? But this was a speech about the economy.

AMY GOODMAN: The war is costing $3 trillion, according to Stiglitz.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: That’s what—I know, which I made a speech about last week. Thank you.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/3/28/amy_goodman_questions_sen_obama_on

[anigbrowl]

11. Let's shut down the economy too, because we hate capitalism

The chances of of us removing ALL troops from Iraq in a short time are virtually nil. It would be irresponsible to promise otherwise, and would be tantamount to pretending the war never happened. We should certainly withdraw as many as possible, and try to get back to the troop levels we had in Kuwait etc. before the war, but saying 'withdraw all the troops now' is overly simplistic.

If you want BS promises to make you feel good, vote for Nader. He'll tell you whatever you want to hear, because he won't have to deliver on any of it.

[Cali_Democrat]

15. Why virtually nil?

We got in, we can get out. Let the Iraqis kill each other, I could care less at this point. I want nothing to do with their civil war.

[anigbrowl]

22. Sorry, I can't take you seriously with that attitude

It's naive to assume we can just walk away from the whole region and not face consequences. Like I said, if you want naive solutions, Nader has plenty of them and you won't have to lie awake at night feeling guilty about it. We do have treaty commitments with other nations in the region, you know.

[2rth2pwr]

23. Was Kucinich naive or lying?

[GarbagemanLB]

5. If we are judging a candidate from the actions of his/her staff, can we assume Hillary is now suppor

tive of NAFTA (again) because Penn went to Colombia in order to talk free trade with their government?

[PA Democrat]

9. This is now the FOURTH time that I will encourage people to READ the article you linked

I read the entire article and what is not mentioned by the OP nor by the other 3 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.”

[2rth2pwr]

12. Obama has already said he was going to leave a Strike Force in the

region.

[PA Democrat]

18. Guess what? So has Clinton

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/iraq_truthtelling_part_ii_1.html

The Clinton position on Iraq still contains a little wriggle room. She has said that she will keep some "residual" forces in Iraq after December 2009 to deal with the threat from al-Qaeda, even though the bulk of U.S. forces will be withdrawn by then. Without being able to predict the future, it is impossible to know whether she will carry through on her promises. But let me know what you think.

[OzarkDem]

26. He needs to change his "frame"

and reject the idea that the US has the sole responsibility for providing troops for oversight after withdrawal.

We US taxpayers have sacrficed our money, our economy and our future for this ridiculous war, with little or no contribution from other countries.

I don't care if Obama's advisors think a million troops need to be left in Iraq after the US withdraws. Make someone else provide them and fund them. We've done our part.

[WinkyDink]

13. He said that he wants to withdraw the troops a couple brigades at a time = 16 months.

I heard him say this 3/31.

[jillan]

14. Same as Hillary. Glad to hear that.

[2rth2pwr]

16. April 1st on Democracy Now!

But in the last two weeks he has moved to the right. On April 1, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! interviewed Obama about what type of U.S. residual forces he would leave behind in Iraq. First, Obama acknowledged combat troops would be left behind as “a strike force in the region.” Where would this strike force be based? Obama said “It doesn't necessarily have to be in Iraq; it could be in Kuwait or other places.”

Of even greater concern was the 140,000 civilian troops – the private security forces that some describe as mercenaries – who are in Iraq. With regard to these Obama said: “we have 140,000 private contractors right there, so unless we want to replace all of or a big chunk of those with US troops, we can't draw down the contractors faster than we can draw down our troops.” When Goodman pressed him on whether he would support a ban on private military forces Obama said “Well, I don't want to replace those contractors with more U.S. troops, because we don't have them, alright?”

Obama seems to be choosing his words very carefully when he talks of his Iraq plan. He always talks in terms of only “withdrawing” “combat” troops and ending “the war.” Withdrawal is not the same as bringing troops home as it could mean moving the troops somewhere else in the region and into Afghanistan. Combat troops are a minority of the 150,000 troops in Iraq. And, ending the “war” is not the same as ending the occupation. Indeed, Obama plans to keep the massive U.S. Embassy as well as the long-term military bases being built in Iraq. No wonder he does not talk about ending the occupation as it does not seem that is his intent.
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2008/04/03/is_it_time_for_the_peace_movement_to_sta

[jillan]

21. Wow - I haven't read that.

[Carrieyazel]

17. This is the kind of thing that totally defuses the Iraq issue in 2008 and helps McCain.

Obama cannot and will not commit to a real withdrawal plan; which basically means a lot of voters don't see much movement in Iraq no matter who wins in Nov.

McCain is having everything fall into place for him.

[jillan]

20. The Dems are putting together a statement on the surge.

The SFRC has had some very interesting hearings over the last week, and the consensus is that the
surge has not accomplished what it was suppose to do. Generals were saying that the reason why violence went down for awhile was due to ethnic cleansing :( and people staying in their secretarian groups.

http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/hearing.html

Besides - I'm sure Richardson will help Obama with this. ;)

[slinkerwink]

24. That advisor also debated another Obama advisor who disagreed with him

Colin Kahl -- an Obama foreign policy adviser -- wrote a paper advocating for 60,000 to 80,000 troops in Iraq through 2010. For background, Kahl debated Center for American Progress's Brian Katulis a few months back. (Katulis and his co-author, Lawrence Korb, are Obama supporters, partially due to his stance on Iraq.)

[BeatleBoot]

28. Diagnosis