Obama Will Keep Troops In Iraq

[Parkerlane]

Run time: 01:45 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvzyq0Og6SA   Posted on YouTube: September 13, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: September 14, 2007 By DU Member: Parkerlane Views on DU: 1941

 
Obama Sr. Foreign Policy Advisor Samantha Power says:

Obama wants to keep a residual force "........to do counter-terrorism," and "....to maintain diplomatic installations" in Iraq.

Obama wants to keep a "quick reaction force" somewhere in Iraq.

Obama wants to keep troops in Iraq.

Same deal as Hillary. Same deal as Edwards. They want their cake and to eat it too. They all quietly promise to keep U.S. troops in Iraq to provide security for U.S. contractors (Halliburton), and to protect U.S. bases and to "execute counter-terrorism" runs. Sickening. They're all BushCo., and we're all Soylent Green.

It's all pure dee bullcrap.

http://www.projectfilibuster.com

[pberq]

1. As a rational alternative, see Dennis Kucinich's plan

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/resources/kucinich-unveils-comprehensive-exit-plan-to-bring-troops-home,-stabilize-iraq/

. . .


These are the elements of the Kucinich Plan:

1. The US announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. The insurgency has been fueled by the occupation and the prospect of a long-term presence as indicated by the building of permanent bases. A US declaration of an intention to withdraw troops and close bases will help dampen the insurgency which has been inspired to resist colonization and fight invaders and those who have supported US policy. Furthermore this will provide an opening where parties within Iraq and in the region can set the stage for negotiations towards peaceful settlement.

2. US announces that it will use existing funds to bring the troops and necessary equipment home. Congress appropriated $70 billion in bridge funds on October 1 st for the war. Money from this and other DOD accounts can be used to fund the troops in the field over the next few months, and to pay for the cost of the return of the troops, (which has been estimated at between $5 and $7 billion dollars) while a political settlement is being negotiated and preparations are made for a transition to an international security and peacekeeping force.

3. Order a simultaneous return of all US contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government. The contracting process has been rife with world-class corruption, with contractors stealing from the US Government and cheating the Iraqi people, taking large contracts and giving 5% or so to Iraqi subcontractors. . . .

(much more at link)

[Tom Joad]

6. Dennis gets it.

[Dancing_Dave]

9. Kucinich is the ONLY one that people opposed to the war

should trust with their vote in the Democratic primaries. That's the lesson to take from this. If you really oppose the war in Iraq, Kucinich is who you should be dedicating your efforts to NOW.

[jsamuel]

2. Edwards' plan is not like Obama's and Clinton's

The only "residual force" Edwards keeps in Iraq is for the embassy (every embassy in the world is that way) and for humanitarian workers. That will be at most 10,000.

Obama and Clinton will have somewhere around 50,000-60,000 for all kinds of purposes.

People need to stop lumping Edwards in with the other two. Richardson does this all the time and has to know that it isn't true by now, but keeps saying Edwards will keep 50,000-60,000 like Obama and Clinton. There is a smear going on here.

[Tom Joad]

5. 10 thousand? The Iraqis want us OUT. what is so hard for them to understand?

convinced me, as if i did not already know, that edwards ain't much different.

[leftchick]

8. The embassy aka: US Imperial Palace

is going to have headquarters for US marines as well.

[ProudDad]

11. I'd go for that if they blow up 99% of that monstrosity

of an "embassy" in Baghdad...

Then they'd only need a couple dozen jarheads to raise the flag in the morning and act as doormen...

[Hulk]

17. Ahhhh.....just leave it as a down payment for all the other buildings we've blown to smithereens.

We owe them a hell of a lot more than one stupid ass embassy. I say, just get the hell out.

[ProudDad]

30. That's a better idea,

make up for the museums the invasion force allowed to be looted...

Saved the Ministry of Oil though!!!

---------

http://www.princemyshkins.com/

http://www.princemyshkins.com/songs/ministry.mp3

Ministry of Oil

once again we hear the word “precision”
from people who think bombs can be precise
we hear “the price of fighting terrorism”
from people who don’t have to pay that price
we see a cloud where there should be a college
we see a reservoir reduced to soil
and though they now admit that the marketplace was hit,
they didn’t hit the Ministry of Oil

what they call a military target
is sacred to all soldiers brave and loyal
you can bomb a shrine, you can bomb a power line,
but you never bomb the Ministry of Oil

once again the mayhem they call “warfare”
is followed by the melee they call “peace”
tearing through the stores and the museums
while the US Army played police
how much do you suppose that artwork sold for
as their last remaining food began to spoil
the situation’s bad, but no place in Baghdad
is safer than the Ministry of Oil

the medicine has all been confiscated
and soon there won’t be water left to boil
and one might wonder who’d think up names like “Oil for food”
when what they mean is “Ministry of Oil”

if there’s any logic in the universe
if the future isn’t just absurd
if justice is precise instead of infinite
if freedom is enjoyed and not endured
I’ll take my class out someday on a field trip
past the shells of Shell and Uniroyal
and as they’re roaming round the musty White House grounds,
I’ll say “Kids, this was the Ministry of Oil”

I’ll say “Kids, it was a peaceful revolution,
there weren’t any battles to embroil,
and I’m very glad to tell that not one person fell
it’s an aspect of our history that every child knows well
how we failed to avoid one building being destroyed,
but at least it was the Ministry of Oil.”

[be inspired]

14. That's true.

Edwards favors a true withdrawal, although he would not abandon our embassy and would keep a very few troops in the green zone only to protect it. That is an entirely different mission than the troops in Iraq now have.

[Parkerlane]

18. Protect the Green Zone? You're kidding, right?

Protect the Green Zone? You're kidding, right? The Green Zone is unsafe right now, coming under sporadic mortar attacks. I know - my friend was ther in the Green Zone for weeks. You ought to read what she says about being in the Green Zone. Why would any American seek to keep any U.S. troops in Iraq for any reason? After years of this Bush-Dems-Occupation, Bush & the Democrats still don't control Iraq - never will. Why would you pre-suppose Iraqis want one single U.S. soldier or diplomat in Iraq? They don't. You ever heard of Somalia? Don't you remember what happened to the American soldiers guarding that embassy? They were killed and dragged through the streets. Didn't you see the movie! Americans are so jaded and out of touch with reality, they think the whole world wants an American presence in their land - they don't!

Apparently, most Americans just don't get it - in Iraq, for Iraqis, there are ZERO DEGREES of separation! Every family in Iraq has a family member who has been killed by the U.S. military or the insurgency - you know, the insurgency created when Bush removed Saddam from power. Under Saddam, approx. 40-50 Iraqi bodies were buried each day - now, there are over 200 Iraqi bodies buried each day.

Edwards supports the bombing of Iran; Edwards supports the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine and Edwards supports keeping troops in Iraq. Edwards is one of the persons responsible for sending American troops to die in this needless war in the first place! Why in the HELL would anyone want to vote for Edwards? Especially considering Edwards has as much as blood on his hands as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Hadley, Wolfowitz and the rest of the neocon gang.

You're misrepresenting John Edwards' foreign policy regarding Iraq: Edwards will keep U.S. troops in Iraq and the region for what Edwards (and Obama and Hillary) calls "quick reaction strike force." OUR GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO USE MILITARY FORCE AT WILL AGAINST MUSLIM/ARAB NATIONS! What part of illegal Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes don't you understand? Edwards voted for this war, co-sponsoring Joe Lieberman's war resolution used to attack Iraq in the first place; yet Edwards continues to support additional illegal military strikes against Muslims - at Edwards will, order and direction!

Read my lips: JOHN EDWARDS VOTED FOR BUSH'S ILLEGAL POLICY OF PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKES!!! EDWARDS ENABLED BUSH'S ILLEGAL ATTACK ON IRAQ! and you want me to vote for John Edwards?

Watch Edwards in this video and think about what he said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9REGbr0nfI

May God Damn John Edwards for being responsible for the needless deaths of nearly four thousand American soldiers, over 25,000 seriously wounded soldiers, and God only knows how many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. This is ONE of the things wrong with the Democratic Party: Democrats should be holding accountable each and every Democrat who (unconstitutionally) gave George W. Bush the faux authority to attack, invade and militarily occupy sovereign nation Iraq. Such an act by a sitting Senator is unforgiveable: legally and morally.


Without this accountability, the Democratic Party cannot stake any claim of honor, respect or sense of justice. Without this accountability, there is no "lesson learned." In fact, if these guilty war-assenters are left scotfree and unchecked, we are doomed to repeat history again. Instead of holding John Edwards accountable for his co-sponsoring and voting for Lieberman's war bill and sending our troops to kill and die in a needless, unlawful war, Democrats are rewarding treasonist Edwards with cash and their support. I'm waiting for our entire political system to implode from the injustice, hypocrisy and ignorance. There is no accountability in the Democratic Party; otherwise, Democrats would NOT be supporting the Democrats who voted to give Bush permission to attack Iraq. Those assenting Democrats are just as guilty as Dick Cheney and George Dubya. Hillary, Obama and Edwards' hands are just as bloodied with the fresh blood of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi citizens as Rumsfeld, Rice, Hadley, Wolfowitz, Pearle and all the other cretinous neocon bastards.

Has the Democratic Party no sense of shame, no sense of accountability, no sense of justice, no respect for our nation's great constitution, no respect for life itself?

Democrats ignore and forego all of these things in favor of a pretty face and slick words.

Edwards says he's sorry for voting for the war - to hell with John Edwards - thousands and thousands and thousands of dead human beings don't get do-overs - why should Edwards? Edwards should be hiding in shame and horror at his actions and the result of his actions; but no, instead Edwards is holding his hand to for a handout from you and me.

Now Edwards says: "It's time to end this war and bring our troops home."
Well, what time was it when Edwards voted to give Bush permission to attack Iraq? Was it time for Iraqis to die? Was it time for American soldiers to die? Apparently so.


Edwards? Let's deport him and Hillary.

.r o n [e-mail]

[Parkerlane]

19. Edwards MUST be held responsible for voting to give Bush the faux authority to attack Iraq

Protect the Green Zone? You're kidding, right? The Green Zone is unsafe right now, coming under sporadic mortar attacks. I know - my friend was ther in the Green Zone for weeks. You ought to read what she says about being in the Green Zone. Why would any American seek to keep any U.S. troops in Iraq for any reason? After years of this Bush-Dems-Occupation, Bush & the Democrats still don't control Iraq - never will. Why would you pre-suppose Iraqis want one single U.S. soldier or diplomat in Iraq? They don't. You ever heard of Somalia? Don't you remember what happened to the American soldiers guarding that embassy? They were killed and dragged through the streets. Didn't you see the movie! Americans are so jaded and out of touch with reality, they think the whole world wants an American presence in their land - they don't!

Apparently, most Americans just don't get it - in Iraq, for Iraqis, there are ZERO DEGREES of separation! Every family in Iraq has a family member who has been killed by the U.S. military or the insurgency - you know, the insurgency created when Bush removed Saddam from power. Under Saddam, approx. 40-50 Iraqi bodies were buried each day - now, there are over 200 Iraqi bodies buried each day.

Edwards supports the bombing of Iran; Edwards supports the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine and Edwards supports keeping troops in Iraq. Edwards is one of the persons responsible for sending American troops to die in this needless war in the first place! Why in the HELL would anyone want to vote for Edwards? Especially considering Edwards has as much as blood on his hands as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Hadley, Wolfowitz and the rest of the neocon gang.

You're misrepresenting John Edwards' foreign policy regarding Iraq: Edwards will keep U.S. troops in Iraq and the region for what Edwards (and Obama and Hillary) calls "quick reaction strike force." OUR GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO USE MILITARY FORCE AT WILL AGAINST MUSLIM/ARAB NATIONS! What part of illegal Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes don't you understand? Edwards voted for this war, co-sponsoring Joe Lieberman's war resolution used to attack Iraq in the first place; yet Edwards continues to support additional illegal military strikes against Muslims - at Edwards will, order and direction!

Read my lips: JOHN EDWARDS VOTED FOR BUSH'S ILLEGAL POLICY OF PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKES!!! EDWARDS ENABLED BUSH'S ILLEGAL ATTACK ON IRAQ! and you want me to vote for John Edwards?

Watch Edwards in this video and think about what he said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9REGbr0nfI

May God Damn John Edwards for being responsible for the needless deaths of nearly four thousand American soldiers, over 25,000 seriously wounded soldiers, and God only knows how many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. This is ONE of the things wrong with the Democratic Party: Democrats should be holding accountable each and every Democrat who (unconstitutionally) gave George W. Bush the faux authority to attack, invade and militarily occupy sovereign nation Iraq.

Without this accountability, the Democratic Party cannot stake any claim of honor, respect or sense of justice. Without this accountability, there is no "lesson learned." In fact, if these guilty war-assenters are left scotfree and unchecked, we are doomed to repeat history again. Instead of holding John Edwards accountable for his co-sponsoring and voting for Lieberman's war bill and sending our troops to kill and die in a needless, unlawful war, Democrats are rewarding treasonist Edwards with cash and their support. I'm waiting for our entire political system to implode from the injustice, hypocrisy and ignorance. There is no accountability in the Democratic Party; otherwise, Democrats would NOT be supporting the Democrats who voted to give Bush permission to attack Iraq. Those assenting Democrats are just as guilty as Dick Cheney and George Dubya. Hillary, Obama and Edwards' hands are just as bloodied with the fresh blood of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi citizens as Rumsfeld, Rice, Hadley, Wolfowitz, Pearle and all the other cretinous neocon bastards.

Has the Democratic Party no sense of shame, no sense of accountability, no sense of justice, no respect for our nation's great constitution, no respect for life itself?

Democrats ignore and forego all of these things in favor of a pretty face and slick words.

Edwards says he's sorry for voting for the war - to hell with John Edwards - thousands and thousands and thousands of dead human beings don't get do-overs - why should Edwards? Edwards should be hiding in shame and horror at his actions and the result of his actions; but no, instead Edwards is holding his hand ot for a handout from you and me.

Now Edwards says: "It's time to end this war and bring our troops home."
Well, what time was it when Edwards voted to give Bush permission to attack Iraq? Was it time to Iraqis to die? Was it time for American soldiers to die? Apparently so.


Edwards? Let's deport him and Hillary.

.r o n [e-mail]

[Parkerlane]

21. What about the 150,000 Blackwater security forces?

What about the 150,000 Blackwater security forces? Thanks to Edwards and the gang, those Blackwater employees aren't going anywhere - to the delight of the Blackwater Corporation. Hillary, Obama and Edwards all magically refrain from even bringing this subject up. The so-called "residual forces" Hillary, Obama and Edwards want to keep in Iraq are for several purposes; not the least of which is to provide "force-protection" to the well-politically-connected Blackwater Corporation employees; Hillary, Obama and Edwards' "residual forces" will also provide protection to Cheney's Halliburton employees, so Cheney's contracts won't be annulled by a total withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq. Now we're getting to the heart of the matter. U.S. troops are in Iraq to provide security detail for oil company employees and other American company employees enjoying thos big, fat, no-bid multi-billion contracts they've sucked out of Joe Taxpayer. Edwards wants to provide security to these corporate employees, so the big boys won't lose their fatass guvmint contracts - just like Hillary and Obama.

Stop fooling around and vote for Dennis Kucinich! You say he's "unelectable"??? - but only if you don't vote for him.

.r o n [e-mail]

[Parkerlane]

23. Edwards' plans ARE like Hillary and Obama's plans - keep U.S. troops in Iraq

Edwards' plans ARE like Hillary and Obama's plans - keep U.S. troops in Iraq!

How stupid would you feel if Edwards became President and kept some U.S. troops in Iraq, then those troops were killed by angry Iraqis - how stupid would you feel then?

[jefferson_dem]

3. Principled, rational foreign policy by Obama.

Totally abandoning relations and targeted strategic operations in the middle-east would be almost as bad (if not just as bad) as continuing with this cluster-fuck of a war Obama opposed from the outset.

[Tom Joad]

12. obama used to support peace. now he supports the status quo

He supports US support of Israeli occupation of Palestine, and US control of Iraq and beyond. More than willing to bomb Iran, not willing to support a nuclear-free Middle East (will say nothing of Israel hundreds of nuclear weapons).

Let's face it, congressional dems support war too.

[lovuian]

16. Yep Obama has dissappointed me here He needs to be clearer

and tone down the rhetoric

[ginnyinWI]

20. I just read it today and I like it

You are correct--we can't just leave--we have to leave carefully.

His speech for anyone who hasn't read it. Read before you make a snap judgement.

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/09/12/remarks_of_senator_barack_obam_23.php

[Parkerlane]

22. Watch the video first, so you can see Obama's policy of keeping troops in Iraq

Watch the video first, so you can see Obama's policy of keeping troops in Iraq.

[Parkerlane]

24. What do you want your son's tombstone to read?

What do you want your son's tombstone to read?

That he died because one of these H.O.E.s wanted to keep U.S. troops in Iraq for diplomatic installations? to protect private American corporate employees? Is that what you want your son to fight and die for? to protect corporate profits? Or you're just willing to send someone else's son to die for maintaining a corporate presence in Iraq?

The fact is, Hillary, Obama and Edwards are just alike when it comes to their solidarity in keeping U.S. sons and daughters in harm's way to keep, perpetuate and protect a U.S. corporate presence in Iraq.

You just don't make any sense.

Hillary, Obama and Edwards are all corporate sellouts, period.

They all voted for this war; they all gave Bush the faux authority to attack Iraq in the first place, save Obama. But Obama continually and repeatedly voted to fund this unlawful, unnecessary war of choice.

.r o n [e-mail]

[ginnyinWI]

26. no need to get personal over a difference of opinion

You are talking to someone who opposed this war from the beginning and has been heartsick about it ever since and who worked hard on Kerry's campaign primarily so that this bloodshed could end.

I have a nephew who just arrived in Iraq with the Air National Guard, supposedly for a two-month tour. Yeah right--we'll see.

I am not committed to any candidate yet, this time around. I'm just looking at the options.

[jefferson_dem]

28. Dude. Chill with the insulting tone.

You may not know this yet but people here can disagree with each other in a respectful manner.

[Parkerlane]

25. You support "Targeted strategic operations?" Go join the Republican Party!

You support "Targeted strategic operations?" Go join the Republican Party!

[jefferson_dem]

29. What the fuck is wrong with you?

Rather ballsy posts given your fairly short stay.

Based on your apparent inability to deal rationally with people who might have slightly different political opinions, one has to wonder if the "Go join the Republican Party" demand is a bit of ... *projection* on your part.

So...have fun as long as you're here. And lighten up a bit there, bunky.

[Greyhound]

27. Military forces do foster "relations", they only serve to intimidate.

Every embassy has a resident security force, but that is not what he has described. He is describing a combat force.

I do not trust him. He turned corporate after he got "the talk" from the "Democratic leadership" and has made it clear that he will do their bidding, not ours.

[Tom Joad]

4. he could place a quick reaction force up his

state of Illinois.

[leftchick]

7. so his plan for a permanent presence in Iraq

is no different from bush's. Thanks for helping to clear that up.

[Tom Joad]

10. What would Fredrick Douglass say? The puny opposition to the war.

What did he say about congress' willingness to continue to fund the war of aggression against Mexico?

The determination of our slaveholding President to prosecute the war, and the probability of his success in wringing from the people men and money to carry it on, is made evident, rather than doubtful, by the puny opposition arrayed against him. No politician of any considerable distinction or eminence seems willing to hazard his popularity with his party ... by an open and unqualified disapprobation of the war. None seem willing to take their stand for peace at all risks; and all seem willing that the war should be carried on, in some form or other.

Of course, Douglass never had the opportunity to meet Dennis Kucinich.

[peace13]

13. Out of Iraq = Kucinich

There are no two ways about it! Your 'classic' Dems are 'Pug light and will carry out the oil procurement process. Peace, Kim

[Dhalgren]

15. I will not vote for anyone who plans on keeping any troops in Iraq.

Period. We can have our guards at the embassy, that's it. That same number of guards we would have at any embassy. The idea that we would invade, conquer, occupied and then garrison someone else's country is just completely unacceptable. I don't give a damn what the "geopolitical ramifications" are. We have no right, under any circumstances to garrison another country against that country's will, period. And the daily killing of our troops should give everyone the clue (even Democrats) that the Iraqis do not want us in their country. This isn't about security or terrorism or any of the bloody, goddamned bullshit; it is about greed, corporate profit, power and empire. No more. Not from me. No more...