A funny thing happened on the way to the withdrawal.

[Jakes Progress]

Ending The War In Iraq: How Obama's Own Rhetoric -- And George Bush's Pact -- Boxed In The President

WASHINGTON -- The Barack Obama of 2011 and the Barack Obama of 2008 don't always see eye to eye.

Typically the presidential vision has overruled the candidate's. (Extending the Bush tax cuts, supporting indefinite detention without trial and engaging in open-ended war in Afghanistan are a few examples.)

But in the case of the complete withdrawal of American troops from Iraq by the end of this year, candidate Obama prevailed over the president.

President Obama wanted to stay longer -- as recently as a few weeks ago asking the Iraqi government to allow 10,000, then 3,000 troops to remain past New Year's Eve.

But the president ultimately had no choice but to stick to candidate Obama's plan -- thanks, of all things, to an agreement signed by George W. Bush.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/obama-iraq_n_1032507.html

But then, let's don't let facts get in the way of a good press conference.

[OnyxCollie]

1. K&R.

[jaxx]

2. Let me be the first to unrec.

You'd think people would be glad it's over....but nooooooo there's the goalposts moving again.

[Jakes Progress]

3. You win.

We all win when the war ends. But it's nice knowing the things that usually take twenty years for the historians to uncover. This is that kind of stuff.

[jaxx]

5. Nothing was hidden, it was published in the papers.

It's just another spin to piss on Obama about.

[Jakes Progress]

9. So

you think it is wrong to speak the truth when it might be bad about Obama?

Do you agree then with the post? Since this information was posted int the papers, you agree that Obama did not want troops completely removed by the end of the year? And you seem then to agree with the part that says he offered a different vision during his campaigning than the vision that he acted on once in office? See. Those are things people should know about a politician. With no honorable - or even competent - opponent, Obama has a lock on the election and clearly is better than any of his putative opponents. But blindly believing whatever a candidate promises without holding them accountable to history and the people for those promises makes a mockery of democratic government and a shadow of the Democratic party.

Do you actually have anything to say about the article's facts? Or do you prefer to just let them stand?

[jaxx]

12. So, the article is pure conjecture, piecing together bits they want

to use to make it real. The President did have a choice, and he chose to leave Iraq. Anything else is media/blog BS because they wanted to be right and have Obama be wrong. Do you really think we were born yesterday and can't figure out what the professional left does for a living?

If I thought the article should stand I'd never have unrec'd it. I stand by the unrec.

[Jakes Progress]

16. Magical Realism?

You know. The ability to hold two completely contradictory beliefs at the same time. It is common in cults, fundamentalists, and groups that base their entire belief systems in one man, no principles or core, just a fervent obsession with the personality.

So in one post you agree that the facts are well known and circulated (you do that to shoot down my post) then in another you say it is all fabricated.

So you have your new belief statements that now contradict the article. You have no evidence. You have no proof. Your beliefs fly in the face of well-known, established, and public statements and documents. But that doesn't matter.

So stand by your unrec. It is the surest proof I have that I am right.

[11 Bravo]

39. It's actually more accurate to state that "you lose" as opposed to "jaxx wins".

[CakeGrrl]

4. Right there with ya

And to think there was some mumbo-jumbo somewhere about not really caring HOW the end of the war came about as long as it was over.

Ha!

[Jakes Progress]

8. Certainly no left there.

Mumbo Jumbo? Gee, when you use technical terms like that, it is such a devastatingly intellectual argument that it is hard to reply. Would you care to demonstrate what you mean? Would you have a position about the article?

Do you agree that removing troops completely by the end of the year was not Obama's choice, but his only recourse? Do you agree that his rhetoric in the primary and his rhetoric once in office are at odds with each other? You did not offer any rebuttal to the article, so you seem to be agreeing with it. If not, please feel free to rebut with examples and sources of your own.

There is a reason to examine and compare a president's campaign speech with what he does once in office. There is a campaign on now. If he said one thing in the campaign and did another once in office before, it casts a light on how much faith to put in his words during the campaign. There is no reason, no thought involved in blindly attacking any questioner, in blindly supporting every action by a politician just because he is hot.

And he is hot. And he is quite fortunate that there is not a shred of honor or truth emanating from anyone who is likely to be his opponent in the race. It's just that some of us prefer to realize that all politicians are flawed and that we must always try to hold them accountable for the better sides of themselves that they project in a campaign.

That is my reason for posting. What are your reasons for snarking about a truthful post?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JVS]

20. Just because people aren't willing to give credit where it's not due doesn't mean they're not...

happy about the war being over.

[Tarheel_Dem]

6. Damn you jaxx. I wanted to be the first.

:cry:

[jaxx]

7. You can be first next time.

:hi:

[Jakes Progress]

10. First for what?

Jaxx seems to admit that the article was accurate and wanted to unrec for being mean to Obama? Do you also agree with Jaxx and the article that Obama didn't want to remove all troops by the end of the year? Do you agree that Obama the candidate put out a different version of what he wanted to have happen than what Obama the president actually did?

Please feel free to offer references and supported facts to contradict the article. That is how a discussion forum works.

[jaxx]

13. Don't be putting words in my mouth, that doesn't fly.

Sometimes I have to laugh at the desperation displayed by the kind of post that tries to manipulate the words of others. Cheer up, President Obama is here to stay.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SkyDaddy7]

26. EXACTLY!

What the hell is the purpose in this other than to start more fights...Meanwhile the Koch Bros are engineering a total takeover of this country! We Democrats must look really weak in the eyes of Republicans!

[CakeGrrl]

34. You nailed it. Nothing more to this repeated attempt than that. -nt

[Jakes Progress]

57. Same reasons they gave for ignoring cheney's stuff.

Hey. Let's not bring up the past. Let's not dwell on facts and stuff. Let's just party, dudes.

[ClassWarrior]

50. Wow, the message discipline on the "moving goalposts" meme is so strong...

...it'd make Frank Luntz and the Heritage Foundation blush.

NGU.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BklnDem75]

11. Unrec

Your 'facts' claiming they wanted troops to stay are unnamed sources. It doesn't even quote Obama. The Pentagon makes no secret they want to stay longer. Pretending that's Obama's wish is pure fantasy.

[Jakes Progress]

18. Rec

Your "belief system" claiming that "they" didn't want troops to stay are unnamed sources. It doesn't even bother to quote PR releases. THe Pentagon works for the Commander in Chief. Pretending that Obama doesn't have any say in this is pure fantasy.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dionysus]

14. lol, someone's burned up over the withdrawal...

:rofl:

[Jakes Progress]

19. I know. It seems Obama was pretty hot about it.

But I don't lol over it. I'm just relieved that the administration got forced into it.

[dionysus]

21. lol, keep trying...

:rofl:

[Jakes Progress]

42. I know. We all have to keep trying.

If we try hard enough, maybe we can get our candidates to try to carry through with their promises and get our centrist administration to act more like a Democrat. With no competition from the idiots in the other party, the administration has no worries about being elected. So it becomes important that we all help remind the president what the Democratic party stands for and help turn him from his third way advisors.

Keep up the good work. We can help make the president as great as his potential if we don't just fall down and worship his every move. He told us to keep him on track. I'm sure you want to help with that.

[DevonRex]

23. Can you believe people on DU are crediting Bush while bashing Obama?

[dionysus]

24. i can these days! care for a truffle? these are platinum dusted this time.

came free with my new cruise missle console!
:hi:

[DevonRex]

25. I'd love one. And I'll dip it into my precious metals fund for a bit

of extra flavor.

I really dislike huffpo. Always have, but before it was because the site was so damned slow.

[polichick]

33. It's not about "crediting" Bush - everyone knows he never should have started the war...

It's about paying attention to FACTS. Pres. Obama could have ended the war anytime since Jan. 2009 - instead he stuck with the Bush timeline and Iraqi wishes.

[Jakes Progress]

44. Ahhh. Facts. They are not wanted here. Just a little

old time fundamentalism - The Church of the Personality (no questioning brooked)

[polichick]

46. It's such a desperate mindset!

[dionysus]

53. repeating something a lot doesn't make it feasible or true....

:shrug:

[polichick]

54. The facts make it true.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jakes Progress]

43. Try reading the article.

Kinda makes your post silly.

[polichick]

22. Glad candidate Obama won on something.

[great white snark]

28. President Obama also won.

It was President Obama who ordered the end of the war and Prez O ordered the troops home.

History will not remember unnamed sources and PUMA "journalists"

[polichick]

29. Actually, the decisions that ended the war had a lot to do with Bush and Iraq...

If Pres. Obama wanted to play a big part, he's had since Jan. 2009 to do it.

[JoePhilly]

31. Actually .... Bush ADOPTED a time-line LONG after Obama and Dems proposed one.

Obama first proposed a withdraw in 2007. Other Dems did so as well.

This HUFFPO article (surprisingly), gets the key point right...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/obama-iraq_n_1032507.html

What drove the Iraq withdraw time-line??

It was Barack Obama's proposal that the Iraqis adopted as theirs," Serwer said. "The Iraqis wanted the Barack deal, not the Bush deal."

When both sides announced a resolution in August, Bush had acceded to the Iraqis' major demands.

Most glaringly, it was a defeat for Bush to consent to precisely the kind of timetable that, when Obama and other Democrats had called for one, he repeatedly and contemptuously dismissed as schedule for surrender.

Pesky facts.

On edit: One theory is that the Bush and the GOP were trying to make Iraq LESS of an issue entering the last months of the 2008 election ... give McCain some room ... and then, if McCain won, he could try to UNDO this. And if he lost, "oh well", the media can help ensure that Obama gets no credit on the way out the door. WIN WIN for the GOP.

[polichick]

32. Inconvenient fact: Pres. Obama could have ended the war anytime since Jan. 2009...

...if he wanted to.

[dionysus]

35. you think he could have instantly, unilaterally ended it?

[polichick]

36. Yes, he's the Commander in Chief.

[JoePhilly]

38. So did Obama adopt Bush's plan as you claimed, or not???

[polichick]

40. He stuck with Bush's date but he could've ended it much earlier - OBVIOUSLY.

[JoePhilly]

47. Bush adopted Obama's timeline on his way out the door.

Obama never said what you wanted him to say ... and so I assume that you did not support, vote, for him.

Right?

[treestar]

51. You really love the idea of all that power, don't you?

That means he can do whatever he wants to do? Really?

That kind of power will never be in someone's hands. Not in this country.

[polichick]

52. Use it or lose it - fortunately, he's starting to get that now.

[JoePhilly]

37. Obama held to the same plan he always had .... he never adopted your plan.

Which is the point.

Sure, you can piss and moan that he needed to do it faster ... and as you did here, claim that he took Bush's plan ... but as I showed, Bush adopted OBAMA's plan.

Those are the facts.

You don't hold office and your plan was never on the table ....

Oh .... and if you voted for Obama ... you voted for HIS PLAN, not yours. No?

[polichick]

41. Tell it to the families of troops who died since January 2009.

[JoePhilly]

48. Obama's time line did not change.

Anyone who voted for Obama knew the path he was on ... YOU included.

If you were so concerned, then you must not have supported, or voted for Obama in 08, right?

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jakes Progress]

67. Lots of fallacy there.

The fact that the timeline was changed over and over is well documented if you just listen to Obama's own words. If you read he article, it sources his campaign quotes with a differing timeline. Are you saying that all the national and international reports about the last few months of negotiations regarding how many troops would be left in Iraq and whether they would receive protection from prosecution are all wrong, and that your faith-based timeline is the right one?

Another problem with your post. See, I am concerned about why we stayed in a war that we weren't supposed to have started. I am concerned about what it says when our politicians feel they can say anything to get elected and then do something else when in office. That is not a good thing. Holding them accountable for their words means first making public those words. Perhaps when they feel that there are more people who will actually call them on their lapses than there are sycophants who will just support their every breath, then politicians will start being careful about what they do. That is the essence of a democracy.

I know you were addressing someone else when you shouted "YOU", but you also said anyone. I'm anyone. And I didn't know that Obama meant to keep the war going for four years. he said he wasn't. I didn't thing he was lying.

So you are simply wrong. Because I was concerned about the war, I supported Obama. I voted for Obama. I put in hundreds of hours campaigning for him. Did you? Did you believe that, despite what he said, Obama planned on keeping the war going for his first term?

[zipplewrath]

27. Difference between the man and the office

There are those in the administration that were advocating for a continued presence, mostly over in DoD. What we don't know is the weight Obama himself was putting behind them. Not much was mentioned about State either. And it is the case that the SOFA was negotiated by the Iraqi's in the context of force Bush's hand, or take their chances with Obama.

The one weakness of the article is that we don't know really where Obama himself was on this whole deal. He may have regretted the deal Bush signed, or he may have seen it as Bush doing for him what he would never have been able to do himself. Until the memoir is written, we may not know. Even then it may be questionable.

[Jakes Progress]

45. But he is president.

We don't know for sure what goes on in the heart of any man. If you can't judge Obama by his administration's actions, then we can't blame bush for his. And I really do blame bush for the crap that the neocons and the banksters did under his watch. This is Obama's watch. He is the most powerful man in the nation - a job he asked for. Credit for ending it finally. I mean, even if he wanted to leave troops, he didn't. He could have always pulled a bush and re-invaded. He didn't. Credit for that.

[treestar]

49. I would hope the one of 2011 knows a lot more than the

2008 one. Only the truly boneheaded would expect an intelligent person to get nothing out of three years of experience.

As for the war in Iraq, it's over. What is the point of bringing up this shit?

[Jakes Progress]

56. Hmm. Why would facts and reality be so bothersome?

Those are the same arguments given for not indicting bush and cheney. Hey it's all over now. Why bring up the past?

And just what wisdom did the president receive that made extending the war and wanting to extend it more such a wiser vision than the one he was elected on? Do you think that is a good thing to remain in Iraq?

[ProSense]

59. The

handwringing over this is beyond hilarious. Oh noes!!! Stop trying to give the President credit for anything!!!

It's as if nothing was done or said before he last announcement.

- In June 2009, U.S. Forces occupied 357 bases. U.S. Forces currently occupy 121 bases, and are expected to reduce that number to 94 bases by the end of August.

link

Operation New Dawn began with 94 military sites in Iraq, in September 2010. Today, that's down to 48 sites. Seven more sites will shut down in August, Richardson said.

more

On June 22, 2011 the President addressed the American people about the way forward in Afghanistan. We have made substantial progress on the objectives the President laid out at West Point in 2009, and he made clear that we will begin the drawdown of U.S. troops from a position of strength. We have exceeded our expectations on our core goal of defeating al-Qa’ida – killing 20 of its top 30 leaders, including Osama bin Laden. We have broken the Taliban’s momentum, and trained over 100,000 Afghan National Security Forces. The U.S. will withdraw 10,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2011, and the 33,000 “surge” troops he approved in December 2009 will leave Afghanistan by the end of summer 2012.

link

It's going to be interesting to see the spin that snatches credit away for the drawdown in Afghanistan.

[Jakes Progress]

61. An

interesting thing is how people choose to decide what is right and wrong based on the personality they support. If a republican does it, it is bad. If Obama does it, it is good.

Might work for you. Not for me.

[ProSense]

62. Hmmm?

"If a republican does it, it is bad. If Obama does it, it is good."

Is this still about Iraq?

If so, a Republican, Bush, invaded the country illegally, and Obama ensured that the illegal war and occupation ended.

So how does that fit into the theory you put forward?

[Jakes Progress]

63. GGGGGG

Read the article. The scenario you toss out here doesn't match reality. bush invaded illegally (which our administration refuses to acknowledge) and tried his best to make it permanent. Obama campaigned on ending the war immediately, then didn't, and then got forced by the Iraqi government to end the occupation.

When bush shoved his crotch in a flight suit and bragged that he had ended the war, we all screamed. Obama has much more class than bush and didn't garb up for the photo op, and he let his press office handle the bragging about doing something he was forced into. Hey. It's good PR. Probably good campaign stuff. But, it doesn't jibe with the whole transparency and responsibility thing.

[ProSense]

64. Hmmm?

"bush invaded illegally (which our administration refuses to acknowledge)"

Translation: bush invaded illegally, which is Obama's fault!

"and tried his best to make it permanent."

Translation: tried to make it permanent by pulling out all combat troops, closing bases and shipping equipment back to the U.S.

"Obama campaigned on ending the war immediately, then didn't, and then got forced by the Iraqi government to end the occupation."

Translation: How to spin this to take credit from Obama after years of people declaring "we're never leaving"?

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jakes Progress]

66. Your ability to argue is questionable.

Nothing in the line "bush invaded illegally (which our administration refuses to acknowledge)" says it was Obama's fault for invading. Please explain how you interpret those lines to say that.

Nothing in the lines "and tried his best to make it permanent" refers to Obama. Read the sentence again. Notice the subject of the sentence. Stop grasping for an attack point and actually discuss the post.

Nothing in the line"Obama campaigned on ending the war immediately, then didn't, and then got forced by the Iraqi government to end the occupation." which is factual, can be taken as spin. This is what happened. The spin was in trying to ignore the reality of what happened and portray the end result of failed negotiation as victory. Now that is spin.

Credit for Obama? Sure. He let it happen. bush would have reinvaded or dropped a bomb or something. Good for Obama. I'm glad the troops are coming home. I would have been happier if we had had the outcome that Candidate Obama sought instead of the outcome that President Obama came to. But it is better than nothing.