Democrat (Obama) urges gradual Iraq withdrawal

[jefferson_dem]

Democrat urges gradual Iraq withdrawal
By DEANNA BELLANDI, Associated Press Writer

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who is contemplating a run for the presidency, on Monday called for a "gradual and substantial" reduction of U.S. forces from Iraq that would begin in four to six months.

Speaking to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Obama envisioned a flexible timetable for withdrawal linked to conditions on the ground in Iraq and based on the advise of U.S. commanders. He also called for intensified efforts to train Iraqi security forces, U.S. aid packages tied to Iraqi progress in reducing sectarian violence and new diplomacy with Syria and Iran.

"I believe that it remains possible to salvage an acceptable outcome to this long and misguided war," he said. "But it will not be easy. For the fact is that there are no good options left in this war."

<SNIP>

"We cannot afford to be a country of isolationists right now," he said. "We need to maintain a strong foreign policy, relentless in pursuing our enemies and hopeful in promoting our values around the world."

<SNIP>

"For only through this phase redeployment can we send a clear message to the Iraqi factions that the U.S. is not going to hold together this country indefinitely — that it will be up to them to form a viable government that can effectively run and secure Iraq," he said.

<SNIP>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061120/ap_on_go_co/obama_iraq

[Alhena]

1. Nothing earthshaking there ...

AFAIK that's the mainstream Democratic position on the war. Of course, Obama was right about the war from the beginning, so that gives him a certain credibility on the subject.

[pinto]

2. Sounds like a consensus is building around this position. And the point

that there are few good options on the table, while delay also means more loss of life.

Minimizing loss of life - whatever the nationality - needs to be paramount, imo. And it is clear we're not going to solve this militarily, nor unilaterally.

Also, I'm equally anxious to see what financial changes may be proposed come January in regards to our overall funding of Middle East operations, from basic defense appropriations to the notorious supplementals used to hide the dollar costs of this war and the numerous contractor scams pulled off under the Pentagon's umbrella.

[Kelvin Mace]

3. I don't care what the "consensus" is

In six months, another 400+ American soldiers will have died. And what will Obama tell their family they died for? His presidential aspirations?

[ripple]

5. Idealism can only go so far

If Iraq disintegrates into a full-scale civil war, we're talking about the slaughter of roughly a half a million people. A HALF A MILLION PEOPLE.

I was and still am vehemently opposed to the war, but I can also see the reality of the situation. While there aren't any good solutions for Iraq at this point, there are some horrific scenarios simmering under the surface.

I agree with Obama. I watched his spech on CSPAN and he also talked a lot about making the "Iraqi government" accountable, not coddling them, requiring them to develop their own solutions, etc. He was very critical of Al Maliki, as we all should be.

It was a good speech and a workable plan, with much more detail than the article includes.

[IndianaGreen]

6. Iraq is already in civil war

Shia death squads operate out of the Shia-dominated government. Sunis are responding in kind.

It's over!

Pope John Paul II warned Bush and Blair that if they went into Iraq they would do so without G-d. What you see now is what we deserve for disobeying G-d's laws, and international laws.

Aggressor states should never be rewarded!

[ripple]

7. Agreed, it's a civil war now

and the writing is on the wall for it to worsen into an unchecked, full-blown slaughter. An abrupt pull-out would essentially be a death sentence for hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians. We owe it to the innocents to at least give them a fighting chance.

This isn't about rewards, it is about humanity.

[Kelvin Mace]

9. Iraq is in a civil war

Nothing will stop it descending into complete chaos. Civil war was assured the day we invaded.

Half a million will die no matter what we do, but 3,000+ more will die on top of that each month we remain.

There is no Iraqi government to "hold accountable" since they are figureheads with no real power.

Ego got us into this, now Obama is letting ego keep us there.

[hezekkia]

11. great-- you want to speed up the blood bath

because you have zero hope that it can be prevented, and so you can say "told ya so."

way to be.

didn't the Democratic Party used to be the party that believed in people? that was optimistic?

[IndianaGreen]

4. There are no good options left in this criminal war, except cut and run

Obama's proposal is a moderate one, but one that will lead to more deaths and sorrows.

Published on Sunday, November 19, 2006 by the Madison Capital Times (Wisconsin)

'Cut and Run' Must be First Step in Iraq

by William E. Odom

The United States upset the regional balance in the Mideast when it invaded Iraq. Restoring it requires bold initiatives, but "cutting and running" must precede them all. Only a withdrawal of all U.S. troops - within six months and with no preconditions - can break the paralysis that enfeebles our diplomacy. And the greatest obstacles to cutting and running are the psychological inhibitions of our leaders and the public.

Our leaders do not act because their reputations are at stake. The public does not force them to act because it is blinded by the president's conjured set of illusions: that we are reducing terrorism by fighting in Iraq, creating democracy there, preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, making Israel more secure, not allowing our fallen soldiers to have died in vain, and others.

But reality no longer can be avoided. It is beyond U.S. power to prevent sectarian violence in Iraq, the growing influence of Iran throughout the region, the probable spread of Sunni-Shiite strife to neighboring Arab states, the eventual rise to power of the anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr or some other anti-American leader in Baghdad, and the spread of instability beyond Iraq.

These realities get worse every day that our forces remain in Iraq. They can't be wished away by clever diplomacy or by leaving our forces in Iraq for several more years.

The administration could recognize that a rapid withdrawal is the only way to overcome our strategic paralysis, although that appears unlikely. Congress could force a stock-taking. Failing this, the public, sooner or later, will see through all of the White House's double talk and compel a radical policy change. The price for delay, however, will be more lives lost in vain.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1119-24.htm

[leesa]

8. It's like stopping the gangbang slowly. Doesn't this goofball understand it was illegal?

[hezekkia]

10. and what do you predict happens if we pull out every single troop tomorrow?

this is your idea. defend it. how will complete, immediate troop withdrawal make America, Iraq, and the Middle East safer and more stable.