BREAKING ON HARDBALL! WH Issues a Statement on "GENERAL TIME HORIZON" for Iraq Withdraw!

[berni_mccoy]

HOLY. FLIP. FLOP!

Obama IS ALREADY THE PRESIDENT!

He is INFLUENCING THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.

And that is the question they are discussing: Is Obama Having An Effect On Policy Now? !!!!!!

O.M.G.

:wow:

On Edit: What A Friday News Item!

[babylonsister]

1. TPM has it up...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/07/us_iraq_seek_general_time_hori.php

US, Iraq seek `general time horizon' on troop cuts

US, Iraq are ready to seek `general time horizon' on American troop cuts, White House says

TERENCE HUNT
AP News

Jul 18, 2008 10:58 EST

The United States and Iraq have agreed to seek "a general time horizon" for deeper reductions in American combat troops in Iraq.

Iraqi officials, in a sign of growing confidence as violence decreases, have been pressuring the United States to agree to a specific timeline to withdraw U.S. forces. President Bush has adamantly opposed a timeline, and the White House said Friday that the timeframe being discussed would not be "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki talked about the timing issue as part of discussions over a broader security agreement to keep American troops in Iraq after a U.N. mandate expires on Dec. 31.

The White House says the two leaders, in a conversation on Thursday, agreed that the accord should include "a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals, such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq."

more...


And ThinkProgress:

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/18/general-time-horizon/

[monmouth]

14. This has been Obama's position from the gitgo. He owns it,

they're borrowing it. Don't believe for a minute they're not looking at Obama's numbers and noticing his appeal to both dems and reps.

[babylonsister]

15. I absolutely agree; they can try to claim it as their own, but too many

people are aware this has not been their prior stance.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

35. shows Obama is on the offensive (attack) not the defensive

[polmaven]

50. They ain't borrowing NUTHIN!

They are outright STEALING IT!...They are very good at that!

[nc4bo]

26. *sniff-sniff* I smell the odor of stinking fish coming outta the WH. nt

[Tutonic]

42. Once they get beyond the General Time Horizon they intend to

Seek a "Resolution to the Solution" and then "Begin the End of the Beginning." But if things don't go as planned they'll "Invest in the Future Investitures" and "Practice Peace after War." If I was alMaliki, I'd charge the US 10 times whatever he is being paid to have to put up with this nonsense!

[Robeson]

2. WTF is a "General Time Horizon?"...

...a string of double-speak thrown together?

[Webster Green]

23. Yep! Just like the "artificial timetable"

If you actually had a timetable, why would it be artificial?

Perhaps if it was set by our artificial president it would qualify as an artificial timetable.

In any event, bush sucks! Glad he's stealing Obama's plans though.

[Muttocracy]

3. Biden's response:

(whole thing below, emphasis mine)

http://biden.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=4067D16F-FC63-46AC-91B9-44F9C0A2077A

BIDEN Statement on Bush-Maliki Agreement on 'Time Horizon' for Troop Reduction in Iraq

July 18, 2008

Washington, DC – Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D-DE) issued the following statement today:

“I welcome today’s announcement that the President has reversed course and dropped his adamant opposition to a timeline for redeployment of American troops from Iraq. He also has acknowledged the need to transition from a combat mission to one that focuses on training and counter-terrorism. The Bush Administration is finally facing reality. They are now engaging directly with Iran and recognizing the need for more forces in Afghanistan while scaling down our force commitment in Iraq.

“The President should begin a responsible redeployment of our combat forces from Iraq so that we can meet the many other challenges we face around the world, starting with taking the fight to Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan – the people who actually attacked us on 9-11.”

[islandmkl]

7. go, Joe, go....

[Virginia Dare]

33. Maliki was ready to GOBAMA!..

wow, they're toast...:wow:

[grasswire]

4. come on, use your heads...

In political parlance, they are taking the issue away from Obama. This is a winning gambit for Republicans. It's a standard political play. They aren't emulating him, they are stealing the issue so he can't use it.

[eleny]

22. But he's already using it

The other day he commented at a speech that they're doing what he's been saying all along. I'm confident that this will come up in the days ahead and in the debates. Given the breadth of communications today, it's going to be hard to steal something that's in plain sight.

Using an old ploy in today's world is not as easy as it was in "the old days".

[Baltoman991]

36. I for one

am using my head and see it for what it is. They're attempting to steal Obamas thunder on this one.

Those who need to use their heads are the ones who can't see this for what it is. But IMO, enough people have finally caught onto the games of Bush & Co. and they'll see right through this ploy.

Obama has won this one. Time for his detractors to finally admit that he's been right all along and George is just following along.

[hisownpetard]

5. The Repubs are more scared than any of us can even imagine. That's why they are trying to short-

circuit the enthusiasm for the presumptive Democratic nominee by out-Obama'ing Obama right now, before the election.

It is simply incredible. He has already put politics on a different course and is not even President, yet!

[Johonny]

11. IDK

I'm still moving towards the theory they are trying to get Bush to try (very poorly and hastily) to Obama foreign policy so they can pretend Obama is just like Bush.

[Johonny]

6. Is there a websters dictionary of Bush terms

So I can understand the difference between a time table and a time horizon.

[Muttocracy]

8. you never actually catch up to the horizon. nt

[JuniperLea]

9. Presactomundo!

Beat me too it!

[TexasObserver]

10. IT'S NOT A WITHDRAWAL TIME TABLE!! DON'T YOU DARE CALL IT THAT!!

It's Withdrawal Stylings!!

It's a withdrawal thingie!!

It's not a timetable for withdrawal!!

---- From the Bush administration Secretary of Up is Down.

[berni_mccoy]

46. lol

[Iggo]

12. What the...?

Sounds like one o' them dang ol' ar-dee-fishul timelines to me!

[sandnsea]

13. They did this to Kerry too

And then pretended the Republicans and Democrats had the same plan, so why not vote for the guy who wants to win the war if both plans are the same. BEWARE!

[woolldog]

16. Wait a minute.

I don't know what happened with Kerry, but this HELPS Obama. If Iraq and foreign policy generally are removed from the debate, then what's left is the economy. And Obama crushes McCain on that.

Plus Obama will be able to say on this and pakistan/afghanistan. "See I was right all along."

[sandnsea]

28. Cut taxes and kill terrorists

That's what defeated us in 2004. That and the idiots who said Bush and Kerry had the same plan on Iraq.

[Cant trust em]

32. and they called Kerry a flip-flopper.

now guess what...they're doing that to Obama too.


The GOP is a consistent lot. I'll give them that.

[Virginia Dare]

34. Except Maliki is apparently cutting and running..

this is definitely a doomsday scenario for the repubs.

[JackORoses]

17. Bush is Royally screwing McCain

First an Envoy to Iran,

now a Timeline?!?

[monmouth]

20. When will John Bolton's head explode?...LOL..n/t

[Cha]

25. One wonders

why? What's in it for them(bu$hites)?

[npincus]

18. how poetic... how about "a Future Freedom Trajectory of Departure"?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

19. It's not a timetable - it's a time horizon

I heard an interview this morning on MSNBC of General David Petraeus by Andrea Mitchell. She asked Petraeus about the fact Al-Maliki was asking for a U.S. withdrwal timetable. Petraeus said that the Iraqis don't want a timetable; they want a time horizon. He said that made it okay and that a time horizon is not a timetable. Just more double talk from the most doubletalking administration in memory.

[Botany]

21. A "GENERAL TIME HORIZON"

[Xolodno]

24. Mitigating Damages

Thats what they are doing. They know they are dead this fall if they keep up with the current line.

What they are hoping is:

1. Disenfranchised Republicans who will vote for Obama may have second thoughts and vote for McCain now, particularly when they contrast "social issues"....they hope. They can now make the issue of whose time table is better (I can hear them saying already "Obama is too rigid on his timetable and doesn't allow for flexibility")

2. If they do lose, this sets them up in the next election to say "We were all on the same page" and then hopefully sweep all the negative under the rug.

If they come out for universal health care....it will be whose version will cost less on the republican side.

[blueknight]

27. wait a minute!

i thought the U.S. didnt "cut and run"

[jaylemond77]

29. October surprise?

I wouldn't be surprised if Bush withdraws some thousands troops in order to help McCain.
He's sneaky like that.

[Median Democrat]

30. Holy Flip Flop Batman! WH Is Adopting The Obama Plan! McCain's 100 Years???

What happened to 100 years in Iraq ala Korea?

[Cant trust em]

31. So we're calling it a "time horizon" now?

Sounds a lot like the terminology that was used by Democrats.

[TheKentuckian]

37. This could be great

but only if the right spin and coverage comes out.

Otherwise it's just thunder stealing.

[Cant trust em]

38. Someone needs to jump up and down about this.

This is a pretty obvious win for us. Democrats just need to tell the public about it.

[Canuckistanian]

39. What? Cut 'n Run?

Slink away with our tails between our legs? Admit defeat and let the terraists win?

If we can't fight them there, where CAN we fight them? Kennebunkport? Crawford? Casper, Wyoming?

[dave29]

40. Speaking in terms of physics, an "event horizon" is where time stops

and the black hole has dragged you in forever. So I think maybe they are just reiterating the status quo

[iconicgnom]

41. Obama owns issues of national security and economics

My intuition tells me that he's spent the recent post-primary time nailing down certain difficult issues, with little or no real help from the ununified Congressional and Senate Dems, and that during and after this European Middle East trip we'll see a gentle "tacking to the left", in a very positive sense where it becomes more clear that there's happening a redefinition of terms, of the language with which the US political leadership deals with the world. Diplomacy first, war last.

That can only be a good thing, and though I'm very very - OK, extremely - skeptical of any framing that immediately follows a Bush admin move, I agree with berni-mccoy's framing.

[kennetha]

43. Don't Underestimate the Republicans.

Here's what I'm guessing they are up to.

They will try to distinguish between their strategy and Obama's in a way that will enable them to paint themselves as wise and tough warriors and Obama as a naive pacifist, who can't make tough decisions.

THey will trumpet this as a drawing down of forces on "our own terms." Our own terms being as a consequence of victory. A victory brought about by the surge. THey will use this to spin the surge as a successful strategy, a successful strategy which Obama, in his pacifistic liberalism, opposed and McCain in his tough as nails realism favored (indeed originated. They will say that what Obama wanted to was to cut and run and not see this thing through to victory.

It's BS. But it's just the beginning of a relentless spin war that will be really hard fought. The Republican's will not at all present themselves as adopting Obama's strategy. Their goal is not simply to "take away" the issue of the war from him. Their goal is to paint him as completely unsuited for the tough even unpopular choices that a "commander in chief" has to make.

Will it work? Depends on lots of things. How adept at Obama is at pressing the case that the war has achieved nothing. But that will also depend on the facts on the ground, how they can be spun, and who controls the spin.

If come the Fall, the media is crediting Bush and the Republican with tough-minded foresight leading to a unlikely but real "victory" in Iraq, -- even if it is only a mirage and a sham like the mission accomplished nonesense -- then Obama's argument that he has superior judgment because he was against a war "that never should have been fought" will lose force with many.

So this is a potential trap.

Of course, if Iraq goes to hell in hand basket, if Al Quaida reqains the offensive, if Afghanastan turns even more sour, Obama's hand is seriously strengthed.

Anyway, I think this is big stuff for both sides.

[Blue_In_AK]

44. They're only shifting to Afghanistan.

There's really no relief here, that I can see. It's still endless war, no matter where it's fought.

[gulliver]

45. I knew this was going to happen the minute Maliki made his...

...little Kabuki dance of independence. Maliki started talking about timetables...really long ones. That was our first clue that he was getting ready to play ball with Bush. There is no way Maliki would give up the free security Bush currently provides at our expense. Maliki knows that if there is no deal to allow Bush to keep American forces in Iraq after the U.N. deadline, Maliki will be a goner.

Iraqis want the U.S. out, so Maliki has to act tough and "insist" (wink, wink) that America pull out--just no time soon.

Bush and Maliki will seal a deal on extending our presence past the U.N. deadline now. That is what this is about. Bush wants the next president to have to break an "agreement" with Iraq in order to get us out. It is all part of the Republican plan to avoid the party death penalty they deserve for this historic disaster. They know that the minute we leave, Iraq will fall into civil war. So the GOP will do anything to keep us in Iraq indefinitely. That's the only course of action they can take to keep boneheaded Americans from writing off the war as what it was: a dumbass, America-wrecking, Republican debacle.

[Quixote1818]

47. I think they knew Iraq was going to support Obama's time-line

This was a preemptive strike.

[rucky]

48. Is it less than 100 years? n/t

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

49. OM F'ing G!

Somebody in the Bush White House must really, REALLY hate John McCain. On the eve of Obama's much-heralded trip to the mideast, they issue an announcement saying in effect, "Obama has been right all along" and they leave McCain as the only head of state (or potential head of state) still beating the drum for staying in Iraq.

Welcome to the Obama Administration.

[SOS]

51. Proof

That the Republican Party has used Iraq for nothing other than domestic political gain.
No wonder the actual invasion and occupation have been a fiasco.

And as E.J. Dionne pointed out - a horizon is something you can walk towards, but never arrive at.