I knew what I was getting when I voted for Obama. Some things I liked, some not.

[cherokeeprogressive]

On the subject of Afghanistan and Pakistan, I knew he planned to escalate in Afghanistan and possibly send troops into Pakistan. I didn't support that. I didn't support it for a minute. I still don't. The alternative was voting for McKamikaze/Failin'. That wasn't happenin'. Not then, not now, not ever. Hell, there are some here who poo-poo the notion of "Al Queda" altogether.

What I DID support though, and what made me VERY happy, was his campaign promise that he'd begin the pullout of Iraq IMMEDIATELY. DAY ONE is what I think I remember hearing. ONE BRIGADE PER MONTH is what I think I remember hearing. How many brigades have come home from Iraq in the three months President Obama has been in office? One? Two? Three? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? I'm not sure, but it seems that the posts I used to see here every day counting the number of American lives lost in Iraq have dwindled to nothing. How many deaths in Iraq since Inauguration Day? The way I saw it, Iraq was *'s war. After Inauguration Day, I thought it would be "President Obama's Withdrawal from an Illegal War". I actually believed that not one more troop would have to board a plane on his/her way to what we called an illegal war. How dumb was I?

Time was, we called supporters of the war in Iraq "chickenhawks" and demanded that they send their own sons and daughters into harm's way to PROVE their support. Today though, criticism of President Obama on that account is ridiculed. The argument is that Candidate Obama said what he needed to say in order to get elected. We're told we should have known what we were buying. We're told we should accept President Obama's change in attitude because he's "smarter" than us. We're told we don't know "politics".

I've NEVER known politics it seems. I never knew that campaign promises were to Candidate Obama what oaths were to President Clinton. In case you're wondering, I voted for him too, twice.

Mr. President, you have my full and honest support. I would respectfully request though that you begin drawing down the number of troops in Iraq at a pace that honors your promise to me and my country while you were trying to get elected. The way I see it, you're three months behind. Three brigades should have been reunited with their families at this point, with no fear of having to go back. According to your promise to me, you have less than 13 months to honor your promise to have them ALL home. I was under the impression that within 16 months of your inauguration, there would be no more American men and women carrying weapons in that country, as per your campaign promise. Fully supporting you does NOT mean that I am barred from thinking you've totally misrepresented your position in regards to the illegal occupation of Iraq, the reason being your wish to be elected President of the United States.

During the campaign, we made a big deal of how many members of the Armed Services supported Candidate Obama. It now seems to me that they might have been fooled (or were guilty of being politically naive, like me) by his promise to end the illegal occupation of a country that hadn't harmed us, the end coming within 16 months. How would YOU have voted in the face of that promise if you were in the Armed Forces?

Agree or disagree. You better bring your nuclear flamethrower though, cuz I have really, really thick skin, and I'm going to mix metaphors here; your ridicule flows off my back like water off a duck's.

[Peacetrain]

1. Stand in line.. I am the best at mixed methphors and off the wall sayings

Obama always was going after bin laden and al qaeda. Bush did not, Obama was always committed to that.

[MADem]

2. He said he'd draw down from Iraq as soon as it was SAFE to do so.

He modified his position on his timeline a number of times over the course of the campaign. I remember him saying sixteen months after he took office, while Clinton wanted to start around Month Nine.

Barack Obama will responsibly end the war in Iraq:
Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: successfully ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased.

Encourage political accommodation:
Obama and Biden will press Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future and to substantially spend their oil revenues on their own reconstruction.

Increase stability in Iraq and the region:
Obama and Biden will launch an aggressive diplomatic effort to reach a comprehensive compact on the stability of Iraq and the region. They also will address Iraq's refugee crisis.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

[cherokeeprogressive]

5. Why didn't you include a link to his "one brigade per month" promise? Starting immediately?

You're linking to his own website. Surely you don't think that what you've copied and pasted dovetails with what he promised on the campaign trail?

His campaign website is totally, completely, and absolutely irrelevent to what he's done as president.

[FrenchieCat]

8. Did you go to my link yet?

[namahage]

12. More to the point...

..why didn't you?
If you're going to make an argument, do the work required to back it up yourself.

[MADem]

18. What part of "he modified his position" is too hard for you to process?

That brigade stuff predated his trip to see the troops and his discussions with Petraeus.

Here ya go, since you so desperately need a link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/03/barackobama.uselections20081

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama today said he would "refine" his position on withdrawal from Iraq after meeting with military commanders there this summer, then later insisted he had not softened his commitment to remove US combat forces within 16 months of taking office.

Speaking with reporters at an airport in Fargo, North Dakota, the Illinois senator appeared open to altering his campaign pledge to have US combat troops home from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.

"I am going to do a thorough assessment when I'm there,'' he said. "I'm sure I'll have more information and continue to refine my policy."

The Republican party leapt at the comments and accused Obama of reversing himself, and at a press conference later, Obama sought to clarify his remarks.

"Let me be as clear as I can be: I intend to end this war," he said. "I have seen no information that contradicts the notion that we can bring our troops out safely at a pace of one to two brigades per month," with all out within 16 months. "This is the same position that I had four months ago."

Obama founded his campaign on a strident anti-war message, which dates back to a speech he gave in Chicago in 2002, while still a state senator.

Republican nominee John McCain was an early supporter of the troop surge in Iraq and has backed the war from the beginning.

He said he will keep US forces there to maintain the security gains the surge has facilitated. He has said he plans to have most US combat troops home by the end of his first term.

Now, keep in mind this was BEFORE--I say again, BEFORE--that major policy speech in July that everyone pretends not to have heard, you know, the one that was rerun on every channel a half dozen times, YOUTUBED to death, and printed in every newspaper from sea to shining sea...and then, a month or so ago, he refined even further:

President Obama leaned heavily toward field commanders' preferences in setting a time frame for an Iraq pullout as he weighed the fervent desires of anti-war supporters who propelled him into office and the equally strong worries of war generals.

"To this very day, there are some Americans who want to stay in Iraq longer, and some who want to leave faster," Obama said in his announcement Friday, summing up a debate that has divided the country like no other since the former President George W. Bush launched the U.S. invasion six years ago.

Obama's description suggests he arrived at a split-down-the-middle compromise with one of the first and most important tasks of his young presidency.

But accounts of the process from officials in the White House, at the Pentagon and across the administration, who all requested anonymity so they could speak more candidly about behind-the-scenes discussions, show otherwise.

At stake was the promise that most defined and drove Obama's presidential bid: to bring all combat troops home -- effectively, to end the war -- 16 months after taking office. The details he offered in an appearance Friday before Marines at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, depart from that pledge in several ways:

--The combat withdrawal will take three months longer than he promised. It is now to be completed by the end of August 2010, 19 months after Obama's inauguration. Though what Obama emphasized most as a candidate was his determination to bring about a quick end to the war, in the fine print of almost all his statements was a commitment to flexibility.

--The withdrawal will not happen at an even pace of one combat brigade per month, as he had repeatedly said. Instead, it will be backloaded. The force posture for this year and into the first few months of 2010 probably will be essentially the same as it would have been under Bush. Under Obama's plan, troops will start leaving in large numbers probably only next spring or summer. The president intends to leave decisions about the pace to field commanders.
..... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/28/obama-considered-different-options-iraq-withdrawal-strategy/100days/

Is that sufficient linkage for you?


You gotta keep up. The first adjustment took place well before the Democratic National Convention. Well before the election. Well before the inauguration. See, what he promised on the campaign trail was that he would MODIFY his position, but way too many people refused to believe the man. "Awww, he's just saying that to get ELECTED!!!" Er, no--he isn't. He meant it. And he fleshed out what he said back in July last month.

[cherokeeprogressive]

27. He promised that he would "modify" his position?

Hey, I'll promise a car in every garage and a chicken in every pot, with the caveat that I'll modify my position after being elected. I'll swear that I'll allow every person, gay or straight, to get married. I'll promise free energy for the masses. THEN, I'll promise to "modify" my promises depending on the situation at the moment. THEN (after being elected), I'll say that a situation dictates that I "modify" my promise that helped me get elected. Kinda like changing the words just to make them rhyme.

Bottom line? He said what needed to be said to get elected, and that makes him nothing more than a politician, a class of people who I choose to regard with total skepticism.

President Obama is just another politician in a very long line of dishonest politicians who led us to where we are this day.

When the day comes that he proves himself different, I'll gladly film myself eating my own underwear, unwashed, and provide a link to same.

[Clio the Leo]

28. But how is accusing him of dishonesty UNTIL he proves himself to you...

.... any better than blind-faith, total trust support cheerleading? (which I'm assuming you dont agree with, forgive me if I'm mistaken.)

So he's inherently dishonest because of the nature of his occupation? He's just like Bush, and the others who lied to us about war?

It's when the otherwise intellectual argument turns to extreme hyperbole that I move on to the next thread. Clearly, your mind is made up and this is a wasted exercise.

[MADem]

29. You need to read before you spout. He talked about modification in July of last year.

BEFORE the election. He also talked about it further in the months leading up to the election. Do the google.

You should have paid more attention way back when, I sure did. And I'm not surprised by Obama's refining. He as much as said he was going to do it after he met with Petraus (as I said in my last post, which apparently whooshed right over your head).

Now, in case you're not clear, he met with Petraus BEFORE he was elected. Around the time he went overseas and met with the troops and played basketball and everyone ooohed and aaaahed.

Don't whine about being duped. You weren't.

He didn't lie. You didn't listen. That's YOUR fault, not his, and your crying about it now is quite frankly immature.

And unless you'd be happier on a forum that envisions a President Romney, or a President Palin, he's as good as it's going to get.

No need to eat your underwear--simply open your ears, listen to the ACTUAL words he uses, stop assuming, and don't paint politicians with your wishes and dreams. All that HOPE and CHANGE stuff really meant is that we might HOPE he would do a better job than Bush, and any CHANGE would be an improvement.

[FrenchieCat]

3. Here's a report on the Iraq Pullout.....

NBC Nightly News Report
GAO: Iraq Pullout "massive and expensive"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#29883983

[Clio the Leo]

26. Well *I* watched it anyway and my fav. parts were ...

"There are 283 US bases in Iraq, most will be closed in 2010."

and I also liked, "withdrawl of all US forces from Iraqi cities by July this year and all 140,000 US troops bases and equipment to be gone by 2011."

[maxanne]

4. it doesn't look good

Instead of ending the war, he's planning to expand it.

This isn't what I voted for.

[Peacetrain]

6. Can I ask this

What did you vote for? I am not trying to be snarky, just curious. Because I am assuming you voted for the President.

[maxanne]

31. with some reluctance

I was a Kucinich supporter.

I'm a lefty. I don't have high expectations, but I didn't vote for continued and expanded war.

[FrenchieCat]

7. There are two wars going on, and I think you've got your wars confused....

Or I am just reading you wrong?

[cherokeeprogressive]

11. Did he promise to end the occupation of Afghanistan in 16 months? Did he advocate invading Iraq's

neighbors if he thought Usama Bin Hidin' was harbored in one of their countries??

Please tell me which illegal war/occupation you think I referred to in my post.

[FrenchieCat]

14. I was responding to poster #4, if you can't tell.

I only provided you with a link to a report on what is going on in Iraq in reference to the draw down that you asked about......But haven't gotten an indication from you as to what you thought of that as of yet. :shrug:

[cherokeeprogressive]

21. I thought it of no consequence at all.

It didn't reference his promise to bring a brigade a month home.

I don't give a fuck how much it costs. I spent ten years in the military and know that when the boots need to get something done, it usually gets done.

With apologies to the almond growers; "A brigade a month. That's all we ask". After all, it's what Candidate Obama promised.

[Clio the Leo]

23. lol, there's a mention of the "one per month" promise on barackobama.com .....

.... but we cant count that right?

Sorry .... I couldn't resist that one. ;)

[FrenchieCat]

24. Than you didn't watch it....as the title was a misnomer.

cause it wasn't about the money.....

Don't bother to ask for anything anymore, if you aren't going to be bothered to looking at it!

[Undercurrent]

13. "the" war?

We are currently engaged in two wars.

[maxanne]

33. ah

if you count the "war on terra" we're engaged in 3 wars!

It sure is disheartening to read people justifying what we found unacceptable under Bush's presidency.

[Undercurrent]

34. I found so many things unacceptable under

criminal Bush's presidency I can't count them all. The war against the people of Iraq, torture, and Qitmo just for starters.

I was never opposed to the war against the Taliban sheltered, and protected al-Qaeda. And since the Taliban was the ruling government in Afghanistan, the invasion was justified to me. The Taliban still has a hold on the much of the country, and is now in full charge of the Swat valley about a 100 miles from Islamabad, with designs on expanding their area of control.

So, no. I don't lump them all together.

[maxanne]

38. yep

and we're not going to stop torturing or killing any time soon, and Gitmo hasn't closed, and it's likely that it won't - but somehow that becomes justifiable because it's Obama who is giving orders now.

[Undercurrent]

39. .

Torture:
The President has ordered that torture is no longer allowed.

Gitmo:
The Bush assholes hid, destroyed and "lost" paperwork on the people being held there. (This is in addition to torture tapes being "lost, and destroyed.) So it's taking time to even figure out what some of the people are being held for, which ones were dragged in by bounty hunters, or family vendettas, which ones had a history documented by the CIA, and other intelligence, and which ones had a criminal history in their own countries. In some cases it isn't even known for sure the person's home town.

The mess that Bush left at Gitmo is astounding!

...reported by Karen DeYoung and Peter Finn in the Washington Post – that the case records for Guantanamo detainees are an unholy mess, incomplete, missing or lost, with crucial paperwork piled on desks or shoved in desk drawers, sitting in boxes or stuffed into lockers all over the C.I.A., the Defense Department, and Guantanamo itself...
http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2009/01/gitmo-detainee-paperwork-scattered-all-over-executive-branch

Guantanamo Case Files in Disarray
Situation Complicates Prison's Closure

By Karen DeYoung and Peter Finn
Sunday, January 25, 2009

President Obama's plans to expeditiously determine the fates of about 245 terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and quickly close the military prison there were set back last week when incoming legal and national security officials -- barred until the inauguration from examining classified material on the detainees -- discovered that there were no comprehensive case files on many of them.

...Several former Bush administration officials agreed that the files are incomplete and that no single government entity was charged with pulling together all the facts and the range of options for each prisoner. They said that the CIA and other intelligence agencies were reluctant to share information, and that the Bush administration’s focus on detention and interrogation made preparation of viable prosecutions a far lower priority...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/24/AR2009012401702.html

[polmaven]

37. OK, you're gonna have to

show me that one...Where have you seen him say he is planning to expand the occupation of Iraq? :shrug:

[BlooInBloo]

9. Probably the biggest thing I knew we'd have to work on Obama on was gay rights stuff....

I gotta admit, though, that I didn't see the Rick Warren jackassery coming - that was disappointing.

Tangentially, here are tools that you can track the status of Obama's campaign promises with:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&num=100&q=obama+campaign+promise&btnG=Search&cts=1238299554216&num=100

[applexcore]

10. "My first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war."

Guess what? On Jan 21st, he instructed the military leaders to do just that. Come up with a plan to withdraw from Iraq. It was in the news if you missed it.

Contrary to what seems to be your belief, after you've devastated an entire country, the safest thing to do is not to just pull out and come home. It takes planning including the factors of: how do we get out safely, how do help Iraqi civilians stay safe after we leave and how do we make sure that it doesn't become controlled by a rouge regime. Pulling out too quickly without any planning is probably actually one of the most unsafe things that we could actually do, for both our security and their civilians.

[cherokeeprogressive]

15. As per his campaign promise, one brigade per month is irresponsible?

Why the fuck did he promise it then? Are you telling me that he didn't research the issue, talk to people who knew, formulate a plan that was workable, but just threw out a number made to make us feel like he'd end it according to a timetable that was acceptable to us in order to get elected?

[applexcore]

20. After making that statement and talking to Gates, he then said

if he won, he would review it and not do anything rash.

He ended up adopting a plan of 19 months to end combat. 3 months more than the 16 he promised.


Honestly, I'm pleased that he's not too pigheaded to not make any adjustments to his plans after he is given advice from our military leaders. Being stubborn and creating an unsafe situation for our troops is the exact opposite of what I would want.

[Autumn]

16. Agree, Obama has made me angry,

he has made me cry, he has made me laugh,he has made me happy,he has disappointed and he has made me proud. He is a human and I don't expect him to be perfect.It is up to us to pressure him to do what we elected him to do, and what he said he would do. Like you I remember one brigade per month. He needs to end this war so we can take care of our problems here at home.

[Clio the Leo]

17. 12,000 troops over six months is approx four brigades....

.... so you're upset over a two brigade deficit? You have managed to utterly and thoroughly confuse me. You're seriously upset over TWO brigades?

Granted, each member of that two brigade deficit is someone's baby but honestly, you're THIS upset because he's two brigades short?

Did you take "one brigade per month" to mean LITERALLY that? Like, by Feb. 20th 3,000 servicemen would be home? I never took it as that. I understood him to mean "x number of troops over y time span which would equal one brigade per month."

You have me quite bumfuzzled. Are we not cutting him ANY slack because he's privy to more intel than he was then?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq-troops-violence9-2009mar09,0,6503133.story

[Clio the Leo]

19. And the answer your looking for is "32" ....

..... 32 troops killed in Iraq since 1/20/09.

There have been approx. 7,820 Americans who died in auto accidents on US soil in that same time frame.

[dsc]

22. wow

just wonder if we accepted the same minimization when Bush was in charge. You do realize that figure is less than the loss during the time Bush prosecuted the war too.

[Clio the Leo]

25. My primary reason for being against it was never the number of deaths...

.... but the false premise upon which they died.

And I'm afraid I dont understand what you mean by,
"You do realize that figure is less than the loss during the time Bush prosecuted the war too."

[jeanpalmer]

30. At the start of his campaign

he gave the clear impression he was going to get us out of Iraq. That's what attracted a lot of people to him, myself included. If he had said then that he planned to have "combat" troops out in 19 months while leaving 50,000 behind, I never would have voted for him. He fooled me. But he will only do that once.

[Honeycombe8]

32. Me, too. But I wasn't necessarily against his plan for Afgh./Pakistan.

I don't pretend to have all the answers (like some do). And I DID support the notion that we must at least try to capture Bin Laden. And the notion that Al Qaeda is still a danger.

[lumberjack_jeff]

35. The campaign said "16 months, best case scenario"

There's an old saying, "if you're not outraged, you're not paying attention"

It's time for an update. "you're outraged because you weren't paying attention"

[butterfly77]

36. Has the situation changed during the campaign...

and did you really think that he could pull troops out on day one without accessing the situation?