« City Government Gets Kickback From Potentially Deadly Products | Main | Will the Hsu Scandal Slow Down the Clinton Coronation? »

Obama Nails Petraeus and Crocker

In today's testimony, Illinois Senator Barack Obama nailed it:

The question I think that everybody is asking is "how long will this take" and "at what point do we say enough".

Ambassador Crocker you said that the Iraqi people understand that the patience of the American people is not limitless, but that appears to be exactly what you're asking for in this testimony.

I don't see at any point where you say if this fails, or if that does not work, or we are not seeing these benchmarks met. Or...any conditions in which we would make a decision now to start drawing down our troops.

And you suggest somehow that our drawing down troops will not trigger a different set of behavior among the Iraqis, but I don't see what will. And if we're there the same place a year from now can you please describe for me any circumstances under which you make a different recommendation and suggest it is time to now start withdrawing our troops?

Any scenario. Any set of benchmarks. That have not been met.

Pow! Right in the kisser! Obama totally nailed the essence of Bush's policy on Iraq. There are no scenarios, no failed benchmarks, no unmet goals and no conditions under which he will consider pulling out of Iraq. Bush's goal is to keep US forces in Iraq forever; he isn't interested in pulling out under any circumstances.

Essentially, there is nothing that the Iraqis could fail to do that would trigger the beginning of the end of our involvement. We had a set of benchmarks 6 months ago, and the Iraqis failed nearly every one of them, but still there are no consequences or changes in our policy because of that failure.

So, in other words, Bush has written a blank check to the Iraqi government in the blood of our heroes and in billions of our dollars that they get to spend however they want for an indefinite period of time.

Republicans should have the courage to put that into their party platform in 2008 and run on it.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 3.4/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 3.4/5 (5 votes cast)

Comments (4)

Conservative Friend:

Larkin, in a different time and place people would accuse what you have written as being conservative.

Oh wait, you are writing what conservatives used to believe before they got addicted to the kool aid.

Steve Crickmore:

I'm afraid this is Bush's strategy for Iraq..Stay there as if we are going to be there forever, or the duration, with permanent bases projected in the offing, and then dump the Iraqian quagmire and blame, onto his successor..Juan Cole thinks that Bush might be able to do that if the Dems win the presidency in 2008 "but in all likelihood, when the Democratic president pulls US troops out in summer of 2009, all hell is going to break loose."

Lee Ward:

The Bush plan is for a long-term police/security effort in Iraq to protect the interests of the oil companies and his pals the Saudis.He knows the American public never would have gone for sacrificing 4,000 US soldiers all for the sake of the oil interests in the region, so he concocted a phony war on terror instead.

Keeping Osama bin-Laden free keeps the "terrorism" aspect going - so he's not even looking for OBL any more - he dropped that ruse several years ago.

The benchmarks were just another ruse -- and Bush and Cheney knew the destabilizing effect this would have on the nation of Iraq - and knew that destabilizing the region helped their plan to keep a military/security presence in the region long-term.

They lied going in and they are lying to us now.

The religious right still supports Bush because they get the stem cell veto and blustery talk about morality in return for their long-term support. THEY are selling the same American soldiers lives away in return for Bush carrying their moral agenda "water" in the White House.

Lee Ward:

There's no question that they knew it was a bad idea, and that there was a long-term destabilizing effect.

If there is another explanation as to why they would intentionally choose to destabilize the region I'd love to hear it.


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.