Posted by
Stefano on Sunday, July 20, 2008 11:39:45 AM
There's a big drive, no doubt from Obama operatives and media dupes, to attempt to validate Oback's goofy shifting positions on Iraq. The thrust of this disinformation campaign is following one of these lines: Maliki endorsment of Obama plans, or Bush and McCain using Obama withdrawal plans, or plans being negotiated between Iraq and US mirror Obama plans. It's a full court press attempt but a simple review of Oback actions and statements on Iraq shows that he has never had the ball and doesn't know where the basket is located.
History shows that the dems in general and Oback in particular supported an immediate surrender in Iraq back in 2007 with total withdrawal by March of 2008. His continuing shifts on Iraq surrender are weak pathetic political posturing. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001586.html?nav=emailpage Quote from Wash Post article: "Obama's legislation, offered on the Senate floor last night, would remove all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008."
This weasel will change his position as quickly as the tides change in the Chesapeake Bay. What would this proposed withdrawal have meant in an historical sense? No surge, no success, retreat, surrender, humiliation, Al Qaida with a permanent effective foothold in Iraq, and a concentration of jihadis in Afghanistan attempting to drive NATO out, in other words a devastating setback in the War on Terror.
Would this defeat have mattered to Oback? Certainly not. His goal is political power and he'll do what ever is necessary to obscure his true socialist agenda in order to attain the goal. Obama would be no better than Dennis Kuscinich or Barney Frank as commander-in-Chief.