Video: Obama to bring hope, change to Iraq by abandoning it immediately
posted at 3:19 pm on January 29, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Fast-forward to 1:28 for a preview of what the Healing will look like in policy terms. On tap for Iraq? A massive security vacuum. For Afghanistan? A security build-up, sure to be popular with the leftist base. It’s a quirk of Iraqi and Afghan cultures, I guess, that the latter, like Bosnia, does best within a traditional occupation model while the former tends to flourish from being returned very suddenly to a quasi-Hobbesian state of nature.
Or maybe it’s not a question of culture or strategy at all but a simple function of each war’s respective popularity, with an abject abandonment of Iraq dressed up as some virtuous form of “benign neglect.” Too cynical to believe about a guy who has a “treasured covenant” with Ted Kennedy? Maybe. But I’ve got a funny feeling that if the Afghan “quagmire” drags on until 2010 or 2011, we may yet find out that getting the hell out of dodge ASAP is the surest way to reconcile Karzai and the Taliban, too.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
Umm this story could easily be about Mitt as well.
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Damn that Lincoln. He should have gotten out of that quagmire in Virginia after the disaster at Fredericksburg.
One love, mon.
SWLiP on January 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
They…just…don’t…get it. Everytime I hear a lib or dem talk about Iraq, my head wants to explode.
conservativejack on January 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
If cut and run results in genocide(as pretty much every abandonment in the past has shown) will those on the left call for his impeachment and indictment on war crime charges?
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on January 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Granting hope to the jihadis by allowing them to change living, freedom loving Iraqis to dead Iraqis.
Frozen Tex on January 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Obama is the same as Hillary, just in a prettier package.
Rode Werk on January 29, 2008 at 3:25 PM
And that doesn’t take much at all.
Frozen Tex on January 29, 2008 at 3:26 PM
That is the Democratic party.
Defeat America First!
Putzes.
SimplyKimberly on January 29, 2008 at 3:28 PM
Nope. It’ll be Bush’s fault for starting the war in the first place, regardless of the fact that Bush’s plan would stop it. Obama will just be perceived as the unfortunate recipient of it.
amerpundit on January 29, 2008 at 3:28 PM
Politicians shouldn’t doing the military’s job. When our military leaders tell us it’s ok to leave and their job is done, then I’m for leaving Iraq.
terryannonline on January 29, 2008 at 3:29 PM
would you vote for Obama over Mccain?
offroadaz on January 29, 2008 at 3:30 PM
Info
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfEP6i_wU7
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 3:32 PM
Of course not!
Frozen Tex on January 29, 2008 at 3:33 PM
I guess that the “hope” aspect of the campaign. I hope Iraq doesn’t fall apart when we pack up.
AbaddonsReign on January 29, 2008 at 3:34 PM
So Obama, what were you doing on those earmarks? You know, the ones President Bush only sees when they get to office, after he put the onus on the Congress that generates them to restrain themselves.
Oh right, you guys failed spectacularly, as you have been doing since 2006.
And you’ve no room to talk empty rhetoric Obambi, considering that is what your entire campaign is comprised of.
Angry Obama is not nearly as pretty as Smiley Obama. Stick to smiley, vapid speeches about change and hope and not whining BO, it suits you better.
BKennedy on January 29, 2008 at 3:34 PM
You know what, if it wasn’t for the very dangerous situation we find ourselves in, and the very fragile situation in Iraq and Afghanistan, I would almost say the heck with it, let’s elect this yutz and get the Dems out of our hair for another generation.
The thing is, if he is elected, he won’t accomplish diddly; congress would simply walk all over him. Hillary, likewise, won’t get a lot “done” either, because she will be opposed like a brick wall everywhere she turns just because of who she is. May not be right, but that’s how it is.
JamesLee on January 29, 2008 at 3:35 PM
the dearth of any real compassion among the “hypoclibs” is mind-boggling… he doesn’t care a whit what happens to the Iraqi people, as long as he can blame the whole bloodbath on GWB, and more importantly use his fallacious argument to get elected now …
max1 on January 29, 2008 at 3:36 PM
This is what we have to stop.
bnelson44 on January 29, 2008 at 3:36 PM
However, many Americans agree with him.
terryannonline on January 29, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Too naive to be President.
pistolero on January 29, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Thats what people said about Clinton in 1996. And look they are back even now.
Its a very stupid gamble to elect a democrat and hope he screws up. If a dem is elected Amnesty is passed in full force and the voter laws are changed to allow felons and illegals to vote as US citisens.
If conservatives are STUPID enough to allow the dems to gain full control of the government and grant themselves a permanment majority then you might as well vote FOR Obama than not vote at all.
The Census in in 2010 and if we give the dems full control over that it will be DECADES before we can come back to power.
If Rush or any other conservative pushes the idea that we should sit out this election then THEY are the ones betraying conservatism now not our candidates !
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 3:40 PM
New guy. Same old talking points.
An Obama presidency would be Jimmy Carter’s second term with better speeches.
CP on January 29, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Depends how far to the “center” McCain tacks when he goes into the general campaign. But even then I’d probably just sit it out.
Mark V. on January 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Everyone knows the Dems are hopeless. Duh. The question is why the GOP has, so far this primary season, mostly taken its eye off the ball - the war - and thus exposed itself to a totally unnecessary risk of defeat at the hands of weak, laughable Dhimmicrat clowns, of whatever gender or race. The Stupid Party has been earning its nickname. Premises have not been checked - they have been thrown to the wind.
Halley on January 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Our choices in this election are looking grim. I don’t expect to be voting FOR anybody. I’ll probably end up voting AGAINST somebody. I’m thinking about writing in Don Imus as a vote against the thought police. I know it’s a wasted vote but at this point I don’t know if it matters. Is John really any better than a Democrat just because he has the word “Republican” stamped on him?
deewhybee on January 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Why is the camera so close to his FACE? It looks just like that 1984 video!
Agrippa2k on January 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Maybe it’s just Barry talking ‘out his ass.
countywolf on January 29, 2008 at 3:43 PM
That’s what happens when the desired end state is to be “liked” by the polls instead of worrying about such inconsequentialities as global security, regional stability, and furthering democracy (a key item of the National Security Strategy since Reagan).
highhopes on January 29, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I have no intention of doing that. If it’s McPain, I may have to think long and hard, Romney I could easily hold my nose.
Also intend to vote against Cleaver in MO-5, and McCaskill whenever she comes up again. And against Nixon for Governor.
JamesLee on January 29, 2008 at 3:47 PM
I literally spit my coffee when I read that last line.
Vizzini on January 29, 2008 at 3:47 PM
agreed.
trailortrash on January 29, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Ahh, finally Obama tells me something with some substance. You know, an actual stance. Too bad his stance is notoriously naive and would result in the deaths of thousands of people. But it’s a CHANGE and it’s HOPE, man!!!
mjk on January 29, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Well, at least we’ll have someone upon whom to solidly rest the mantle of defeat.
Forever.
drjohn on January 29, 2008 at 3:49 PM
The first term will be spent undoing everything that Bushitler has done.
Change!!!!!!!
I also hear that he might move the capitol to Hawaii.
Hening on January 29, 2008 at 3:49 PM
We don’t fight wars by concensus. If we did, I don’t know of any war we would have won.
bnelson44 on January 29, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Could you see this guy…or any democrat, save for Liebermann, coming to terms with and ordering a dday invasion in June 1944?
That should be your litmus test. If you can see that happen, you may have a valid candidate.
wildweasel on January 29, 2008 at 3:51 PM
I hope when Barry is defeated we can go back and change his butt out of his US sentate office when he is up for re election. Would be hillarious to see his opponent use the change mantra against him.
BTW Dick Durbin is up for re election in Illionis so please people from that great state get rid of that crud for us !
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 3:51 PM
More of YOUR money.
drjohn on January 29, 2008 at 3:53 PM
I guess Hope IS a strategy.
As for Change, well, the times they are a-changin’, especially when Iran and the Saudis decide to have a nice little proxy war in Iraq. After all, ethnic cleansing and mass death do in fact change things.
BHO promised Change and when He’s crowned the Living Embodiment of St JFK you’ll see lots of Change. Iraqis will see Change and hear it smell it and feel it rumble the ground. I can already see the last man hanging on the last helicopter as it hovers above the Green Zone, now over-run with desperate Iraqis, soon to Changed into refugees or corpses. It’s about Change, baby. Yeah!
Vote Sauron 08 on January 29, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Ya know, it’s a laugh or cry choice. We can cry about his ignorance, or laugh at how he’s gonna take office, remove “combat troops” (which is already scheduled to happen in his first year), and then send more forces to Afghanistan (great plan-just ask the Soviets, British, etc). So imagine if you will a President Obama on 21Jan 2009…he does his big JFK impression on the steps of the Capitol, then parties, signs some bs legislation that he should have introduced as a Senator but was too busy campaigning, and then a day or so later announces that US “combat troops” are leaving Iraq and heading to Afghanistan where historically the moretroops=lessviolence model has just worked OH so well for the past 4000years. Brilliant strategy. (might as well order US frigates and destroyers to Afghanistan. History shows it to be as successful a military strategy as more troops.
Aside from the sheer military stupidity of it, I gotta wonder how hard the news media will point out that the troop withdrawals will have been happening since Sept 2007, had already been ordered, and that aside from “combat troops” US force levels in Iraq will remain well over 50,000? Nah, Olby’d never ask that. You could bet good money that Fox would be all over it though.
Oooo, he’s gonna order a withdrawal that’s already taking place, started almost a year and a half earlier, will not be a complete withdrawal, and with Iraq quieting down…he’s gonna send troops to the Graveyard of Empires.
QUESTION: is this US military strategy, or Jihadi wet dream?
scottm on January 29, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Obama needs to stop drinking Gray Goose, he’s starting to sound like Teddy. Pretty soon, the only difference will be the one drove the car off the pier/bridge and the other one didn’t.
As for earmarks, he should visit our good old friend Murtha, aka Lord Lard @ss of the earmark world. How much BS do we have to keep hearing from this guy and how dumb do you have to be to fall for this stuff.
Obama, I hate to say this but you won’t be the president at the next SOTU. How can you say people need health care and can’t afford it. So what’s going to happen to them when you implement you healthcare plan and taxes go sky high? Give me a sec, sipping some Gray Goose while I write this.
Ok, I’m back. Guys/Gals, we need to come together and defeat these socialist. The more time goes by the more people start believing in clowns like this. Someone needs to remind Obama that the circus has left town.
Cuerbo on January 29, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Very true.
terryannonline on January 29, 2008 at 3:55 PM
McCain supporter, I assume?
iurockhead on January 29, 2008 at 3:59 PM
He supports Barry O, and hoping to ride his ILL coattails.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2008 at 4:01 PM
Well, there goes any hope of my supporting this man. I guess hope is only for those who don’t mind screwing the Iraqi’s and our future military over.
Defense Guy on January 29, 2008 at 4:05 PM
No I mistrust Mitt. He is weak on the WOT. I am not supporting any of the current candidates.
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Obama’s foreign policy team has on it, Robert Malley.
And who is Robert Malley:
ELECTION 2008
Obama aide wants talks with terrorists
Foreign adviser’s ‘anti-Israel policies,’ sympathy for Hamas, raise concerns
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59930
georgealbert on January 29, 2008 at 4:06 PM
couldnt watch the whole thing. did he mention the military is bombing innocent iraqis again?
CaptainObvious on January 29, 2008 at 4:08 PM
Articulate airhead. Hey, Hussein! go vote “present”, will ya?
dogsoldier on January 29, 2008 at 4:10 PM
God help us all if he’s elected. If Roosevelt had lost to him this country would be split right down the middle now with the western half speaking Japanese and the eastern speaking German.
Rod on January 29, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Actually, the election of Obama would likely invigorate the Democrat Party, sweeping away a big part of the mean-spirited machinery built up.
I feel it would also increase to maximum the chance of a frightening scenario that none of us wants to think about, but should; a nuclear strike on American soil.
michaelo on January 29, 2008 at 4:12 PM
H aving
O bama
P lacate to our
E nemies
In Obamas world hope means always having to say you’re sorry.
fogw on January 29, 2008 at 4:14 PM
With indulgence, hopefully.
Entelechy on January 29, 2008 at 4:14 PM
With permission, another version, my friend
In Obama’s world hope means the same as change doeas, in other words, nothing, nada.
Entelechy on January 29, 2008 at 4:17 PM
Mubarak Hussein Obama is the most frightening candidate I’ve ever seen in American politics (besides Keith Ellison that is).
I’d say Romney is a close second as far as dangerous presidential candidates go….followed by the Hildebeast with a close third!
HaraldHardrada on January 29, 2008 at 4:17 PM
All I can think of watching Obama is “Cadillac” Deval Patrick. Another Dem who ran for Mass. Gov on little experience but lots of good catch phrases.
I made it to 1:36 when he said the the surge isn’t working.
Really?
Are you sure?
Are you really, really sure?
I like this one.
This is too easy.
Geronimo on January 29, 2008 at 4:18 PM
SENATOR from ILLINOIS.
‘Nuff said.
mojo on January 29, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Forget Iraq. It’s too costly for AQ, Iran, and Syria to continue spending assets there. Forget Afghanistan. That place has never seen peace, never will, and the forces of good will always have to send troops there to keep it from becoming a terrorist state again.
What I’d REALLY love to see someone ask Sen Obama whether or not he’ll send US troops into a Kenyan quagmire if his grandmother’s village is raided by jihadis. That’d be interesting.
scottm on January 29, 2008 at 4:20 PM
Amazing that Mike “I’ll change the Constitution to reflect Pro-Life Democrat values” Huckabee didn’t make your list…
Oh wait, you’re a Huckatroll.
BKennedy on January 29, 2008 at 4:21 PM
He’s signing up for his, if you can believe what they reported on FNC this morning. For last year, Obama had 46 earmarks, and Hillary had more than 3 times that number.
I have to laugh every time I hear some talking head on t.v. say that Obama’s success proves how this country has moved beyond race. Can you imagine anyone taking Obama seriously as a presidential candidate if he were a white man with the same resume? Race is the only reason anyone is taking this guy (and his silly platitudes) seriously.
AZCoyote on January 29, 2008 at 4:25 PM
Bkennedy,
Wow! I didn’t know that pro life is a democrat position.
I guess I learn something new every day.
HaraldHardrada on January 29, 2008 at 4:26 PM
Heed our American generals and increase in Afghan, but don’t heed them in Iraq?
So they are only right half the time?
right2bright on January 29, 2008 at 4:27 PM
This Jew-hating b@st@rd will surely sell out Israel. With him in office, the mooslims will be free to kill across the Middle East. Why? Because he’s really a mooslim.
See here and here.
Yet secular Jews support this POS. Pathetic.
Andy in Agoura Hills on January 29, 2008 at 4:27 PM
Isn’t PC wonderful? Bodes well for this country.
Andy in Agoura Hills on January 29, 2008 at 4:29 PM
That is an interesting question. I also wonder if Obama plans on bringing his father’s tribe to the White House for the inauguration. Won’t it please all the “diversity” pimps to see a bunch of Kenyan Muslims doing a victory dance on the WH lawn!
AZCoyote on January 29, 2008 at 4:32 PM
Obama’s speach after South Carolina was not half bad. I was sure there could be worse candidates. This morning I hear he is going to California to talk about his support for Drivers License for the Illegals. Then I watched this video for the first 23 seconds, then shut it down. It looks Like Obama is doing everything possible to give the Dem nomination to Hillary. It looks like we will get a Republican President after all. Fred should have jumped in back in July.
Guest1.1 on January 29, 2008 at 4:32 PM
Abandon all hope ye who vote for this maniac.
Kini on January 29, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Can anyone believe that Mitt wouldn’t cream this guy in a debate?
cjs1943 on January 29, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Perhaps you should bone up on your basic knowledge of derogatory political terms. “Pro-Life Democrat,” when used to describe a Republican, is a term meaning “supports the platform of the Democratic Party in all things except abortion.”
It may also be used by Democrats to denigrate one of their own for leaving the pro-abortion Dem majority.
BKennedy on January 29, 2008 at 4:39 PM
cocky, know it all with limited experience = scary.
jimmer on January 29, 2008 at 4:40 PM
now there is a debate i would buy on ppv
Mojack420 on January 29, 2008 at 4:41 PM
The democrats have never answered for the blood on their hands for the millions slaughtered in souther Asia when the democrats pulled all funding for our troops as well as South Viet-Nam. With out that funding they could not defend themselves and we left Pol Pot to slaughter at will.
Now we have Obama who has no clue what will happen when he as Commander-in-Defeat will do the same. Millions will die and the democrats will never answer for the fresh blood on their hands.
Wade on January 29, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Man…this was pure boilerplate.
Where’s all the soaring hope and stuff?
This guy in this clip looks as beatable as a rented mule. I admit I shut it off too after he said he was going to invade Pakistan. Or did he offer in the last bit some other way to “go after al Qeada” like with a long fishing pole or something.
Typhoon on January 29, 2008 at 4:44 PM
Mojack420 on January 29, 2008 at 4:41 PM
I agree with you. That would be a debate.
cjs1943 on January 29, 2008 at 4:45 PM
I thought the very same thing today. You could, perhaps, forgive them for not knowing the consequences in advance the first time around. But now? Criminal.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Barak Hussein Obama could single-handedly ruin the world.
It starts with not putting one’s hand over his heart during the Pledge of Alegiance.
knob on January 29, 2008 at 4:56 PM
Obama is Saruman to Osama’s Sauron.
MCPO Airdale on January 29, 2008 at 4:58 PM
I don’t think these guys are going to be as hard to beat as we think. This is madness.
ronsfi on January 29, 2008 at 5:06 PM
“Our Image”
The United States of Obama:
Like a Fat-Ass Cop, sittin’ in Krispy-Kreme, feedin’ his bloated, fat face with donuts, while the li’l old lady is being mugged out in the street.
*mmfff - mmfff…jes’ one more*
franksalterego on January 29, 2008 at 5:11 PM
I guess his desire to heal the world doesn’t include Iraq.
I would think some reporter somewhere - anywhere? - would ask him about the seeming inconsistency of his JFK like calls for healing the world while at the same time he argues that preventing genocide in Iraq was not sufficient reason to stay there.
Perhaps it isn’t (I think it is). But it’s hard to accept the flowery rhetoric that he movingly states about our global responsibilities while at the same time you have a ruthless realist that make Machiavelli look like a boy scout.
SteveMG on January 29, 2008 at 5:18 PM
I suspect that President-Elect Obama would have the situation re-explained to him in painstaking detail, and would end up realizing that precipitous withdrawal would destroy his presidency before it even got started. That doesn’t mean that electing him wouldn’t be a real setback, likely cost the lives of many of soldiers and allies in the short term, and harm the country gravely in the long term, but he’d find he most likely weasel his way to something he could call a withdrawal. It would be akin to President-Elect Clinton discovering, shazam!, that there wasn’t enough money and will for him to fund the many promises he sold his base and the country in ‘92.
CK MacLeod on January 29, 2008 at 5:28 PM
I’ve been wondering whether Barry was born a sunni or a shia.
By his plan to let Iraq go to hell in a hand basket, I would say he is a sunni Muslim.
BL@KBIRD on January 29, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Okay, that pegged the old BS meter. “Elect me and everything will miraculously change for the better.” Isn’t that what Pelosi said about Congress when the Dems took control in 2006?
Snidely Whiplash on January 29, 2008 at 5:41 PM
So, in other words, yes.
docob on January 29, 2008 at 5:42 PM
when are the republican candidates going to point out the fact that the tax cuts have led to record high tax revenues? its a proven fact that lowering taxes raises revenue to the government…….im tired of them getting away with saying we need to raise taxes to pay for the war, when that will only dig the hole deeper
pmoshields on January 29, 2008 at 5:42 PM
Obama said “earmarks”. he should not be talking about ears. im just saying
custer on January 29, 2008 at 5:48 PM
Many Americans also agreed with the Loyalists during the American Revolution. That didn’t make their stance the correct one…
eanax on January 29, 2008 at 5:56 PM
Surrender to islamic terrorists and criminal aliens! Yup, thats a program I can get behind … NOT!
LCL4 on January 29, 2008 at 5:57 PM
True. Thank God the Founders designed our Republic the way they did…
eanax on January 29, 2008 at 5:59 PM
Good points, but there are enough people out there who don’t like or want to take personal responsibility for their lives, and the Libs feed off of this. It’s their political life-blood…
eanax on January 29, 2008 at 6:03 PM
Obama, the “unity” candidate — who belongs to a black supremacist church that expressly rejects American “middle class” values.
I wonder if Obama knows that something like 90% of Americans identify themselves as “middle class”?
AZCoyote on January 29, 2008 at 6:13 PM
he looks like alfre E newman to me
custer on January 29, 2008 at 6:18 PM
There is simply no way to put more troops in Afghanistan. Obama look at a damn map. ALL supplies have to go through Pakistan. Which is pretty darn iffy on cooperation since most Pakistanis support Osama.
Yon called Afghanistan a Special Forces Hunting Lodge and he’s right. That’s about all we can do there because we cannot supply a large force there.
Because Clinton declined in 96 (after the CIA issued a “report” saying that Pakistan was decades away from nukes) to do anything to stop Pakistan’s nuke program, Osama is home free under Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella. Unless President Obama wants nuclear war with Pakistan there is nothing we can do about Osama bin Laden or the Taliban and AQ. Clinton’s re-election had a consequence — Osama’s safe haven under Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella.
whiskey_199 on January 29, 2008 at 6:36 PM
Selfish bastard, he just wants power for himself, what about giving Iraqi’s hope, hope that they might see even a fraction of the freedoms that we have..
Hope that they do not have to worry about being blown up by terrorists, or their towns subjugated to mass killings..
For a black candidate to NOT see that what were are doing in Iraq is a noble cause is insane.
Chakra Hammer on January 29, 2008 at 7:07 PM
Time to get the hell out of Iraq. We should have never been there in the first place. Everyone but you seems to know this simple fact…
DMeNTe on January 29, 2008 at 7:11 PM
Yes indeed, and Hillary killed Vince Foster. Where is the jew hating?
In no way do I support Obama, but, if he gets the nom and this stupid meme is a point of attack for the Republicans, this will go a good ways to help him in the general.
SouthernDem on January 29, 2008 at 8:28 PM
That’s the spirit!
SouthernDem on January 29, 2008 at 8:29 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »