The Young Turks

As for Obama's actual position on Iraq, I honestly dont know and could really care less. You guys are probably right in saying that Obama didn't flip flop on this issue (Like he did on FISA), but those of you up in arms about this are missing the larger point...

Obama is in the lead. He is the frontrunner - be it through good campaigning or favorbale press treatment (or both) he is bound right now to win.

The media must now make a story to make the race look more even when it is really clear who the better and more popular candidate is... The media is there for one purpose, and its not to tell the truth or to inform the public on news! IT IS THERE TO MAKE MONEY FOR ITS ADVERTISERS! period.  

Who are the companies that advertise on Cable News and Major Networks?

Drug Companies
Oil Companies
GE
Financila Corporations
Auto makers
Chemical/Petroleum Companies
Energy Companies

How better to sell their idea to the unwitting public than to paint this front runner, this "Messiah" figure to many Liberals as a 2 faced Centrist who flip flops on his word?

It really doesnt matter what the TRUTH is - it only matters what they can sell and what people believe - Why dont more people here understand this?

They arent gonna hold McCain to the same standard as Obama for several reasons -

1. Hes Old - Advertisers aim for old people who have money plus nobody likes to see the elderly derided or abused. Its sad but true, guys...

2. Hes a War hero - We can fight about this one all day, but the media has sold this crap to the voting public and it has thus been associated with him. Right or wrong, its not nice to speak bad about Veterans (especially POW's)

3. He embraces the media and knows how to manipulate them - BBQs at his house, straight talk sessions make the media reporters feel loved and important. Where Obama comes off as Smug and Condecending to the media (the 2nd news conference on Iraq was a great example of this), McCain with all of his faults still is liked by the media...

4. He isnt expected to win - My god if this creep can win, then democracy is truly fucked!!! So why bother writing hit pieces and exposing the truth about him when hes already so far behind supposedly...

I could go alot more into this guys, but I will hold off for later discussions - Thanks for reading...

:)

In early March Samantha Power, a foriegn policy advisor for Senator Obama was quoted, "Well, of course he's not going to just stick to some campaign promise of 16 months. He's going to look at the facts on the ground."

The next day Senator Obama responded to a question about this saying, "You can’t make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009."

Senator Obama IL Senate Debate, Illinois Radio Network Oct 12, 2004

"Now, us having gone in there [Iraq], we have a deep national security interest in making certain that Iraq is stable. If not, not only are we going to have a humanitarian crisis, we are also going to have a huge national security problem on our hands-because, ironically, it has become a hotbed of terrorists as a consequence, in part, of our incursion there. In terms of timetable, I'm not somebody who can say with certainty that a year from now or six months from now we're going to be able to pull down troops. It must be done, but it must be done in consultation with the commanders on the ground."

On September 25th 2007 at a Democratic debate Senator Obama was pressed by moderator Tim Russert and was unwilling to commit to a promise in a campaign debate that all of the U.S. combat forces deployed in Iraq will be gone by 2013. In direct answer Senator Obama said, "It's hard to project four years from now." And while he would not commit to an end date, he did say, "I can tell you when the start of ending the war will be, and that will be the first day I am in office." Senator Obama also said "It's important for candidates for president to tell the American people not just what they want to hear, but what they need to hear." 

On September 11th, 2007 senator Obama said, “The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq’s leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year – now.” In this speech senator Obama called for a gradual withdrawal of combat troops, while saying that an unspecified number of American forces would remain to continue training, embassy protection, and if necessary counter terrorist operations. He said, “The withdrawal will be strategic and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government.”

In his speech to the AIPAC Policy Forum held on March 2, 2007 in Chicago, Illinois Senator Obama said,
"This war has fueled terrorism and helped galvanize terrorist organizations. And it has made the world less safe. That is why I advocate a phased redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq to begin no later than May first with the goal of removing all combat forces from Iraq. This will be done in consulation with the Iraqi government, and with the commanders on the ground to ensure that that we’re not as careless getting out of this war as we were getting in.

"In a civil war where no military solution exists, this redeployment remains our best leverage to pressure the Iraqi government to achieve the political settlement between its warring factions that can slow the bloodshed and promote stability.

"My plan also allows for a limited number of U.S. troops to remain and prevent Iraq from becoming a haven for international terrorism and reduce the risk of all-out chaos."

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama March 21, 2007 from the Senate Floor, "We must remember that ideology is not a foreign policy. We must not embark on war based on untested theories, political agendas or wishful thinking that has little basis in fact or reality.

"We must focus our efforts on the threats we know exist, and we must evaluate those threats with sound intelligence that is never manipulated for political reasons again."

The New York Times reported on September 16th 2007, that although Senator Obama stopped short of calling for an immediate pullout of all troops in a press conference, that he did say there should be a clear and certain timetable.

Senator Obama 2007 Democratic primary debate at Dartmouth College Sep 26, 2007

"The first thing I will do is initiate a phased redeployment. Military personnel indicate we can get one brigade to two brigades out per month. I would immediately begin that process. We would get combat troops out of Iraq. The only troops that would remain would be those that have to protect US bases and US civilians, as well as to engage in counterterrorism activities in Iraq."

Senator Obama 2007 Democratic primary debate at Dartmouth College Sep 26, 2007

Q: "Will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, there will be no US troops in Iraq?"

A: "I think it's hard to project four years from now, and I think it would be irresponsible. We don't know what contingency will be out there. I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don't want to make promises, not knowing what the situation's going to be three or four years out."

Senator Obama 2007 Democratic primary debate at Dartmouth College Sep 26, 2007

"Military commanders indicate that they can safely get combat troops out at the pace of one to two brigades a month. That is the quickest pace that we can do it safely. I have said I will begin immediately and we will do it as rapidly as we can. But let me reiterate that it will be done safely for our troops and the Iraqi people."

On October 9, 2007 the Washington Post reported Senator Obama's plan for Iraq contained four elements, the most significant of which is a timetable that would result in the withdrawal of all combat forces. A call for a new constitutional convention for Iraq designed to force political reconciliation on the competing factions there. Stepped up diplomatic efforts and United Nations involvement in Iraq, and his plan further includes initiatives aimed at ensuring regional security and preventing humanitarian disaster during and after the withdrawal from Iraq.

Senator Obama 2007 Des Moines Register Democratic debate Dec 13, 2007

"It is absolutely clear that Pres. Bush continues to not let facts get in the way of his ideology. And that's been the problem with the administration's foreign policy generally. It is important for the president to lead diplomatic efforts, and to listen to experts."

In January of 2008 Senator Obama said in prepared remarks “We must get out strategically and carefully, removing troops from secure areas first and keeping troops in more volatile areas until later.” As quoted by The Associated Press.

Senator Obama at the 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Jan 15, 2008
 
"I have put forward a plan that will get our troops out by the end of 2009."

"My first job as president is going to be to call in the Joint Chiefs of Staff to responsibly, carefully, but deliberately start to phase out our involvement there and to make sure that we are putting the onus on the Iraqi government to come together and do what they need to do to arrive at peace. I have been very specific in saying that we will not have permanent bases there. I will end the war as we understand it in combat missions. But that we are going to have to protect our embassy. We're going to have to protect our civilians. We're engaged in humanitarian activity there. We are going to have to have some presence that allows us to strike if Al Qaida is creating bases inside of Iraq. So I cannot guarantee that we're not going to have a strategic interest that I have to carry out as commander-in-chief to maintain some troop presence there, but it is not going to be engaged in a war and it will not be this sort of permanent bases and permanent military occupation that Bush seems to be intent on."

From the 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Democratic debate Jan 21, 2008
"I want to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in, but I want to make sure that we get all our combat troops out as quickly as we can safely. Now, the estimates are maybe that's two brigades per month. At that pace it would be some time in 2009 that we had our combat troops out, depending on whether Bush follows through on his commitment to draw down from the surge. We don't know that yet."

Senator Obama in response to 2008 State of the Union address Jan 28, 2008

"It's time to heed our military commanders by increasing our commitment to Afghanistan, and it's time to protect the American people by taking the fight to al Qaeda."

Senator Obama from the 2008 Democratic debate in Los Angeles before Super Tuesday Jan 31, 2008

"We've got to be very clear about what our mission is. We would make sure that our embassies & our civilians are protected; that we've got to care for Iraqi civilians, including the four million displaced already. We already have a humanitarian crisis, an we have not taken those responsibilities seriously. We need a strike force that can take out potential terrorist bases that get set up in Iraq.

"But the one important thing is that we not get mission creep, and we not start suggesting that we should hav troops in Iraq to blunt Iranian influence. If we were concerned about Iranian influence, we should not have had this government installed in the first place. We shouldn't have invaded in the first place. It was part of the reason that it was such a profound strategic error for us to go into this war.

"I will offer a clear contrast as somebody who never supported this war. I don't want to just end the war, but I want to end the mindset that got us into war in the first place."

Senator Obama from the 2008 Democratic debate in Los Angeles before Super Tuesday Jan 31, 2008

Q: "There has been some stability in parts of Iraq where there was turmoil before and that any quick, overly quick withdrawal could undermine all of that and all of that progress would be for naught. The number of US casualties has gone down. What do you say?"

A: "I welcome the progress. This notion that Democrats don't want to see progress in Iraq is ridiculous. I have to hug mothers in rope lines during town hall meetings as they weep over their fallen sons and daughters. I want to get our troops home safely, and I want us as a country to have this mission completed honorably. But the notion that somehow we have succeeded as a consequence of the recent reductions in violence means that we have set the bar so low it's buried in the sand at this point. We went from intolerable levels of violence and a dysfunctional government to spikes and horrific levels of violence and a dysfunctional government. Now, two years later, we're back to intolerable levels of violence and a dysfunctional government."

From the 2008 Politico pre-Potomac Primary interview Feb 11, 2008 
Q: Will you use every tool in our country's arsenal to prevent civil war in Iraq after troops are pulled out?
A: If we are doing this right, if we have a phased redeployment where we're as careful getting out as we were careless getting in, then there' not reason why we shouldn't be able to prevent the wholesale slaughter some people have suggested might occur. And part of that means we are engaging in the diplomatic efforts that are required within Iraq, among friends, like Egypt, and Turkey and Saudi Arabia, but also enemies like Iran and Syria. They have to have buy-in into that process. We have to have humanitarian aid now. We also have two-and-a-half million displaced people inside of Iraq and several million more outside of Iraq. We should be ramping up assistance to them right now. But I always reserve the right, in conjunction with a broader international effort, to prevent genocide or any wholesale slaughter than might happen inside of Iraq or anyplace else.

From the 2008 Democratic debate at University of Texas in Austin Feb 21, 2008
Q: You were opposed to the surge from the beginning. Were you wrong?
A: It is indisputable that we've seen violence reduced in Iraq. That's a credit to our brave men and women in uniform. The 1st Cavalry of Fort Hood played an enormous role in pushing back al Qaeda out of Baghdad. We honor their service. But this is a tactical victory imposed upon a huge strategic blunder. When we're having a debate with McCain, it is going to be much easier for the candidate who was opposed to the concept of invading Iraq in the first place to have a debate about the wisdom of that decision than having to argue about the tactics subsequent to the decision. Not only have we been diverted from Afghanistan, we've been diverted from Latin America. We contribute our entire foreign aid to Latin America is $2.7 billion, approximately what we spend in Iraq in a week. It is any surprise, then, that you've seen people like Hugo Chavez and countries like China move into the void, because we've been neglectful of that.

On March 21, 2008 Senator Obama is quoted by the Associated Press as saying, "We also must make sure that we’re not as careless getting out of this war as we were getting in, and that’s why this withdrawal should be gradual, and keep some U.S. troops in the region to prevent a wider war and go after Al Qaeda and other terrorists."

On March 31, 2008, Senator Obama is quoted by Fox News as saying “What I said was I would have a strike force in the region, perhaps in Iraq, perhaps outside Iraq so we could take advantage of or we could deal with potential problems that might take place in the region.” “That’s very different from saying we’d have a permanent occupation in Iraq. And it’s certainly different from saying we would have a high level of combat troops inside Iraq for a decade or two decades or, as John McCain said, perhaps 100 years.”

From the 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary Apr 16, 2008
Q: You have said "we will be out of Iraq in 16 months at the most." No matter what the military commanders say?
A: The commander in chief sets the mission. That's not the role of the generals. The president's approach lately has been to say, well, I'm just taking cues from General Petraeus. Well, the president sets the mission. The general and our troops carry out that mission. And unfortunately we have had a bad mission. Once I've given them a new mission, that we are going to proceed deliberatel in an orderly fashion out of Iraq, if they come to me and want to adjust tactics, then I will certainly take their recommendations into consideration. And I have to look at not just the situation in Iraq, but the fact that we continue to see al Qaeda getting stronger in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, we continue to see anti-American sentiment fanned all cross the Middle East, and we are overstretched in a way that we do not have a strategic reserve at this point.

From the Fox News Sunday 2008 presidential race interview April 27, 2008
Q: Will you vote to confirm Gen. David Petraeus in his nomination to be the head of Central Command?
A: Yes. I think Petraeus has done a good tactical job in Iraq.

Q: If Gen Patraeus says your plan to get out of Iraq is a mistake, will you replace him?

A: I will listen to General Petraeus given the experience that he has accumulated over the last several years. But it would be my job as commander in chief to set the mission, to make the strategic decisions in light of the problems that we're having in Afghanistan & Pakistan.

Q: So would you replace him or would you just say, "I'm the commander in chief, follow my order?"

A: What I will do is say, "We have a new mission. It is my strategic assessment that we have to provide a time table to the Iraqi government. I want you to tell me how best to execute this new assignment, and I am happy to listen to the tactical considerations and any ideas you have, but what I will not do is to continue to let the Iraqi government off the hook."