John R. Houk
September 17, 2008
Let us see: Barack Hussein Obama stance to his voting base is to leave Iraq ASAP. BHO claims he was against removing genocidal tyrant Saddam Hussein. BHO says he was against the Surge implying it was a waste in a nation he believes to be a quagmire of American defeat.
Oops! President Bush (which Senator McCain fully supported) went ahead with the Surge to Left America’s horror. This is even more horrific for Left America: the Surge has been an amazing success even beyond President Bush’s expectations.
Understandably BHO being a good Leftist denied the success of the Surge for some time. Only when it became evident that BHO would look like a Foreign Policy fool to refute the success of the Surge did a Leftist spin begin.
That spin was something like this: BHO believed we had no idea the Surge would have been successful; ergo he would have still been against it on principle. I am guessing that principle is defeat rather than victory.
Now the even more hypocrisy for the Leftie who says CHANGE will be the theme of an Administration he would operate.
The New York Post reports that BHO on his only visit to Iraq demanded the Iraqi government to cease negotiations with the Bush Administration over a time frame for U.S. Troops to leave Iraq. Why? I believe reason incorporated something like the Bush Administration was an ineffective weak Presidency.
Hmm … Weak I guess even though after many bad decisions in a post Saddam regime to bring democracy to a much divided nation, President Bush made a good decision with the Surge. This is very Surge that has nearly decimated al Qaeda’s existence in Iraq. So the only real problem in Iraq is rogue Islamofascist Iran attempting to stir up trouble among the Iraqi Shi’ites.
BHO wants no credit to go to President Bush, Senator McCain and the Republicans for being correct about the Surge and how that success could actually bring Americans home earlier than anticipated. BHO wants to continue to paint a bad picture (with the help of his crony media supporters) about Iraq in order to grab the messianic hero adulation for bringing Americans home ALONE. Thus BHO’s idea of CHANGE is still NOT bi-partisan. It is fringe Leftist Democratic Party partisanship in an effort to work Americans at home into giving the Democrats more political power via the vote. Such political power will be an increase in taxes, government interference, restrictions on real Christianity (as opposed to fake Progressive Christianity), and the culmination of a Secular Humanistic transformation in America that will make deviants appear normal and Biblical morality to look deviant.
Here are some excerpts from a Move America Forward Freedom PAC email I received on September 16.
It is very apparent to me that Barack Hussein Obama is NOT an agent of CHANGE. Rather BHO is an agent of political skullduggery.
JRH 9/17/08
***************************************
OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
By Amir Taheri
Last updated: 2:34 pm
September 16, 2008
Posted: 4:02 am
September 15, 2008
New York Post
WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.
According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.
"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.
Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."
"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.
Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.
While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.
Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.
By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.
Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.
Thus, the 2010 deadline fixed by Obama is a meaningless concept, thrown in as a sop to his anti-war base.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the Bush administration have a more flexible timetable in mind.
According to Zebari, the envisaged time span is two or three years - departure in 2011 or 2012. That would let Iraq hold its next general election, the third since liberation, and resolve a number of domestic political issues.
Even then, the dates mentioned are only "notional," making the timing and the cadence of withdrawal conditional on realities on the ground as appreciated by both sides.
Iraqi leaders are divided over the US election. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani (whose party is a member of the Socialist International) sees Obama as "a man of the Left" - who, once elected, might change his opposition to Iraq's liberation. Indeed, say Talabani's advisers, a President Obama might be tempted to appropriate the victory that America has already won in Iraq by claiming that his intervention transformed failure into success.
Maliki's advisers have persuaded him that Obama will win - but the prime minister worries about the senator's "political debt to the anti-war lobby" - which is determined to transform Iraq into a disaster to prove that toppling Saddam Hussein was "the biggest strategic blunder in US history."
Other prominent Iraqi leaders, such as Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi and Kurdish regional President Massoud Barzani, believe that Sen. John McCain would show "a more realistic approach to Iraqi issues."
Obama has given Iraqis the impression that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success, let alone a victory, for America. The reason? He fears that the perception of US victory there might revive the Bush Doctrine of "pre-emptive" war - that is, removing a threat before it strikes at America.
Despite some usual equivocations on the subject, Obama rejects pre-emption as a legitimate form of self -defense. To be credible, his foreign-policy philosophy requires Iraq to be seen as a failure, a disaster, a quagmire, a pig with lipstick or any of the other apocalyptic adjectives used by the American defeat industry in the past five years.
Yet Iraq is doing much better than its friends hoped and its enemies feared. The UN mandate will be extended in December, and we may yet get an agreement on the status of forces before President Bush leaves the White House in January.
UPDATE 9/17/08 12:38 PM ET: BHO accuses author Amir Taheri of distortions which is code for you caught me and I have to lie my way out of it.
________________________________
Barack Hussein Obama Skullduggery
John R. Houk
September 17, 2008
_________________________________
Move America Forward Freedom PAC donation
______________________________
OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
Copyright 2008 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.
September 17, 2008
Let us see: Barack Hussein Obama stance to his voting base is to leave Iraq ASAP. BHO claims he was against removing genocidal tyrant Saddam Hussein. BHO says he was against the Surge implying it was a waste in a nation he believes to be a quagmire of American defeat.
Oops! President Bush (which Senator McCain fully supported) went ahead with the Surge to Left America’s horror. This is even more horrific for Left America: the Surge has been an amazing success even beyond President Bush’s expectations.
Understandably BHO being a good Leftist denied the success of the Surge for some time. Only when it became evident that BHO would look like a Foreign Policy fool to refute the success of the Surge did a Leftist spin begin.
That spin was something like this: BHO believed we had no idea the Surge would have been successful; ergo he would have still been against it on principle. I am guessing that principle is defeat rather than victory.
Now the even more hypocrisy for the Leftie who says CHANGE will be the theme of an Administration he would operate.
The New York Post reports that BHO on his only visit to Iraq demanded the Iraqi government to cease negotiations with the Bush Administration over a time frame for U.S. Troops to leave Iraq. Why? I believe reason incorporated something like the Bush Administration was an ineffective weak Presidency.
Hmm … Weak I guess even though after many bad decisions in a post Saddam regime to bring democracy to a much divided nation, President Bush made a good decision with the Surge. This is very Surge that has nearly decimated al Qaeda’s existence in Iraq. So the only real problem in Iraq is rogue Islamofascist Iran attempting to stir up trouble among the Iraqi Shi’ites.
BHO wants no credit to go to President Bush, Senator McCain and the Republicans for being correct about the Surge and how that success could actually bring Americans home earlier than anticipated. BHO wants to continue to paint a bad picture (with the help of his crony media supporters) about Iraq in order to grab the messianic hero adulation for bringing Americans home ALONE. Thus BHO’s idea of CHANGE is still NOT bi-partisan. It is fringe Leftist Democratic Party partisanship in an effort to work Americans at home into giving the Democrats more political power via the vote. Such political power will be an increase in taxes, government interference, restrictions on real Christianity (as opposed to fake Progressive Christianity), and the culmination of a Secular Humanistic transformation in America that will make deviants appear normal and Biblical morality to look deviant.
Here are some excerpts from a Move America Forward Freedom PAC email I received on September 16.
- It is almost impossible to believe Barack Obama can be this arrogant. But sometimes the worst about politicians is true. It looks like Barack Obama told the Iraqi government to halt negotiations on troop withdrawals until after the election.
Obama is putting his own political objectives ahead of the safety of U.S. troops in Iraq. Apparently this all happened during his celebrated trip to Iraq - yes, the same trip where he refused to meet with American military personnel in the hospital in Germany because they wouldn't let news camera crews turn the visit into a circus and political stunt.
Iraqi government sources have revealed to the New York Post that Presidential candidate Barack Obama demanded that Iraqi officials stop negotiations with the Bush Administration to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq. …
Fearful that the success in Iraq would harm his political aspirations, Obama sought to keep U.S. troops in Iraq so he can continue attacking the Bush Administration for not imposing a timetable for withdrawal. If these allegations prove to be true, it should be the end of the Obama campaign. The report says this was a demand Obama made to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari.
…
Obama should have the decency to recognize that he lacks the moral character to serve as Commander-in-Chief, and he should withdraw from the ticket. I have never heard of any candidate deliberately trying to get Americans killed to prove their point.
According to the New York Post story, not only did Obama seek to get the Iraqi to stop negotiating with Americans on the troop drawdown, he also tried to bully General David Petraeus to agree to a hard withdrawal date.
The hypocrisy of Barack Obama - to say, in the United States, that he wants a speedier troop withdrawal date - while telling the Iraqis to stop negotiating is appalling. Even supporters of a quicker U.S. withdrawal must be sickened by his conduct in Iraq. If there were ever a candidate who has demonstrated the lack of character and leadership to represent the United States in foreign affairs, it is Barack Obama.
…
It is very apparent to me that Barack Hussein Obama is NOT an agent of CHANGE. Rather BHO is an agent of political skullduggery.
JRH 9/17/08
***************************************
OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
By Amir Taheri
Last updated: 2:34 pm
September 16, 2008
Posted: 4:02 am
September 15, 2008
New York Post
WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.
According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.
"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.
Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."
"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.
Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.
While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.
Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.
By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.
Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.
Thus, the 2010 deadline fixed by Obama is a meaningless concept, thrown in as a sop to his anti-war base.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the Bush administration have a more flexible timetable in mind.
According to Zebari, the envisaged time span is two or three years - departure in 2011 or 2012. That would let Iraq hold its next general election, the third since liberation, and resolve a number of domestic political issues.
Even then, the dates mentioned are only "notional," making the timing and the cadence of withdrawal conditional on realities on the ground as appreciated by both sides.
Iraqi leaders are divided over the US election. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani (whose party is a member of the Socialist International) sees Obama as "a man of the Left" - who, once elected, might change his opposition to Iraq's liberation. Indeed, say Talabani's advisers, a President Obama might be tempted to appropriate the victory that America has already won in Iraq by claiming that his intervention transformed failure into success.
Maliki's advisers have persuaded him that Obama will win - but the prime minister worries about the senator's "political debt to the anti-war lobby" - which is determined to transform Iraq into a disaster to prove that toppling Saddam Hussein was "the biggest strategic blunder in US history."
Other prominent Iraqi leaders, such as Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi and Kurdish regional President Massoud Barzani, believe that Sen. John McCain would show "a more realistic approach to Iraqi issues."
Obama has given Iraqis the impression that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success, let alone a victory, for America. The reason? He fears that the perception of US victory there might revive the Bush Doctrine of "pre-emptive" war - that is, removing a threat before it strikes at America.
Despite some usual equivocations on the subject, Obama rejects pre-emption as a legitimate form of self -defense. To be credible, his foreign-policy philosophy requires Iraq to be seen as a failure, a disaster, a quagmire, a pig with lipstick or any of the other apocalyptic adjectives used by the American defeat industry in the past five years.
Yet Iraq is doing much better than its friends hoped and its enemies feared. The UN mandate will be extended in December, and we may yet get an agreement on the status of forces before President Bush leaves the White House in January.
UPDATE 9/17/08 12:38 PM ET: BHO accuses author Amir Taheri of distortions which is code for you caught me and I have to lie my way out of it.
________________________________
Barack Hussein Obama Skullduggery
John R. Houk
September 17, 2008
_________________________________
Move America Forward Freedom PAC donation
______________________________
OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
Copyright 2008 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment