Obama: War Crimes?

Barack Obama has a plan. He wants a war crimes commission set up in Iraq while we begin removing troops immediately at the rate of two combat brigades a month until done just before the end of next year. Among other problems, as that would allow for no consideration of circumstances on the ground and leave us shouting war criminal at insurgents without the forces in country to do anything about it, I think it safe to say, every time this dilettante opens his mouth on military and national security issues, a war crimes commission should be formed to investigate him.

As expressed, his "strategic" plan would leave us with fewer forces in country stranded in the most volatile areas as troops in secure areas were pulled out immediately. Perhaps reinforcement and reserve troops just aren't Obama's thing. And of course, in truly Democrat fashion, he wants to throw more money at the problem and join hands with surrounding countries to sing Kumbaya. Oh boy! What a plan. If I didn't know better, I'd think it came from some neophyte state legislator from the south side of Chicago. Oh, wait ... it does.

CLINTON, Iowa (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is calling for the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. combat brigades from Iraq, with the pullout being completed by the end of next year.

"Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was," Obama was expected to say in a speech Wednesday at Ashford University.

"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," the Illinois senator was to say.

"We must get out strategically and carefully, removing troops from secure areas first and keeping troops in more volatile areas until later," Obama said in prepared remarks. Key excerpts were obtained by The Associated Press.

Comments

[Kaitain]

So does this mean he comes out in support of the MCA 2006?

[seekeronos]

I really hope this clown isn't serious, and that he is just pandering to the far left.

Hmmm. How much of this is rhetoric designed only to get the vote from the CodePinkos and the outer fringes of the peace-at-all-costs Dhimmicrat fringe?

Doesn't he realize that pulling out if Iraq now would be not only political suicide, but would also cost the lives of untold thousands of Iraqis? That most Iraqis dread the thought of us cutting and running? It just might make the over-inflated death toll numbers in that debunked Lancet Study become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I mean, he really can't be serious here... he's just doing it to make the KosKidz™ happy, and then, once he becomes al-President, he'll "forget" that he mentioned anything about cutting and running?

Or should we simply question his patriotism, and his appreciation for the expense of our blood and treasure to accomplish our policy goals in the Middle East?

Can we question their patriotism now?

[scarshapedstar]

Say... where's those WMDs?

[templar knight]

"Say...where's those WMDs?"

Why don't you ask Obama, he seems to know everything, at least as far as the left is concerned.

[chris]

Barack HUSSEIN Obama is an IMMINENT THREAT. We must invade Illinois now. God Bless America!

[DANEgerus]

So I guess he's one Muslim who hasn't read 'BlackHawk Down'?

Or maybe... he just misunderstood the title?

[chris]

Or Lebanon. The GREAT COMMUNICATOR pulled the ultimate cut and run job there.

[Fred Beloit]

This plan sounds like something Dizzy Dennis Kucinich just presented on Syrian television. He explains to a female interviewer, who has more of a Brit accent than any Brit I've ever known, that he is bringing his plan before the Congress. The weird thing about this interview is he gave it exactly as he would to a U.S. interviewer, except that he kisses Assad's nether parts a bit. It is as if he were running for President of Syria. Crazy! Link below.

[Fred Beloit]

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1550.htm

[Fred Beloit]

Well at least the Democratics are finally, finally offering alternative plans on Iraq. This is progress for the progressives after six years of unconstructive criticism. Of course these plans so far are goofiness based on ignorance. But, as the BP ads say, it's a start.

[George]

The Democrats offering alternative plans? You must be kidding. They cant even agree on how they want to quit and say we lost. They have no plans for anything other then to scare people into hating a war where casualties have been so minor compared to other wars. They say we should focus on Iran and N. Korea but they would never do anything to stop those countries and say that we are bogged down in Iraq as an excuse for not acting.

All I know is we were attacked on 9/11. I think we should fight and kill as many of those persians arabs etc over there and start being more assertive instead of being afraid to fight because Democrats scare people into voting for them because we lost some people. Its war for christ sake. If Democrats stay in power, we dont fight another war until we are invaded. Our enemies blow up buildings. That is how they invade. We need to respond.

Sorry for the rant...i hate democrats.

[Fred Beloit]

"Sorry for the rant...i hate democrats." That is quite understandable and certainly no reason to be sorry for ranting. I think one of your best statement is this one:

"If Democrats stay in power, we dont fight another war until we are invaded. Our enemies blow up buildings. That is how they invade. We need to respond."

[tally]

Hillary may be a crook, but at least she's smart. Obama is f...... stupid.

[Colin MacDougall]

Remove the troops from the secure areas first. Brilliant. And just what exactly do the troops in the troubled areas do then? Retreat under pressure to the 'secure' areas that have no American troops available - meaning they can be cut off and destroyed. Any evacuation that's not going to turn into a massacre of Americans as well as Iraqi's would have to be accomplished almost overnight. Because images order proving they pushed the Americans out would be worth a great many casualties to the enemy. And the heavy stuff would all have to go first, meaning little armored support for those providing security to the evacuation. Meanwhile, pity the Iraqi who lives anywhere near an airport because the enemy will go all out to destroy or disable them. And imagine how much fun it would be to negotiate the return of a battalion or so of prisoners - or a brigade, for that matter. One hopes the man has a competent SecDef in mind or God help us.

[Terry Gain]

Ambassador Crocker put it best:

I am certain that abandoning or drastically curtailing our efforts will bring failure, and the consequences of such a failure must be clearly understood. An Iraq that falls into chaos or civil war will mean massive human suffering--well beyond what has already occurred within Iraq's borders....[T]he gains made against al-Qaeda and other extremist groups could easily evaporate and they could establish strongholds to be used as safe havens for regional and international operations. The current course is hard. The alternatives are far worse.

Say... where's those WMDs? Posted by: scarshapedstar

The WMDs are, like the brains of Obama and starboy, missing. Nothing will stand in the way of their hunger for political power- not massive human suffering, nor capitulation to al Qaeda, nor abandoning Iraq's southern oil fields to Iran. Party of partisan children. Pathetic.