“Why Obama must go to Iraq”
Vets for Freedom chairman Pete Hegseth makes the case in the WSJ today. A snippet:
Even more astonishing than Mr. Obama’s absence from Iraq, however, is the fact that he has apparently never sought out a single one-on-one meeting with Gen. Petraeus. The general has made repeated trips back to Washington, but Mr. Obama has shown no interest in meeting privately with him. It’s enough to make you wonder who exactly Mr. Obama listens to when it comes to Iraq?
Mr. Obama frequently decries the danger of “dogmatists” and “ideologues” in public policy, yet he himself has proven consistently uninterested in putting himself in situations where he might be confronted with the hard complexities of this war. It suggests a dangerous degree of detachment and overconfidence in his own judgment.
After all, Mr. Obama was among those in January 2007 who stridently opposed the surge and confidently predicted its failure – even going so far as to vote against funding our soldiers in the field unless the Bush administration abandoned this new approach. It is now clear that Mr. Obama’s judgment on the surge was spectacularly wrong.
Yet rather than admit his mistake, Mr. Obama has instead tried to downplay or disparage the gains our troops have achieved in the past 12 months, clinging to a set of talking points that increasingly seem as divorced from reality as some in the Bush administration were at the darkest moments of the war.
Will Obama go? I doubt it.
Obama can’t afford to risk any exposure to the inconvenient truths on the ground that led Democrats Brian Baird and Joe Donnelly to change their minds and oppose immediate withdrawal.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Barack Obama, Iraq
Right Wing Nut House
» WILL NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE KILL CONSERVATISM?
Redstate
» Obama: Billions for Pork Barrel EarmarksPajamas Media
» Must Conservatives Rally Round the Messiah?Marginal Revolution
» What are the lessons from the New Deal?Power Line
» Close Guantanamo Bay?protein wisdom
» Anxiety of Influence?Power Line
» Turkeys on paradeHot Air
» Zimbabwe to “Elders”: Get lost
Terrig:
PRESIDENT CLINTON NOT DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY CLINTON. That’s the difference.
Mr. Hegseth made my day. Thank you.
And that is the central distinction between what donkeys mean when they say they “support the troops” and what a conservative means.
Donkeys see the military through one of the following prisms:
- As “children” or “victims”;
- As bloodthirsty rednecks;
- As a social-engineering playground; or
- As a cash-cow of funds to divert to entitlement programs.
Conservatives see “supporting the troops” to mean backing policies and strategies designed to achieve victory.
War is always Hell, but I’d wager that you’ll see a lot fewer cases of PTSD and the like among servicemembers returning home after winning instead of losing – thereby significantly reducing the need to treat them like ticking time bombs of criminal insanity, which is how hard-core lefties like Senator Hopenchange want to express their “support” for veterans.
Good point. Obama is the fairy tale Emperor strutting his “new clothes” in public, and while the media are going along with the gag he himself is all too aware of the pendulum-like display of his own Swinging Richard. This is why he and his minions have to declare more and more topics as “off-limits” to discussion: it’s the only way they can try to prolong the illusion until his coronation takes place.
This is why he should not pick Hillary as running mate. She wants his job TOO much.
To be concerned about the war in Iraq and how the troops are faring, one has to have a heart inside beating with patriotism. Barack Hussein Obama doesn’t have that heart. His heart is pounding patriotism for Africa, “The Mother Country.” He doesnt’t care diddly squat about America. His allegiance, as preached to him by Rev Wrong is to Africa. He doesn’t have the backbone to go to Iraq, for he knows he probably wouldn’t be treated very kindly.
I know the liberals will tell me how much he loves his Country. He loves what his Country can do for him, and right now, a bunch of misguided, ignorant, brainwashed, starry-eyed Americans are about to hand the Country over to him. I shudder to think what the next four years UNDER Barack Hussein Obama is going to be like.
First, no more war as we surrender to terrorists world wide; our military will be gutted, and we’ll lose Tiawan(SP?)to China who’s waiting in the wings; then we’ll give into Iran, and lose Israel to their nuclear bomb.
They’ll be over here, because The Homeland Security Department will be disolved, all of our surveilance will be done away with by Obama, Reid, Nan, and the rest of the democrats in Office. There won’t be enough Republicans left to put up a fight. Yes, the next four years are going to be tough, and the one’s I really worry about are our young people that have no idea of the Holocaust they’ll be going through. If I sound paranoid and scared—-it’s because I am.
Great posts olympian and Alphonse…you guys nailed it.
This is the most dismal of my 15 Presidental elections. It is inconceivable to me that any rational human of voting age would support Obama. Of course, it was inconceivable that Republicans would nominate McClain when we had several better choices but somehow it happened and we are stuck with him as the least worst of a Hobson’s choice.
I try to console myself that our country survived Carter and Clinton but I shudder at the prospect of Hussein Obama leading the US against terrorism.. and with 20 years in the Army and 40 years in the oil patch, I don’t shudder easily.
That’s because little girly men really don’t know anything about leadership.
They are sheep. No rams.
Silky, I am aware of the fact that Clinton isn’t running again you’re really on a tear aren’t you? I was using the example of what happened when I was serving and you were probably in kindergarten and how we reacted to his coming to pay a visit. We were not thrilled and I can promise you that the majority of the troops will not be thrilled if Obama wins either. Got it? Please read the post more carefully next time before you spout off. It’s obvious you don’t understand examples and smiley faces.
Oh and Silky don’t do all caps, it’s considered shouting and it is rude. Especially when you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about, although it could be considered comical.
LGM, I told you before, during my last 15 months in Iraq, I saw congressional delegations probably 30 times-Including Senators McCain, Chambliss, Snow, and a myriad of minor and major representatives. These were in Ramadi and Falluja. We frequently took them downtown. If they want out, they get out.
A US pol doesn’t learn much by going to Iraq. He or she can’t travel enough to see anything. They mostly get powerpoint briefings in meeting rooms in the green zone, which could be done just as well in the US.
For all your talk, you are clueless. The surge brigades have almost all left, or are in the process of leaving, Iraq at the end of their rotations. This move will leave Iraq at pre-surge levels because they weren’t replaced. Read up on it.
I wonder if Obama will be more successful at hiding his contempt for the military than either of the Clintons?
Going to Iraq shows real support for the troops, and gives him an opportunity to actually meet and interact with them.
I guess he isn’t interested, unless McCain can shame him into it.
How many years did it take to rebuild Germany and Japan? And people said the same things you are saying. (and we are still in these countries militarily)
Terror techniques specifically include constant claims of responsibility for attacks (which may or may not be true) and anything they can do to keep a population nervous. I believe it is the Democrats which consider him a sufficient threat to go after him in Pakistan, not the Republicans.
Now that was just plain low. I may not be a McCain fan, but that was just mean and fairly ignorant. I mean, are you implying that he planned to get shot down and “vacation” in the Hanoi Hilton?
I think someone with extreme firsthand experience with the horror of war is someone that I would want as president over some Affirmative Action recipient with almost no experience in government or legislating or interacting with politicians (not the Rezko gangster types I mean). Semi successful asbestos remediation is a qualification for a job at Clean Harbors, not president.
How can Obama not go to Iran? This is really shameful.
And this is why I have come to say I do not doubt the liberals support the troops, I just wonder whose troops they support!
LGM
A US pol doesn’t learn much by going to Iraq. He or she can’t travel enough to see anything. They mostly get powerpoint briefings in meeting rooms in the green zone, which could be done just as well in the US.
For all McCain’s trips to Iraq, he still doesn’t seem to understand it very well.
The other day he said troops are back to pre surge levels. This was not a slip, as he repeated it and defended the statement. But it is false.
The Great ANWAR Debate
If oBORGama takes McCain’s suggest to visit Iraq to learn what it’s all about first hand, McCain ought to toss the next gauntlet down — the ANWAR debate!
Rules — only one, a DEETless McCain-oBORGama debate held in the great ANWR summer outdoors, complete in HD so everyone can watch close up as the skeeters suck these two clowns dry in about ten minutes.
Win or lose, they both be itching about it for days. Plus the public would see what pristine ANWR is all about — skeeters and a lot of nothing else.