US Troops to Leave Baghdad
September 4th, 2008 at 04:55am Mark Noonan
In a way Obama and his Democrats can’t stand - with victory:
General David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, said declining violence in Baghdad raised the possibility that American combat troops could leave the capital by next summer.
Asked in an interview with the Financial Times whether it was feasible that US combat forces could leave Baghdad by July, he said: “Conditions permitting, yeah.”
His comments come as the US and Iraq hammer out the final details of a long-term security agreement that reportedly outlines a potential timeline for US combat troops to leave Iraqi cities by next summer, and the country by 2011.
“The number of attacks in Baghdad lately has been, gosh, I think it’s probably less than five [a day] on average, and that’s a city of seven million people,” said Gen Petraeus.
While declining to comment on the details of the security agreement, Gen Petraeus said US combat forces had already pulled back from cities in 13 of Iraq’s 18 provinces. The sight of US soldiers exiting Baghdad would be highly symbolic given the scale of violence that gripped the city in 2006 and 2007.
Is that unfair comment? No. Obama wanted the last US soldier out of Iraq on March 31st, which would have ensured defeat…and as Obama thought this was a good idea, he must think that US defeat is a good thing.
You wanted him, you got him, Democrats…are ya startin’ to feel like you’ve been ripped off?
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans, War on Terror
12 Comments
1. Willem van Oranje | September 4th, 2008 at 7:14 am
Hmmmm. So a timeline after all?
When the last soldier has left, all hell will break loose, and far more deadly because you’ve supplied both sides of the conflict with far more advanced weapons.
Nice job.
There is only one victor in this misbegotten war: Iran. And millions of losers: the current - and future - American taxpayers.
2. extramedium | September 4th, 2008 at 7:45 am
“You wanted him, you got him, Democrats…are ya startin’ to feel like you’ve been ripped off?”
I’m a bit more concerned with NOT electing a guy who would do this all over again if given the chance, which is what I think we’d get with McCain.
I’ve always been in favor of staying until we fix it, since we broke it - but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t vote for Obama because of some out-of-date timeline “gotcha”.
(oh, and by “Democrats”, I’ll assume you mean any Obama supporters)
3. js | September 4th, 2008 at 7:57 am
some folks dont know the difference between a timeline to victory and a timeline of cowardice…those are the folks that will vote for obama…anyone with good sense will understand
4. CanadianObserver | September 4th, 2008 at 8:05 am
US and Iraq hammer out the final details of a long-term security agreement that reportedly outlines a potential timeline for US combat troops to leave Iraqi cities by next summer, and the country by 2011.
———————————-
We should be thankful that after all the opposition there was to accepting a timeline, the U.S. will finally agree to one.
Sadly, it will not erase the death and destruction brought about by the unnecessary invasion and occupation of Iraq.
As Willem van Oranje correctly stated: “There is only one victor in this misbegotten war: Iran. And millions of losers: the current - and future - American taxpayers.”
5. neocon | September 4th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Obama needs to quickly revise his moving 16 month timeline to a fixed 12 month timeline so he can be right again.
I only hope he’ll have time in between the lines of cocaine. Stay tuned
6. WhatChange | September 4th, 2008 at 9:34 am
“I only hope he’ll have time in between the lines of cocaine. Stay tuned.”
According to the gay limo driver [D] who reportedly had sexual relations with that man, Bambi prefers crack, not powder.
7. neocon | September 4th, 2008 at 10:16 am
WhatChange,
Thanks for the correction. My bad.
8. Rich | September 4th, 2008 at 10:59 am
“I’m a bit more concerned with NOT electing a guy who would do this all over again if given the chance, which is what I think we’d get with McCain”
Surely you must be worried with Chickehawk Biden being a heartbeat away from the whitehouse then? After all he was a big war cheerleader was he not? Change you can believe in.
9. William of Orange | September 4th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Willem van Oranje writes:
There is only one victor in this misbegotten war: Iran. And millions of losers: the current - and future - American taxpayers.
You will probably not like this, but the U.S. will have four “hard” bases in Iran from which we can assist the Iraqi government and provide sufficient deterrent to an adventerous Iran:
http://www.fcnl.org/iraq/bases.htm
..I hear the mantra about McCain’s 100 year plan beginning to throb in your brain, but rmember, we’ve been in South Korea and Europe for about 50 years already..
..besides, I wonder what the cost of another 9/11 would be if Islamic Terrorists hit us again and caused the economy to tank. I am sure the losses there would far exceed what we have spent in our defense.
10. extramedium | September 4th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
“Surely you must be worried with Chickehawk Biden being a heartbeat away from the whitehouse then?”
Presidents die in office less that 20% of the time, historically. I won’t worry about that any more than I’ll worry about Sarah Palin becoming president.
11. Kahn | September 4th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Peace through Victory
12. Danish Artist | September 4th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Now Obama “get’s it” (yeah right!),
The troop surge in Iraq has been more successful than anyone could have imagined, Barack Obama conceded Thursday in his first-ever interview on FOX News’ “The O’Reilly Factor.”
Nothing more than for political expediency. What changed since July when Obama was stating that it was not the success it was labeled to be???
Uh, who pushed for the surge again?
Psst….. it wasn’t Barak Hussein “Cut and run” Obama.
Who called it a failure just a few short months later??
The leftist Democrats……..
They are running scared now. First, successes in Iraq after years of preaching failure….Now McCain/Palin, and the American people are not buying the “Bush third term talking point”.