Obama endangers troops-tried to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay agreement...
repo
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.
repo
.
> 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.
Treason is Obama's middle name,
Barack Hussein Obama
> 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.
>
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama...
Osamahelper
Kitty
"Osamahelper" <o...@mas.ama> wrote in message
news:UTNzk.33159$bx1....@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
naah, he's just one of the Chicago mob!
Kitty
Frank Arthur
By Jay Bookman | Tuesday, September 16, 2008, 08:13 AM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
So Sarah Palin, the "reformer" advocating greater transparency in
government, is now refusing to take any part in a state investigation
to which she once pledged total cooperation. She is also trying to
squelch release of emails and other evidence in the case.
The issue is stark: Did Palin abuse her authority and fire her state's
top public-safety official because she did not get her way in a
personal family dispute? Her record as mayor of Wasilla suggests she
is prone to such high-handed behavior; the fact that after just a year
and a half as governor, she already found herself embroiled in another
such controversy is telling.
We have had almost eight years of an administration that believed that
rules were for other people, an administration that has acted as if it
was immune to outside oversight. It is not "change" to replace that
administration with another just like it. It is not reform.
The McCain campaign claims Palin can prove that Walt Monegan was fired
as part of a budget dispute. If so, the investigation established by
the Alaska Legislature - a process set up with Palin's full support -
offers a forum in which that evidence can be viewed and weighed.
But Palin refuses to do so. Is this how a McCain/Palin administration
would be run, arrogantly and secretly?
"Osamahelper" <o...@mas.ama> wrote in message
news:UTNzk.33159$bx1....@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
Osamahelper
> McCain/Palin offer insight to how they would govern
> By Jay Bookman | Tuesday, September 16, 2008, 08:13 AM
>
u posted in the wrong thread there dembot. wake up. hellooo.
charles bash
Illegal war! On 3 counts which I won't go into here. Congress has got to
"step up to the plate" and Put a Stop to these undeclared wars, and Put
a Stop to funding them.
I am not aware at all of any UN mandate on Iraq = there is a UN mandate
on Afghanistan, however, and it expires end of 2008, this coming New
Years Eve!!
Both negotiating alternates are bad, but a 'lame duck' regime in its
last few months really shouldn't be committing this whole country to a
long term commitment, which is what Bush wants and even MUCH Worse is
McCain's version of staying in Iraq for many more years!
McCain is quoted in this new hatchet book on 'half-breed' on how long in
Iraq he would be contented with. I will quote it next time I come across
it. It's years and years.
C. Bash
<<< The 87 Billion Is Only The Down Payment = We Will Be In The Middle
East Ten More Years! ,, ==o== senator john kerry,, january 2004 ,,
Frank Arthur
"Osamahelper" <o...@mas.ama> wrote in message
The US Taxpayers are paying $10,000,000,000 a month to finance the war
in Iraq so Iraq can have an Islamic Republic of Iraq. The Iraqi
government has a surplus of $67,000,000,000. Why are we financing
their country? And why are Americans dying for Iraq?
Lazarus Cain
>
> - Show quoted text -
All trops there are Bush volunteeers.
Should we go overboard to support those who support Bush and go to war
to defend his reputation?
They are there because Bush orders his volunteers there. If they
support his war effort, then they can enjoy the benefits of not having
war support. They are soldiers of war, and thus they are then legal
targets of the war effort. Their injuries they bear by the act of
defending Mr Bush's war and lies. How many Iraqi casualties of war has
the US failed to officially account for? The US administration has no
idea, nor does it want anyone to know.
None were drafted.
They are there for job training primarily and expect a good US middle
class job when the war is over.
Sorry the war the troops volunteered for screwed up American
employment opportunities if one is seeking a nonmilitary career.
repo
WHILE Barack Obama has publicly campaigned for a speedy withdrawal of
US troops from Iraq — in secret private discussions, Obama has tried
to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the
American military presence.
– “OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS’ IRAQ WITHDRAWAL,” NY Post, September 15,
2008
By asking Iraqi leaders to delay a withdrawal plan, Barack Obama hopes
to make the GOP look bad so that he can get elected.
Never mind the consequences. Kill the kids, but get me my throne.
::::::::::::::::::
Here’s how Obama, the national security neophyte with no military or
foreign policy experience, tried to play the big boys’ game:
First you tell them on the phone: Don’t worry. I’m just as good as
McCain.
On June 18, 2008 the Washington post published an editorial titled:
Mr. Zebari’s Message
Iraq’s foreign minister has a chat with Barack Obama.
SEN. BARACK OBAMA told Iraq’s foreign minister this week that he plans
to visit the country between now and the presidential election. We
think that’s a good thing.. because it will give Mr. Obama an
opportunity to refresh his badly outdated plan for Iraq. To do that,
the Democrat needs to listen more to dedicated Iraqi leaders like
Hoshyar Zebari, the foreign minister..
Mr. Obama laid out his current strategy for Iraq in November 2006,
shortly before announcing his candidacy for president. .. Nineteen
months later, the situation in Iraq has changed dramatically, with
violence down 75 percent from its peak and the Iraqi government and
army in control of most of the country. But Mr. Obama has not altered
his position: He still proposes withdrawing most U.S. troops according
to a fixed timetable..
Earlier, in June, Obama called Zebari:
Mr. Zebari said he told Mr. Obama that “Iraq is not an island.” In
other words, an American withdrawal that destabilized the country
would also roil the region around it and embolden U.S. adversaries
such as al-Qaeda and Iran. “We have a deadly enemy,” Mr. Zebari said.
“When he sees that you commit yourself to a certain timetable, he will
use this to increase pressure and attacks, to make it look as though
he is forcing you out. We have many actors who would love to take
advantage of that opportunity.” Mr. Zebari says he believes U.S.
forces can and should be drawn down. His point is that reductions
should be made gradually, as the Iraqi army becomes stronger.
The foreign minister said “my message” to Mr. Obama “was very
clear. . . . Really, we are making progress. I hope any actions you
will take will not endanger this progress.” He said he was reassured
by the candidate’s response, which caused him to think that Mr. Obama
might not differ all that much from Mr. McCain. Mr. Zebari said that
in addition to promising a visit, Mr. Obama said that “if there would
be a Democratic administration, it will not take any irresponsible,
reckless, sudden decisions or action to endanger your gains, your
achievements, your stability or security. Whatever decision he will
reach will be made through close consultation with the Iraqi
government and U.S. military commanders in the field.” Certainly, it
makes sense to consult with those who, like Mr. Zebari, have put their
lives on the line for an Iraq that would be a democratic U.S. ally.
Mr. Obama ought to listen carefully to what they are saying.
Then, face to face and behind closed doors, you propose a totally
different track.
Today, September 15, 2008, Amir Taheri writes in the New York Post
Osamahelper
> All trops there are Bush volunteeers.
> Should we go overboard to support those who support Bush and go to war
> to defend his reputation?
>
> They are there because Bush orders his volunteers there. If they
> support his war effort, then they can enjoy the benefits of not having
> war support. They are soldiers of war, and thus they are then legal
> targets of the war effort.
so you admit the dems are fighting against the U.S. in Iraq. I knew it
all along. you're all traitors.
Osamahelper
sacrifice to help the less fortunate. you gotta problem with that?
Frank Arthur
"Osamahelper" <o...@mas.ama> wrote in message
So you think about 50% of the American electorate who are Democrats
are "traitors"? Does that include Servivemen and Servicewomen fighting
in Iraq who vote Domocrat are "traitors" too?
Osamahelper
Frank Arthur
"Osamahelper" <o...@mas.ama> wrote in message
Why not help the less fortunate Americans- some 40 million of them who
don't have access to Health Care? Or the thousands of Americans who
served in Iraq who are now homeless and out of work here in America?
repo
Barack Hussein Obama will say and do anything
to get elected, even using the soldiers as a political pawn.
Obama didn't visit the troops but while on the campaign
trail he tried to influence foreign powers
in violation of the Logan act.
Frank Arthur
"Osamahelper" <o...@mas.ama> wrote in message
So why did you write "so you admit the dems are fighting against the
Bert Hyman
<A...@Arthurian.com> wrote:
> So you think about 50% of the American electorate who are Democrats
> are "traitors"?
Voters can't be held responsible for the actions of the toads they
elect, at least not 'til they find out what these politicians have been
up to and elect them anyway.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
Osamahelper
to the hospital. that's where it is. homeless? yea, right. want a
job. all you have to do is work hard and bring in more to the company
than you take out and you'll have a job. now if you want to sit on your
ass and play solitaire, it might be tuff to find a job then.
Osamahelper
repo
There are the far far left Democrats who are Marxist Socialist who
call the shots in your party, I would call them "traitors". Most
normal Democrats do not look at the issues, they assume their
leaders are telling them the truth, but they are not traitors, only
uninformed.
Kitty
"Frank Arthur" <A...@Arthurian.com> wrote in message
news:JOOzk.33745$Ep1....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
15 to 20 million without health care are ILLEGAL aliens, who deserve NOTHING
Kitty
ayatollah obama
>
> > it appears paleface Obammy speaks with forked tongue- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Are you a complete idiot, or do you just do a real good impression of
one?
Why don't you go dig on why obamaramadingdong went to Pakistan in 1981
using his Indonesian passport
Frank Arthur
"Kitty" <cowg...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:2mPzk.33757$Ep1....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
Health Care coverage. Here are the facts
This document is also available as a printable .pdf file.
Health Insurance Coverage
Facts on Health Insurance Coverage
Introduction
Most Americans have health insurance through their employers. But,
employment is no longer a guarantee of health insurance coverage.
As America continues to move from a manufacturing-based economy to a
service economy, and employee working patterns continue to evolve,
health insurance coverage has become less stable. The service sector
offers less access to health insurance than its manufacturing
counterparts. Further, an increasing reliance on part-time and
contract workers who are not eligible for coverage means fewer workers
have access to employer-sponsored health insurance.
Due to rising health insurance premiums, many small employers cannot
afford to offer health benefits. Companies that do offer health
insurance, often require employees to contribute a larger share toward
their coverage. As a result, an increasing number of Americans have
opted not to take advantage of job-based health insurance because they
cannot afford it.
Who are the uninsured?
a.. Nearly 47 million Americans, or 16 percent of the population,
were without health insurance in 2005, the latest government data
available.1
b.. The number of uninsured rose 2.2 million between 2005 and 2006
and has increased by almost 9 million people since 2000.1
c.. The large majority of the uninsured (80 percent) are native or
naturalized citizens.2
Kitty
"Frank Arthur" <A...@Arthurian.com> wrote in message
source please
Osamahelper
spring for health insurance. ain't freedom great. according to you is
sucks.
charles bash
>But employment is no longer a guarantee of
>health insurance coverage.
Indeedy, no longer a guarantee, if it ever was.
It doesn't Say Anything about wage earners and others who buy Their Own
health insurance through Kaiser Permanente or Blue Cross, or other
providers. How many?
When I first worked for the Govm't many years ago, my Employer provided
No Health Coverage!. We Govm't employees paid for it ourselves, with
Payroll Deductions! For the first maybe 5 years or so, my private
Pennsylvania Blue Cross was Cheaper for the same coverage, than that of
Govm't, my employer! And Blue Cross allowed me to keep Penna Blue Cross
coverage even while working in Maryland, at the time.!
That article is Too Trite,, like a lot of articles in papers nowadays,
it is Not there to inform! It is there to "Sell a viewpoint" and
confuse, if that was the intent of the purveyor. I don't know what
viewpoint he was really selling nor who was paying him for it.
C. Bash
.
<<< You Can Lead A Horse To Water = But You Can't Make Him Drink! ,,
==o==,frederick marrayat,, 1830 ,
br...@pobox.com
wrote:
>Unfortunately, Obama is mostly correct. The Iraq war is Absolutely An
>Illegal war! On 3 counts which I won't go into here. Congress has got to
>"step up to the plate" and Put a Stop to these undeclared wars, and Put
>a Stop to funding them.
>
>I am not aware at all of any UN mandate on Iraq = there is a UN mandate
>on Afghanistan, however, and it expires end of 2008, this coming New
>Years Eve!!
The UN mandate on Iraq went clear back to the Kuwaiti invasion.
Hussein repeatedly violated the provisions of the cease-fire that
ended the first conflict.
charles bash
>The UN mandate on Iraq went clear back to the
>Kuwaiti invasion. Hussein repeatedly violated
>first Kuwaiti war.
No! That's Not what I mean by "mandate". By mandate I Meant the
statement backing an armed invasion of a country. The UN was definitely
urging member states to "use military force" to free Kuwait of the Iraq
occupation. A great many countries participated
But the invasion of Iraq was very different. Although Iraq was in non
compliance of two "UN Resolutions", I think they are called, a war vote
was taken by the Security Council and Bush defied it! The Council voted
" Let The Inspectors Work A Little While Longer Before We Resort To
War." The French UN ambassador fashioned it that way and Bush called the
French "Obstructionists" to his war mania!
That;s why I call the new invasion a Criminal Act! An unproved attack on
a member state of the UN, a violation of the UN charter.
The use of the War Powers act was likewise a Misuse, since the CIA head
said "We never said there was IMMINENT THREAT { of an Iraqi attack}
which is the defining authorization for a pro-active first strike
Attack under the War Powers Act.
Bush and Cheney { maybe others } are responsible for a Criminal War, as
far as I am concerned. Recall the Millions of Europeans who marched in
protest just before the war began. They saw how WRONG was Bush's war!
The Congress needs "to step up to the plate" and Cut Off The War Funding
for both Iraq and Afghanistan. wars. Allowing funds for a safe orderly
pullout of all our forces and closure of our bases there. Nine months
maybe. The Iraqis themselves are calling us "occupiers" and are sickened
by Bush's insane plan to maintain Sixty Bases permanently!! { like in
Korea or Germany}
Insane,, my friend. We need to get out! And Soon! A serious unexpected
nerve gas attack that kills thousands of soldiers will almost certainly
bring us a coup de e'tat, and I for one won't cry at all.
C. Bash
~ member air force association~
*us*
เดช
On Sep 18, 10:41 am, * US * wrote:
> Bush is a traitor.
*us*
Even the most desperate bushworshipper
can't show anything Bush has ever done
that didn't betray the USA to its harm.