WP: Bush, Maliki Agree on 'Time Horizon' for U.S. Troop Withdrawals

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Bush changes positions! :applause:

The question is, does this mean we "lost" the war now? According to some....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/18/AR2008071801308.html?hpid=topnews

TUCSON, July 18 -- President Bush and Iraq's prime minister have agreed to set a "time horizon" for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq as security conditions in the war-ravaged nation continue to improve, White House officials said here Friday.

The agreement, reached during a video conference Thursday between Bush and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, marks a dramatic shift for the Bush administration, which for years has condemned any talk of timetables for withdrawal.

[Predicto]

Wait, timetables are bad. They are the same as surrendering to the terrorists.

Sarge told me so.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Wait, timetables are bad. They are the same as surrendering to the terrorists.

Sarge told me so.

Total flip-flop, whatever. Its the right move. My :applause: for him taking this position is a genuine one.

[Prosperity]

Next step: Iraqi occupation of the Eastern United States

[Vicious]

Bush is talking to Iran and making time tables to get out of Iraq. Bring your ice skates, we're going to hell to have a good time.

[twa]

Bush changed positions??

But Maliki and other Iraqi leaders in recent weeks have begun demanding firm withdrawal deadlines from the United States. Bush said earlier this week that he opposes "arbitrary" timetables but was open to setting an "aspirational goal" for moving U.S. troops to a support role.

While Bush was traveling here for a GOP fundraiser, the White House issued a statement announcing the agreement.

"In the area of security cooperation, the president and the prime minister agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals," the statement said. It said those goals include turning over more control to Iraqi security forces and "the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq."

The statement continued: "The president and prime minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

[PeterMP]

Bush changed positions??

But Maliki and other Iraqi leaders in recent weeks have begun demanding firm withdrawal deadlines from the United States. Bush said earlier this week that he opposes "arbitrary" timetables but was open to setting an "aspirational goal" for moving U.S. troops to a support role.

While Bush was traveling here for a GOP fundraiser, the White House issued a statement announcing the agreement.

"In the area of security cooperation, the president and the prime minister agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals," the statement said. It said those goals include turning over more control to Iraqi security forces and "the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq."

The statement continued: "The president and prime minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

I agree.

I think this the Iraqis playing politics for their public. Their proposal never included a "time table" for withdraw in the normal American lexicon.

It includes a method by which things will be assessed on a regular basis to determine if American troops SHOULD be withdrawn.

Essentially, actual conditions on the ground will will dictate American troop levels not the date on the calender.

[Prosperity]

Bush changed positions??

But Maliki and other Iraqi leaders in recent weeks have begun demanding firm withdrawal deadlines from the United States. Bush said earlier this week that he opposes "arbitrary" timetables but was open to setting an "aspirational goal" for moving U.S. troops to a support role.

While Bush was traveling here for a GOP fundraiser, the White House issued a statement announcing the agreement.

"In the area of security cooperation, the president and the prime minister agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals," the statement said. It said those goals include turning over more control to Iraqi security forces and "the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq."

The statement continued: "The president and prime minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

The truth doesn't matter Twa, the good guys will use this rhetoric to force the GOP's hand

bye bye McCain Presidency... though I guess there was never really a decent shot at it anyway

[PeterMP]

The truth doesn't matter Twa, the good guys will use this rhetoric to force the GOP's hand

bye bye McCain Presidency... though I guess there was never really a decent shot at it anyway

If violence stays low, this will be dead and buried by the election because NOTHING Obama does or says can reconcile it w/ his 16 month withdraw timetable.

[Predicto]

If violence stays low, this will be dead and buried by the election because NOTHING Obama does or says can reconcile it w/ his 16 month withdraw timetable.

Of course, Obama also says that his actions will be dictated by the facts on the ground, and his timetable is just a guideline.

I doubt there is much real difference between the two positions, other than that Obama wants to hold the Iraqi government's feet to the fire a bit more about necessary political change.

[twa]

The truth doesn't matter Twa, the good guys will use this rhetoric to force the GOP's hand

bye bye McCain Presidency... though I guess there was never really a decent shot at it anyway

The truth IS usually the first to go,then the obfuscation begins in earnest with promises of better times and benefits w/o costs....but enough about the Dems

I agree McCain never had much of a shot,and I'm surprised so many actually see thru the BS that the polls are so close....or maybe they are just buying a different line of BS. :laugh:

I've resigned myself to four yrs of ****ing about whichever lesser choice wins.....and I plan to be annoying as hell.

[Sarge]

I'm sorry. I didn't see the line in the Compost article that says "16 months no matter what"

They gotta come home sometime. If it's that calm in Iraq, then it's time so send some troops to Afghanistan to kick the **** out of the purple pissing Tailban throwbacks

[Predicto]

I'm sorry. I didn't see the line in the Compost article that says "16 months no matter what"

Funny, I didn't see that in any of Obama's literature or speeches.

Didn't stop you from saying it about him.

[Prosperity]

If violence stays low, this will be dead and buried by the election because NOTHING Obama does or says can reconcile it w/ his 16 month withdraw timetable.

It's the economy stupid, Iraq going well is a neutral political event, Iraq going badly though would hurt McCain tremendously. Which is why it was a great strategy by Obama to take on McCain on Iraq. If Iraq is stable we can safely leave and claim victory and save money. If Iraq is unstable we can cut our losses and help our faltering economy. You see, the better off Iraq is, the less people care about it.

The truth IS usually the first to go,then the obfuscation begins in earnest with promises of better times and benefits w/o costs....but enough about the Dems

I agree McCain never had much of a shot,and I'm surprised so many actually see thru the BS that the polls are so close....or maybe they are just buying a different line of BS. :laugh:

I've resigned myself to four yrs of ****ing about whichever lesser choice wins.....and I plan to be annoying as hell.

Just embrace your new God King, it will make the 8 years all the less painful :laugh:

btw the polls aren't that close, all except maybe 1 or 2 has Obama +15 or even at worst. Just wait till Obama and McCain are speaking at the same time on TV...

[jpyaks3]

I'm sorry. I didn't see the line in the Compost article that says "16 months no matter what"

They gotta come home sometime. If it's that calm in Iraq, then it's time so send some troops to Afghanistan to kick the **** out of the purple pissing Tailban throwbacks

Who has been proposing moving more troops to Afghanistan?

And who has been saying we dont need more troops in Afghanistan...well up until a week ago?

[Sarge]

Who has been proposing moving more troops to Afghanistan?

And who has been saying we dont need more troops in Afghanistan...well up until a week ago?

Unless we're going across the border with troops, there won't be a significant re-deployment of ground troops. That's not to say a wing of B-52's won't be deployed to bomb the **** out of the Taliban targets in Pakistan

[PeterMP]

It's the economy stupid, Iraq going well is a neutral political event

Actually, it isn't the economy. It is about trust and respect. Obama already holds about a 19 point advantage on McCain about whom people trust with respect to the economy. He isn't likely to open that lead significantly more (I guess if McCain can cut into that it might help him).

The problem is do people trust and respect Obama overall.

Obama can talk about the economy all he wants. It isn't going to help him. He's not going to change those numbers significantly He needs to talk about WHY he'll be a good President independent of the issues.

"Asked whom they trust more to handle the economy, 54 percent named Obama, while 35 percent said McCain. Obama also holds double-digit leads on dealing with the federal budget deficit and on immigration."

"Economic concerns continue to eclipse other issues, with half the country saying the economy will be "extremely important" to their vote. Gasoline and energy prices, which voters rarely mentioned at the start of the year, come in just behind. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071502136_2.html?sid=ST2008071503279&pos

Moving on his "appearant" (happy Predicto) timeline on Iraq only hurts him.

[PeterMP]

btw the polls aren't that close, all except maybe 1 or 2 has Obama +15 or even at worst. Just wait till Obama and McCain are speaking at the same time on TV...

Ahh no. No poll done this month has Obama up by more than 10.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Several have it within 5.

[Prosperity]

Actually, it isn't the economy. It is about trust and respect. Obama already holds about a 19 point advantage on McCain about whom people trust with respect to the economy. He isn't likely to open that lead significantly more (I guess if McCain can cut into that it might help him).

it's not how much more people trust him on the economy, its how much more people care about the economy. A 50 point lead in economic management wouldn't mean much if it was say... September 12 2001, but today a 19 point lead in economic management is a lot more important.

Obama can talk about the economy all he wants. It isn't going to help him. He's not going to change those numbers significantly He needs to talk about WHY he'll be a good President independent of the issues.

until he starts being threatened in the polls I don't see why he should change his strategy. remember all the foreseeable big Iraq headlines have pretty much already taken place.

"Economic concerns continue to eclipse other issues, with half the country saying the economy will be "extremely important" to their vote. Gasoline and energy prices, which voters rarely mentioned at the start of the year, come in just behind. "

exactly

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071502136_2.html?sid=ST2008071503279&pos

Moving on his "appearant" (happy Predicto) timeline on Iraq only hurts him.

This election is going to come down to domestic issues, people aren't going to go against issues like the economy in exchange for who they think they'd rather drink beer with, at least not this time around.

[Sarge]

Funny, I didn't see that in any of Obama's literature or speeches.

Didn't stop you from saying it about him.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11517.html

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Thursday backed off his firm promise to withdraw combat forces from Iraq immediately and instead said he could “refine” his plan after his trip to Baghdad later this month.

Earlier, a top Obama adviser had said that the senator is not “wedded” to a specific timeline.

Obama told reporters in Fargo, N.D., that he is “going to do a thorough assessment."

"When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies," he said, according to CBS News. “I have been consistent, throughout this process, that I believe the war in Iraq was a mistake.”

Obama later said at a second news conference he still intends to stick to the timeline.

At the second meeting with reporters, Obama said: "We're going to try this again. Apparently I wasn't clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. ... I have said throughout this campaign that ... I would bring our troops home at a pace of one to two brigades per month and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position.

[twa]

Just embrace your new God King, it will make the 8 years all the less painful :laugh:

btw the polls aren't that close, all except maybe 1 or 2 has Obama +15 or even at worst. Just wait till Obama and McCain are speaking at the same time on TV...

From what I've seen I'll pass,and hope I'm wrong for all our sakes.

You must be following some different polls

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html#polls

As far as speaking?...the god king leaves something to be desired w/o his teleprompter(probably why he is avoiding the townhall format :laugh: )

for real live ones

or his oops

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

How is John "I don't know much about the economy" McCain really going to hurt Obama on that issue?

I think the improvements in Iraq actually help Obama and hurt McCain. Americans want out of Iraq, but now that things are just awful there as opposed to cataclysmic, leaving is a less scary proposition. Obama just has to say that he agrees with the Iraqi government that Americans should leave.

I think McCain needs the world to be in absolute shambles in order to win, because he needs people to be scared. Any improvements in foreign policy focus attention to domestic issues.

[Predicto]

Ahh no. No poll done this month has Obama up by more than 10.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Several have it within 5.

The pollsters admit that they are having trouble with this one. In general, Obama is ahead by 8-10 points among registered voters, but the polls are adjusting for "likely" voters. That usally means older and more conservative voters, who are more reliable about voting.

Problem is, there is good reason to think that the likely voters in this election may be different that the "likely" voters in an ordinary election, based on the vastly different primary turnouts between the Republican Party and the Democratic party this year, and the fact that so many young people already turned out to vote once.

Here's a good read about it.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/07/likely-voters-more-republican.html

[Tulane Skins Fan]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11517.html

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Thursday backed off his firm promise to withdraw combat forces from Iraq immediately and instead said he could “refine” his plan after his trip to Baghdad later this month.

Earlier, a top Obama adviser had said that the senator is not “wedded” to a specific timeline.

Obama told reporters in Fargo, N.D., that he is “going to do a thorough assessment."

"When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies," he said, according to CBS News. “I have been consistent, throughout this process, that I believe the war in Iraq was a mistake.”

Obama later said at a second news conference he still intends to stick to the timeline.

At the second meeting with reporters, Obama said: "We're going to try this again. Apparently I wasn't clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. ... I have said throughout this campaign that ... I would bring our troops home at a pace of one to two brigades per month and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position.

Doesn't that prove that you are wrong?

Also, the Bush plan is going to set dates for withdrawal of troops. They haven't released those dates. But when they do, I'm sure it will not be called a "timetable."

Bottom line, its the right move to start moving our troops out of Iraq. Period.

[Predicto]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11517.html

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Thursday backed off his firm promise to withdraw combat forces from Iraq immediately and instead said he could “refine” his plan after his trip to Baghdad later this month.

Earlier, a top Obama adviser had said that the senator is not “wedded” to a specific timeline.

Obama told reporters in Fargo, N.D., that he is “going to do a thorough assessment."

"When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies," he said, according to CBS News. “I have been consistent, throughout this process, that I believe the war in Iraq was a mistake.”

Obama later said at a second news conference he still intends to stick to the timeline.

At the second meeting with reporters, Obama said: "We're going to try this again. Apparently I wasn't clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. ... I have said throughout this campaign that ... I would bring our troops home at a pace of one to two brigades per month and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position.

Ummm, Sarge.... Your quote supports my position, not yours. He has a plan but it's not stuck in stone. He thinks his plan will spur on the Iraquis better than the current approach. That view is open to change.

Your problem used to be that he didn't have a plan, now your problem is that he has an unyielding plan. Neither claim is accurate.