Starting Gate: Obama's Iraq Clarity
After a week's worth of stories and speculation about Barack Obama's move to "the middle" on issues near and dear to the hearts of progressive activists (see the FISA bill flap), Obama is redoubling his effort to make his position on the war in Iraq clear.
Throughout the primary campaign, Obama pledged to end the war, telling voters that he would pull U.S. troops out of that country at a rate which would result in nearly all troops out in 16 months. Obama seemed to fudge recently when he suggested that he would talk with military commanders on the ground during his upcoming trip to Iraq and that what he learned would help dictate the pace of withdrawal.
Coming on the heels of a series of moderating shifts on issues like the Supreme Court decision on the D.C. gun ban, Obama set off a lot of chatter about his commitment to ending the war quickly. That prospect did not sit well with activists in his party. So, in a New York Times op-ed today, Obama clarifies his position on the war.
"This is not a strategy for success," Obama says of the refusal to put a timeline on withdrawal. "It is a strategy for staying that runs contrary to the will of the Iraqi people, the American people and the security interests of the United States. That is why, on my first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war."
More Obama: "As I've said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces. That would not be a precipitous withdrawal."
Around The Track