When Is A Withdrawal Not A Withdrawal?

Obama has always talked about withdrawing US combat troops from Iraq and leaving behind a residual force to train Iraqis and target Al Qaeda in Iraq (without combating them, I guess).  However, I have never heard him give the residual force as much emphasis as he did during his interview with Katie Couric, currently of CBS News.

Couric: ... Prime Minister Maliki on the same page when it comes to a troop withdrawal by 2010. Why do you believe that the Iraqi security forces, which have taken so long to get up to speed, will be equipped to protect the country at that point?
Obama: Well, keep in mind that, and I can't speak for Prime Minister Maliki now, but under my proposal, you'd still have U.S. forces with a capable counterterrorism operation in the region. You would still be training Iraqi security forces. We'd still be providing logistical support. We would still provide protection for our diplomatic corps and other civilians as well as our forces on the ground.
So we would still have the capacity to help promote effective actions by the Iraqi security forces. And, in fact, we're already starting to see more and more of those forces take the lead in actions where we're playing more of an advisory role. The key is for us to not inhibit the Iraqis from taking that kind of responsibility on.

That's not the withdrawal I knew.  By way of comparison, here is how the residual force was described when Obama laid out his plan to "end the war" (or anyway, end US involvement) in his recent national security speech:

To achieve that success, I will give our military a new mission on my first day in office: ending this war. Let me be clear: 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 – one year after Iraqi Security Forces will be prepared to stand up; two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, we’ll keep a residual force to perform specific missions in Iraq: targeting any remnants of al Qaeda; protecting our service members and diplomats; and training and supporting Iraq’s Security Forces, so long as the Iraqis make political progress.

The balance of the Couric interview is bafflegab and Obamafuscation as The One tries to explain why he still does not back the surge:

Couric: But talking microcosmically, did the surge, the addition of 30,000 additional troops ... help the situation in Iraq?
Obama: Katie, as … you've asked me three different times, and I have said repeatedly that there is no doubt that our troops helped to reduce violence. There's no doubt.
Couric: But yet you're saying … given what you know now, you still wouldn't support it … so I'm just trying to understand this.
Obama: Because … it's pretty straightforward. By us putting $10 billion to $12 billion a month, $200 billion, that's money that could have gone into Afghanistan. Those additional troops could have gone into Afghanistan. That money also could have been used to shore up a declining economic situation in the United States. That money could have been applied to having a serious energy security plan so that we were reducing our demand on oil, which is helping to fund the insurgents in many countries. So those are all factors that would be taken into consideration in my decision-- to deal with a specific tactic or strategy inside of Iraq.

Couric: And I really don't mean to belabor this, Senator, because I'm really, I'm trying … to figure out your position. Do you think the level of security in Iraq …
Obama: Yes.
Couric … would exist today without the surge?
Obama: Katie, I have no idea what would have happened had we applied my approach, which was to put more pressure on the Iraqis to arrive at a political reconciliation. So this is all hypotheticals. What I can say is that there's no doubt that our U.S. troops have contributed to a reduction of violence in Iraq. I said that, not just today, not just yesterday, but I've said that previously. What that doesn't change is that we've got to have a different strategic approach if we're going to make America as safe as possible.

Bizarre - was it only yesterday that Barack was telling Terry Moran of ABC News that "hindsight is 20/20"?  Yet now, even with hindsight, he can't figure out if the surge was a good idea.  Still, The One makes a great and widely overlooked point.  Personally, I have always wondered whether Thomas Edison's invention of the lightbulb was a good idea - if he had applied his research in a different direction, he might have been able to come up with a cure for influenza and saved millions of lives in the 1918 pandemic.  I'll never know, just as Barack will never know whether the surge was the best possible idea in the best of all possible worlds.  FWIW, here is Obama's surrender speech on the floor of the Senate from January 2007.

This is a comedy classic:

Couric: Two more questions. You said not too long ago that Jerusalem should remain undivided. And then you backtracked on that statement. Does that play into the argument that some believe that someone more experienced would not have made that kind of mistake?
Obama: Well…if you look at what happened, there was no shift in policy or backtracking in policy. We just had phrased it poorly in the speech. That has happened and will happen to every politician. You're not always gonna hit your mark in terms of how you phrase your policies.

The policy hadn't changed - people just had to understand to ignore the words coming out of his mouth!

Our next President.

 

Comments

[centralcal]

I have never been a Katie fan - before or during her tenure at CBS. But, I have to say, I think she did a terrific job in her questioning of Obama and that she was "fair and balanced," in that she also interviewed John McCain in her segment.

This may be the first and last compliment I pay her. I look forward to seeing what Brian and Charlie do when their turn comes. Americans are not only watching Obama (and, maybe, McCain), they are watching the media too.

[clarice]

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/07/obama-tells-katie-couric-surge-worked.html>Video of Couric's interviews of O and McCain
Does anyone care what Obama says anymore..It's as solid as Edward's denials of an affair with Reille.

[DrJ]

When Is A Withdrawal Not A Withdrawal?

When you are John Edwards?

[centralcal]

Amen, Clarice!

[JM Hanes]

TM: ...currently of CBS News... Now that's funny!

[centralcal]

It is funny JMH, but I think we need to give Katie some credit here. She has the most to prove as an "anchor." And, by golly, I think she done good.

[PaulL]

Who cares what we think? I want to know what Obama's supporters think about him wanting to maintain 50,000 troops in Iraq and send an additional several thousand to Afghanistan. I doubt that goes over well with them.

[Danube of Thought]

On another thread I posted a paraphrase of Obama's 2005 remarks about his "plan," which would have had all US troops out of Iraq by March, 2008. How I pray that McCain will make everything he can out of this.

[Jane]

I can't believe Obama keeps bringing up the money angle - "we could have spent that money fixing the economy, reducing dependence on oil". (I really don't want to hear that plan.)

I guess that may fly with moonbats, but gee, "let's cause some genocide to save a few bucks" is an odd campaign slogan from my perspective.

[hit and run]

Centralcal:
I have never been a Katie fan - before or during her tenure at CBS. But, I have to say, I think she did a terrific job in her questioning of Obama

Media Bistro:

Some thoughts from Couric at the event:

"However you feel about her politics, I feel that Sen. Clinton received some of the most unfair, hostile coverage I've ever seen."

Couric went on to say that latent sexism contributed, in part, to Hillary's defeat.

She referred to one "prominent member of the commentariat" who said he "found it hard to be objective when it came to Obama."

That and for all we know, when Obama arrived for the interview today, he probably said to her, "you're nice enough, sweetie"

[Ranger]

It will be fun to see how the Left takes the new talk of keeping troops in country for "humanitarian missions." I am betting they don't buy it... but I could be wrong. They do love "humanitarian missions."

[centralcal]

Ha! Hit.

Look, the media is a favorite punching bag of mine. I give her credit simply for adding McCain to the mix. She didn't have to do that. I think that took courage and, I hope, sets the stage for the anchors that are gonna follow her.

[Jane]

Oooh - that stings.

[clarice]

Imagine you are a diehard Hill fan--you watched this weasel get the nomination by taking one position on Iraq and immediately after run away from it.

[hit and run]

I agree Centracal (though without the advantage of with the blessing of not having watched the interview).

[Ranger]

And if Obama just renames them "peacekeepers" he keeps his promis to "end the war" while keeping 80,000 troops in country.

[Peter]

"That and for all we know, when Obama arrived for the interview today, he probably said to her, "you're nice enough, sweetie""

Obama is a well traveled cosmopolitan,more like,

"Wie gehts meine Schatze?"

[JM Hanes]

centralcal:

I just enjoy Tom's sense of humor -- the kind where you read right over something, then find yourself doing a mental wheelie and going whoa, now that's funny!:)

I haven't seen the interviews, but from the transcripts I'd agree that Katie did a very creditable job. She didn't let Obama off with pablum, even doubling down with "so I'm just trying to understand this" to press him further. And kudos, or at least acknowledgements, are due for giving McCain equal time. Maybe the embarassing press the press has been getting will ultimately pay off in more balanced coverage than we'd otherwise have seen -- although I'm not holding my breath.

I may have to go back and watch the video, just to check out Obama's body language. He seemed a trifle tart here and there!

[JM Hanes]

Ranger:

"...while keeping 80,000 troops in country..." for the next hundred 8-10 years.

[sbw]

Now, porch, now after reading about the double dealing in Iraq, in government and in the campaign that remains uncalled by the press and the population, now I get depressed.

[MikeS]

I understand that almost all of our offensive combat operations troops are out of Iraq now. The troops we have left are committed either to defensive, preemptive, and preventative combat operations or to support and training operations.

At least that's what my advisers tell me.

[centralcal]

JMH: Now, I do have to confess I did not watch the whole interview(s), just the excerpts that Gateway Pundit showed (equal time to both candidates).

However, I still come back to the fact that this was the Magical Mystery Tour (Obama) with fawning groupies/acolytes (the Media), so I guess I am easily made less critical - that Katie included Johnny Mac, forced a balance.

[BobS]

Please note the attack piece from HufPo right after McCain was interviewed by Curic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ilan-goldenberg/not-a-gaffe-a-fundaemtnal_b_114394.html

The left will say ANYTHING to get in power.

[Porchlight]

sbw,

Hope you'll find reason for cheer soon. Obama's Grand Tour is likely not going to end up being the money and time he spent on it. He seems to be annoying US reporters as much as anyone else, with aides speaking presumptously as if he's already won office. He stumbled badly in his press conference. We still haven't had the Berlin speech yet, but a subset of the MSM and foreign press is already beginning to take notice of the fact that this tour is unseemly on its face. And no visible bump in the polls thus far. I was honestly expecting much worse.

[Soylent Red]

After reading the transcript, I have the following belief: The MSM knows the jig is up.

After the NYT travesty I think the press will become more and more sensitive to appearing balanced. Couric, I think, sensed the mania going too far and realized that she needed to protect whatever credibility she has.

I won't say she was balanced, but she was a lot less swoony than I thought she would be.

[A Panglossian]

But Tom,

Everything does happen for the best in this best of all possible worlds.

Only cynics doit garder leur jardins.

[BobS]

Porchlight: I agree with you. Only MSM believes that Obama is on some sort of introductory world tour. You pointed to something that I've not thought of in that he's spending some major cash on this tour and the campaign seems to have fudged their June take. Are they (forgive me everyone) "jumping the shark?"

[BobS]

and maybe....just maybe the wiley old shark has been holding fire and husbanding his resources

[Porchlight]

BobS, I've heard it floated that since it's supposedly a fact-finding mission and Obama brought those other Senate stooges with him, the Middle East part of the trip will be charged to the taxpayer. (I sure hope someone asks him about this.) But I don't see how Europe could be thus expensed, so yeah, it ought to be a pretty penny on top of all of his other campaign expenses for July.

[centralcal]

Soylent: "Couric, I think, sensed the mania going too far and realized that she needed to protect whatever credibility she has."

That is the point. Couric is the bottom of the heap ratings-wise, the vultures have been circling her Anchorness for months, so she has more to prove. She, among the Big 3 anchors went first. I think she threw down the gauntlet (of sorts). Let's see how Charlie and Brian respond when their turns come.

[BobS]

Charlie and Brian must have watched the Moran and Curic interviews - or at least their producers did. Both Curic and Moran acquited themselves well and I'm doubtful that Williams and Gibson will be willing to be seen as sops for Obama.

[centralcal]

I am not so sure about Brian Williams, BobS. He is an NBC stooge after all. I hold out a little bit of hope for Charlie, but not a whole lot.

[BobS]

Good thing Chris Mathews wont be there. I hate to see such man crushes on TV

[Ann]

Obama travel press corps pushes for on-the-record briefings.
By Lynn Sweet on July 22, 2008 7:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
JERUSALEM-- Aboard the Obama campaign plane flying from Jordan to Israel Tuesday night, reporters collectively balked when Obama staffers wanted to brief a second time in one day without having their names used. The reporters refused and so there was no briefing.The upshot of sticking together: when Obama foreign policy advisor Susan Rice briefs on Wednesday morning, it will be on the record.

[MarkJ]

"Obama: ***We just had phrased it poorly in the speech. That has happened and will happen to every politician. You're not always gonna hit your mark in terms of how you phrase your policies."

Messiahs don't "phrase poorly."

Messiahs don't flop around from position to position like hooked carp.

Messiahs aren't "inartful."

Messiahs don't say "gonna." They use proper diction and enunciation.

Messiahs are always aware "that words mean things."

[Uncle BigBad]

I'm gonna stick by my prediction that Hillary will be the Democrat nominee. The super delegates are watching the same TV clips as we are.

[Elliott]

I have been so inspired by Soylent's Bald Man stories that I have begun work on a serial tale of espionage and intrigue. It will be a pale imitation, but I hope it is enjoyable. The first installment follows:

-----------

Beijing, China

The wait in the ante-room had been lengthy, but Geng Huichang, Minister of State Security was aware that could not be helped. The President was attending the weekly meeting of the Politburo standing committee and any interruption would arouse unwanted suspicion.

Geng had not intended to be here, but when he arrived at work, his deputy was already outside his office bearing a most unusual report. 20 minutes later, Geng was in his official car on his way to the Presidential residence. Now, the report that had generated this frenzy was tucked into the expensive Valextra briefcase that rested in his lap, a magnificent item acquired on a recent trip to Milan.

The purchase of the briefcase had not been the indulgence of a corrupt communist official, but rather an essential part of the ingenious cover Geng had used on an operation so sensitive and vital to Chinese interests that he had been ordered to make an unprecedented clandestine trip abroad to oversee it personally. Upon his return to China, Geng had requested and been granted permission to keep the briefcase for he went to great lengths lest his integrity would be put into question.

Thus, it was not surprising that as he waited for the President's arrival, he began to wonder whether he had done right bypassing the State Council and going directly to Hu Jintao. But, while he fretted over a possible reprimand—he did not even wish to consider the more severe punishments that were not infrequently administered—one of the Presidential secretaries emerged and ushered him into the President's office.

"What is it?" Hu demanded, as soon as the secretary had left the room. Hu was standing behind the valuable 18th century French desk that was the centerpiece of the room. The desk, however, was entirely decorative. In fact, the entire room was. Though the President received all his visitor's here, he worked in an adjoining room furnished modestly and with utility in mind.

Geng did not reply, but removed the report from his briefcase and handed it across the President's desk. Hu seemed put out. He was clearly expecting to be apprised of the contents, yet Geng remained silent, even as Hu, in a gesture that betrayed his impatience, took his reading glasses from the desk and began to study the report.

Within seconds, his expression changed, wonder and excitement were now to be discerned from his countenance.

He turned his gaze to Geng. "How many people know about this?" asked the President.

Geng had seen the excitement in the President's eyes, but nonetheless he was wary. Questions like this were dangerous. "You know better than to ask such questions, sir," Geng intoned. "It will suffice for me to say that all involved know what it is necessary that they know and no more."

The President seemed chastened, "You are right. And you were right to bring this directly to me. If your department can exploit this information to our advantage, do so."

"Thank you, sir," said Zeng, who now felt confident enough to voice his innermost thoughts. "We will bring honor to our glorious motherland and pestilence will descend on its enemies."

Hu was startled, for he had never seen Zeng so animated.

"Do you not think such rhetoric is too high flown?" asked the President.

"No," replied Zeng calmly. "If we are clever, my words will, in retrospect, be considered an understatement."

[MayBee]

You are incredible, Elliott.

[RichatUF]

Nice job Elliott. What's in that briefcase...

And going OT for a minute, surprised that this story isn't making the rounds. I suppose the media couldn't report this here, although the confidence vote was a Star Wars bar scene which could be blamed on Bush.

[Soylent Red]

Oooooooooh Elliot...

I suspect I know what's in that briefcase. And I think we are on similar tracks, just different protagonists.

[Ann]

That was really good, Elliott!

Is it Obama's fake birth certificate in the really cool briefcase?

I can think of a million things I would like to see in that briefcase.

[mkultra]

Obama is making a point that is over Katie and Tom's heads. (What a coincidence!) Was it worth the cost, given the reality and the potential in Iraq.

Answer? Mission Accomplished!

[JM Hanes]

Ha! This is one of those game shows, isn't it? Where you have to choose between the very expensive briefcase or its contents, sight unseen.

Since Ann has apparently has dibs on the ostensible treasure inside, I guess I'll go for the case.....
with my oversized monogram.....
blind stitched across the front....
in Obama green.

[Soylent Red]

RichUF:

That India nuke deal is good mojo for us. Helps to uncouple them from Iranian oil.

It's The Great Game version 2.0.

I wonder if the Obamessiah would have thought of it that way while his moonbat masters were bleating "No nukes!" Hmmmm...

[BobS]

SR: What does this...if anything...do to the situation in Pakistan?

[Soylent Red]

BobS:

India has been getting a good deal of their oil and natural gas from some great big fields in western Iran. There is a large oil and gas pipeline running from Iran to India, through Pakistan. As of late, Pakistan has been charging India a steeper fee, making energy more expensive. That's one of the reasons why India wants to develop it's nuclear power generation program.

Since they are a nuclear military power, the proliferation people are nervous. Increased power generation can also be a cover for increased weapons production (cf. Iran). that prospect obviously makes the Pakis nervous, and could precipitate a similar move.

Main thing is Central Asia is to isolate Iran and Russia by way of blocking their oil and gas interests. That's partially why we're buddying up with the various -stans. Lots of LNG up in those hills, and they have a fair amount of cultural animus to Iran and Russia.

From a long term strategic perspective, IMO, Central Asia is way more interesting than the Middle East. A whole lot more craft and guile going on in Central Asia.

[BobS]

so, SR: who is willing to pony-up to this shunting of Iraian and Russian demonstration of power?

[Soylent Red]

Bob:

US/UK of course.

This India deal helps bring them over to our side, and they're very interested in maintaining cheap energy costs to keep their growth going.

Japan is interested in how the things plays out, vis a vis China.

Most of the -stans would love to be an alternative to Iran as an energy resource, but they don't have the development money.

Gazprom is actively pursuing contracts, while we dangle security agreements in front of dictators.

Hopefully we can get some smart people over at USAID or State to get together a bunch of enormous trade missions to put together development contracts to compete, although Gazprom will be a tough competitor.

A real long-term solution would be to bring Iran in-line and get the other -stans together with the new Iran and set them to competing with the Russians for the European market. That would be a six-way screw-you poke in the eye for Russia.

But there's a whole lot of ifs that have to be filled to get that to come to fruition.

[BobS]

refresh my memory....who is Gazprom?

[Thomas Esmond Knox]

Obama. Will he invade Pakistan or not? If not, how will he capture/kill/destroy Al Qaeda in Afghanistan/Pakistan?

[Soylent Red]

Russian energy company/mafia. Semi state controlled. Putin and Medvyedev are insiders.

[JM Hanes]

I know you're dying to hear what Obama had to say on India in his if-it's-Tuesday-it-must-be-Jordan presser:

And so, one of the things that was driven home is the importance of our diplomatic efforts in Pakistan, which, by the way, may include having a conversation with India and seeing if we can lessen some of the tensions between those two countries.

A lot of what drives, it appears, motivations on the Pakistan side of the border, still has to do with their concerns and suspicions about India. And I think that's an example of aggressive, creative diplomacy.

OBAMA: We haven't had a conversation between the Indians and the Pakistanis that has been sustained and meaningful about how they can arrive at a more sensible arrangement between the two countries. That could relieve some of the pressure and help us go after some of the -- some of these forces along the border regions.

Very sophisticated, eh? As they say, read it all; it's full of....amazing stuff like recommending Israeli/Palestinian "confidence building measures" to "get discussions back on track." Can't imagine who whispered that in his ear.

While I'm at it, he was positively inspirational on China with Katie Couric:

You know, so far the Iranians have not accepted the kinds of talks that we need to deal with in terms of suspending their enrichment program. But the fact that we've tried to talk to them then strengthens our hand in the international community when we wanna get Russia or China to help apply the tough sanctions that are gonna be required to make Iranians know that we mean business.

Leanin' on weak reeds there, Barack, Russia and China mean business too. How quickly we forget how much help they supplied when it came to "applying" sanctions to Iraq. Without firm guidance from Obama, I suppose they just confused which side they were supposed to be assisting, aside from helping themselves, of course. The Chinese seem to be confused about Zimbabwe too, and Sudan and zzzzzz.

[Soylent Red]

Yup. I'm pretty sure all of those oilfield development contracts China and Russia have inside Iran will go right out the window when they find out they could trade them in for an opportunity to advance US interests.

This is a prime illustration of how naive the Obamessiah is.

Hint: Not everyone in the world is waiting in line to help us and give us things.

Having just written that, I wonder if the Obamessiah thinks that way because that's how he grew up: everyone scrambling to help out the clean and articulate black kid.

[Jane]

I wonder if the Obamessiah thinks that way because that's how he grew up: everyone scrambling to help out the clean and articulate black kid.

Ouch!

[clarice]

Good work Elliott.
I can't bear to listen to O's jejeune carp much longer and the notion of ten more years!!Oh, NO!!!!

[K T Cat]

Word of the day: "bafflegab."

LOL!

[sbw]

Porch, thanks for bucking me up. And TM, too, for the analysis he put in the new thread.

[Tully]

Ah, the "slow pivot refining" of Obama's "plan" in motion!

The policy hadn't changed - people just had to understand to ignore the words coming out of his mouth!

No wonder he feels that Maliki's misquoted and misrepresented words were actually an Obama endorsement....

[tanstaafl]

"You know, this conversation doesn’t help my kids."

Probably not :)

But thanks for having it anyway.

Barack has a tendency to mildly chastise his interlocutors..."hey, you've asked that 3 times already"... (and I'm too important for this stuff...)

There was some of that same kind of feeling with his back and forth Q & A in Amman, Jordan yesterday.

I think it's a way for him to try to control the exchange.

[Porchlight]

Elliott, you are a marvel! I had to sign off last night before reading but I've now caught up. Would love to see your narrative and Soylent's meet up in a Batman meets Spiderman kinda way.

sbw, my pleasure. I know there's more Obama fun to come before he has to head home to the boring old United States.

[PapayaSF]

It's so telling and rather funny that the toughest media grilling Obama has had so far in this campaign has come from . . . Katie Couric. Good for her, but a rather shameful comment on the high-status "serious" journalists of the MSM.

[Thomas Jackson]

The Dalibama makes me long for the consistenency and forth right policies of Clinton and Kerry.

There was a crooked man, who walked a crooked mile.....

[Jeff F.]

With nicknames like "Obamessiah" and "Dalibama" it has struck me that conservatives truly fear the black man. To bestow such lofty names to Barack is a sign of an underlying fear that a man who represents many of the qualities that conservatives have stepped on for decades might actually become the leader of their country.

Why such righteous add-ons? Is it a desire to break out of your oppressive shells and repent for all the injustice done by those on the right to this country and the world?

Surely it can't be sarcasm. I mean propaganda like that could never come from those with such great family values.

[Jeff F.]

P.S. Elliott,

You've got me hooked. Can't wait for more.