The Corner

Obama’s Iraq Evolution

After his comment about how he may “refine” his Iraq position, Obama communications director Robert Gibbs can’t seem to decide whether or not Obama’s campaign promise to withdraw from Iraq in 16 months is real. The RNC has taken notice and sending this around:

CNN, 7/7/08, 7:34 am ET

John Roberts: To what degree will commanders on the ground dictate the pace of withdrawal? How much say will they have in this whole thing?

Robert Gibbs: Well, look, I don’t want to prejudge a lot of this stuff. We’re going to get to that point on the first day of this administration.

MSNBC, 7/7/08 7:04 am ET:

Gibbs: Obviously you have to give commanders on the ground flexibility. We’d be crazy not to.

Andrea Mitchell: Does that mean you would not be able to withdraw in 16 months.

Gibbs: No, no. We believe we will. We believe we will. But obviously we’ll listen to commanders on the ground as conditions may or may not change. 

Gibbs also tried to rewrite Obama’s opposition to the surge:

MSNBC, 7/7/08 7:04 am ET

Robert Gibbs: “We added 30,000 brave American troops, and violence is down, as everyone suspected it would be.”

MSNBC’s “Response To The President’s Speech On Iraq,” 1/10/07

Barack Obama: “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.” 

In the article I have on NRO this morning, I discuss Obama’s decision to moderate his position on Iraq withdrawal in a little more detail, but I also think his Iraq shift must be viewed in context along with his other foreign policy shifts. My conclusion? Obama would be loathe to admit it, but between his current stances on three things — staying the course in Iraq, endorsing the doctrine of preventative war and supporting the strategic expansion of executive power to fight the war on terror — he’s awfully close to embracing the core tenets of Bush’s foreign policy

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

Grassley’s Kangaroo Court

So now it looks like next Thursday. On Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s manifestly meritorious nomination to the Supreme Court, what was supposed to be the vote out of the Senate Judiciary Committee this past Thursday now appears to be sliding into a hearing to be held next Thursday. Or, who knows, maybe a Thursday ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Censure Dianne Feinstein

Regardless of the fate of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, the Senate should censure the ranking Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein. Her deception and maneuvering, condemned across the political spectrum, seriously interfered with the Senate’s performance of its constitutional duty to ... Read More

Are We on the Verge of Civil War?

Americans keep dividing into two hostile camps. It seems the country is back to 1860 on the eve of the Civil War, rather than in 2018, during the greatest age of affluence, leisure, and freedom in the history of civilization. The ancient historian Thucydides called the civil discord that tore apart the ... Read More