President Obama sets time table for Iraq for August 2010

Did you also hear that he set aside money (I think it was $190 billion a year) through 2019, so he can claim this as money saved in the future? Slight of hand at it's best.

Wonder how popular he'll be with the left when the body count starts rising in Afghanistan? Or maybe they will just ignore it since it's not Bush.

Oh, almost forgot, in the spirit of your articles non Obama bashing approach.

Thank you Mr. President for delivering us from this terrible war in Iraq (even if it was won before you entered office), your wisdom and leadership on this matter has not gone unnoticed.

It is interesting that the defintion of "Combat troops/operations" has changed.

I would think that one of the missions of those 30-50k troops still being left in county to "work on counterterrrism" would be cosidered Combat operations.

What is the meaning of the word "Is" now days. 

Much like his latest deficit reduction plan, the meaning or words are now changing to fit a new vocabulary. 

Will this mean I will need to buy a new Dictionary this year?  I guess so.  Well I guess this is a way to stimulate the Dictionary printing part of our economy.

I hear ya Lee, the irony is even if words were not changed in some way, anything said by our current President is seen as almost miraculous. The war ends and Obama will get all the glory for the victory. If the economy goes to hell, Bush will get the blame for "starting" the chain reaction but Obama will be forgiven for not being able to stop it.

You know, I get really annoyed at the fact that almost no one on this board even thinks about giving the guy a chance. Nitro, what would it take for you to give the guy a little credit? I mean he has ammended his Iraq timeline after talking to the generals...doesn't that seem smart? He is going after the Taliban in Afghanistan....isn't that a good idea? He tried to work with congressional conservatives on the stimulus plan before the idiot Dem. congresspeople got in the way. He has most of the Republicans behind him on this Iraq plan. Please...give the guy a chance. Jeez. Seems to me that you are just pissed for being pissed. When did he claim credit for "winning" the war as you claim, I have never heard such a thing. What would make you happy, if we annoucnced that we were staying there at 150,000 tropps for the next ten years, would you be on here singing his praises...probably not, you would be ripping him a new one for not listening to the guys on the ground, exactly what he just did. You cannot condemn the man for ANYTHING he does, let me hear your rationilization?

That's kinda hypocritical (which was my what I wanted some people to do) considering Bush was criticized and scorned for everything he did, even when the results were positive, such as the surge.

To be fair some of the criticism of Bush over the surge was that we should have sent more troops over for the initial invasion and occupation as more than a few generals and officials had recommended, all of which were quickly put out to pasture.  That kind of criticism of Bush is warranted, the other stuff from people who just didn't want to war in general to work (ie most Democratic officials) was useless after the war had started.

Can you explain to me what do you mean by giving Obama a chance? When was the last time you did something out of chance? Would you by a product from a brand name you believe is of bad quality? Would you give a murderer, who claims to be reformed, a chance to do work that would put your family in his/her hands? Did Obama give the surge a chance before he said it would fail or refused to believe it worked? Did Obama give soldiers a chance when he called them killers and thieves? It's interesting how people get upset over something they themselves did.

We mocked, insulted, ridiculed and trashed our own President. We made cartoons our of him, movies making fun of him, sold calendars with his Bushism and even have a man who immitates him. This is the leader of our Nation, the man who represents us around the world and we basically told the world how have a clown for a President. And we wonder why the rest of the world looks fdown on us.

Look, I cannot speak for others regarding treatment of President Bush, but I always repected the guy, if not agreeing with his policies. Using the lowest common denomanator argument just sucks, it makes all of youguys look like you are whinning. Tell me WHY you do not like his withdrawl plan...what is wrong with it? Don't just complain that he is Deomocrat, and you were rooting for the other guy. Don't just bitch about perceptions and the media, and all that crap, give me something of substance as an argument....please. Again, what is wrong with his withdrawl plan?

jdkeepsmiling, it's really simple, forget the fact that I am a veteran (Iraq and much earlier). The president is politicizing the war in Iraq (if you can still call it that) by allocating money, yours and mine, to the tune of $190 billion a year until 2019. Of course he has no plan of spending that. It's over. But he is going to turn around, probably near election time, and tell the American people how he saved the taxpayers billions by withdrawing from Iraq when they were due to leave anyway. That my friend is dishonest and he deserves no credit for it.

Additionally, the president is fond of throwing around the phrase that he inherited the economic problem (despite the fact he was part of the problem, the Senate, the last four years). So when he refers to Iraq why doesn't he call it the victory he inherited? He was wrong about the surge and just can't bring himself to admit he was wrong (and he's been asked directly). When he and many of the other Democrats were threating to withhold funds for the troops in 2007 they lost my respect completely. Using your ON troops as a political tool during a war is despicable in my eyes, others see things differently. I never stated he claimed victory, he was part of the cut and run group, I call them defeatists. My post about his "delivering us" from Iraq was sarcasm.

Passing a bill that nobody had time to read before being passed does not inspire confidence in the Democratic leadership IMO. Obama went to Williamsburg before his Democrat congress members and trashed the Republicans for wanting to look at the bill. He used what he refered to during the campaign as the "politics of fear" to scare folks into supporting the bill, sight unseen, without debate or input. Does that sound responsible to you? This bill needed to be passed so quickly, why? It didn't save my job, are you seeing a benefit? It was just to push an agenda through without questions, plain and simple.

An agreement was in place with the Iraqis for a withdrawal by 12/31/2011 anyway. I'm not unhappy he's pulling troops out. What would give you the idea that I want troops to remain? What disappoints me is he didn't tell the troops what a victory they achieved (despite his party's efforts and because that would give credit to the previous administration). He and the Democratic Congress didn't get the failure there that they wanted in 2006, so they diminish what the troops did there by not acknowledging the accomplishments, which were liberating a nation and instituting the only Democratic Muslim nation in the middle-east. Sometime it is all in what is not said. Listen to his speech, it's weak.

As for Afghanistan, I wish him luck. It will definitely be a hard row to hoe, due to the fact that they (the Taliban) operate from a "friendly" country. I do want a victory there as well, that would make me happy, and it wouldn't bother me at all if this president pulled it off.

Don't worry I firmly believe the Republicans made some huge mistakes over the last few years. That doesn't mean I'll follow this guy blindly. You need to stop giving any politicians slack, they are doing things now that will affect your grandchildren. Hope this answers your questions.

But you can talk about ours? That doesn't seem fair. We getyou stamp of disproval but others get a free pass? Equality seems to have a very unusual meaning for Democrats.

So you arebasically saying taht Democrats whinned for 8 years?

I don't need to say much, just read:

"When they talk about 50,000, that's a little higher number than I had anticipated," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said before a briefing at the White House on Thursday.

Other top Democrats who expressed concern about the troop levels were House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Charles Schumer, Sen. Patty Murray and Sen. Russell Feingold.

"The good news is that he has a plan and that obviously his election in no small measure was the result of the massive anti-war sentiment in the country and he understands that," said Leslie Cagan, co-founder and national coordinate of United for Justice and Peace. 

"The bad news from our perspective is it's going to take that long," she said. "We think the timeline could be a lot shorter. We're also troubled by the plan to leave literally tens of thousands of troops in Iraq."

Cagan said Obama should leave no troops in Iraq.

Link

The Democrats themselves are bitching about the idea. Funny how you didn't notice that.

Dude, it's very boring and insulting to have someone tell me not to do something theythemselves did for 8 years.

Jd, I know others on this site may quickly dump on him every chance they get.  But for me I can not stand a person who says/promises one thing knowing full well what he is saying is complete BS. 

I called Bush out on his creative budget numbers and deficit cutting plan that took effect four years after his departure from office.  I called Clinton out on his definition of "Sexual Relations".

I am just sick of this circle talk.  But BO takes the cake.  Everything coming out of his mouth is double talk.  From not knowing anything about Rev. Wright's views until his resent speech on no earmarks in this omnibus bill.

If you really think he has any intention of ever balancing the budget, I have a piece of beautiful land in Florida to sell you.

If the next four years is anything like the last 35 days, this guy will not get any breaks from me.

PS: I have no problem with him removing troops at this time, but his saying all combat troops are being pulled out is just a straight out changing of definition.  I have spent over twenty years in the military to know the reality of what goes on in country.

We have entered the new era of the Antonymical Presidency.  Just rename everything with its opposite meaning.  There's change you can believe in.

Now thats change I can believe is true.

gotta love words like that, but you shouldn't have defined it here because it deserves all of what little effort it may require from readers.

but since you did, might as well also provide examples:

a. "the patriot act"

b. "war on terror"

c. "no child left behind"

d. "department of homeland security"

LOL you funny guy

Don't forget the DRRD - Department of Redundancy Reduction Department.

We will not hear much about the body count in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is fecking dangerous. Journalists like reporting from dangerous places, but they like doing so while being completely safe. The ideal dangerous place is one under attack by Israel or the US because they rarely hurt journalists.

Afghanistan is a mountainous desert with few villages, terrible streets, no working mobile phone network, and all-in-all terrible living conditions.

Iraq is pretty much a place like the US or Europe. You have hotels, running cold and hot water, an excellent mobile phone network (I could speak with Dublin from the middle of the desert), excellent (and existing) streets, and fantastic food.

Reporting from Iraq is much more fun than reporting from Afghanistan. And public opinion is based on what reports the public hear, not what really happens. That is why few people care about Sudan (100,000/year victims) but the media cover daily any conflict between Israel and Gaza (1000/year). Who wants to live in a tent in the desert reporting about the war crimes of those who actually commit them? It's fecking dangerous. Those people kill you if you report that.

Journalists are scum. They make their money with the suffering of other people and they never care if they cause violence by reporting whatever nonsense made the most money at the time. (I have never seen a journalist apologise to Israeli victims of revenge attack because of the made-up Jenin "massacre".) Journalists take pictures of terrorists launching rockets because they think they are somehow exempt from the law that obligates other people (apparently) to report crimes to the authorities or try to stop them, not interview the criminals and make money with their story. But scum is scum.

I doubt that anyone will hear about the terrible situation in Afghanistan, about the terrible conditions for American soldiers, or about anything really bad; because journalists mainly report from places that are safe for journalists and about people who do not take revenge. The more bad news you hear about a place, the safer it is. I wasn't afraid in Iraq, not even in Kirkuk. But I wouldn't want to go to Afghanistan or Dafur.

dunno what is broadcast in ireland but abc, pbs and national geographic (possibly others i'm neglecting) have consistently provided us residents a view into the ongoing trainwreck that is afghanistan.  not an everyday thing admittedly but what i've seen and read has seemed responsible and objective.

last week pbs reported on winners of 2009's alfred i dupont/columbia university awards for outstanding journalism one of which was abc news nightline:

"Opening the program is the story behind a gripping combat report produced by ABC News Nightline and narrated by Brian Ross. Watch a video clip.

The Other War is based on field reporting by Sebastian Junger and Tim Hetherington, who were on assignment for Vanity Fair in northeast Afghanistan, a front that until recently has received far less press attention than the war in Iraq. Over a period of 15 months, Junger and Hetherington returned to Afghanistan repeatedly for long tours embedded with an American platoon pursuing Taliban and Al Qaeda militants.  Their video footage, shot in the remote Korengal Valley under the most dangerous circumstances, captures the intense day-to-day reality of waging this war – including extraordinary combat sequences.  “It was the worst combat I’ve ever experienced, by far,” Junger tells Woodruff.  “I feel like the combat footage we got was sort of emblematic of all combat.  It was so intense.  It was so up close.” 

here's a link to a video clip from national geograpic channel's documentary entitled 'inside the green berets; firebase cobra--the true cost of war".  like the previously cited report, this one was the work of journalists embedded for several months with the unit about which they reported. 

the la times regularly publishes first-hand reports from its correspondants in both afghanistan and pakistan. 

you may even remember one notable scum who made several trips to afghanistan following the soviet invasion. he's one of ju's favorite targets.  guy named dan rather.

we could hardly hear less than has been offered officially in iraq.

I fully do not expect to have a daily body count coming from Afghanistan, as the media did from Iraq for years.

Indeed.

Plus I will be surprised if several institutions were to compete in the field of making up "studies" about civilian casualties in Afghanistan.

Now that they will soon be able photograph the US soldiers caskets (with family permission) flying into Dover, I wonder if they will take advantage or forget about it to protect their guy.

Charles,

   To answer your statements.... Yes, i do beleive that mose Democrats were whinnig the past 8 years, I beleive in solution oriented discussions, not just calling out someone else for doing something wrong. If you want of example of that not working read up on the Kerry Campaign.

In your response to my questioning about the Withdrawl plan, you point to a comment by a congressional Democrat, again, not actually adressing the issue. Your issue is not with the plan, more with congressional democrats? If that is the case we agree on this one. I am really starting to get angry at congressional dems....acting like idiots.

Again, as I stated, I was not one of those people who just complained and complained about Bush. If I had issues with his policies, then I said it, but that was all. I believe I said that in my last post. I guess you can choose not to beleive me, but it is the truth.

My main point is that it seems like at least posters on this forum are resorting to the same "rip on Obama" tactics that they derided for the last 8 years just becasue it was "rip on Bush." All I am saying is step up to the plate and present something substanial, not just complaining.  It makes you look foolish.

The same was done with the Patriot Act post 9/11, and it was attempted with the Immigration Reform Act (luckily that one failed).

The bottom line is that both Democrats and Republicans use the same tactics to get what they want when they are in power.  All too often the people of this country are duped into believing the crap that we are told by the politicians and the media.  We all need to start questioning everything that our elected officials do and hold them to task when they do things that we disagree with.  I'm not saying that we need to write our representatives all them time, I have found that it doesn't work as all of my efforts were ignored in favor of the party line, but during election time when we can actually take people out of office.  We need to bring that 90+% incumbency rate down significantly to remind the officials who they actually work for, as it stands right now they only work for the party and NOT for the people.