what does this mean for Obama if its true?

[CUDA]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/po ... 129150.htm

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence

thread title says it all. what does this mean if it's true and how will it hurt Obama if at all

[Dakatsu]

If it's true, then Obama is not a candidate for change, and would be worse than McCain.

Then again, its the New York Post - a tabloid owned by News Corp. I doubt it is truthful.

[Sergeant Thorne]

My first question would probably be: how does a \"weakened Bush administration\" hinder the progress of anything being done in Iraq? How, in regard to administration of the troops in Iraq, should the Bush administration be considered weak? Or confused?

Maybe I'm naive, but it seems to me that this is a particularly good time for Iraq, because there's pressure on the administration to make something of it so that they can hold their heads higher when their term is over. Sort of a second wind, with the end of the term, if not the occupation altogether, in sight. Whether that's giving the Bush administration enough credit or not, I think it has to be a factor.

[Lothar]

I doubt it is truthful.

There's some truth to it. Obama claims to have pushed the Iraqis to delay a "strategic framework agreement" until the next president enters office, but seems to think troop withdrawals are not a part of that. Iraqi foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari interpreted Obama's request as pertaining to troop withdrawals.

The most charitable interpretation is that Obama didn't realize troop withdrawals are a part of the SFA. This makes him guilty of ignorance, but not malice.

[Will Robinson]

I doubt it is truthful.

There's some truth to it. Obama claims to have pushed the Iraqis to delay a "strategic framework agreement" until the next president enters office, but seems to think troop withdrawals are not a part of that. Iraqi foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari interpreted Obama's request as pertaining to troop withdrawals.

The most charitable interpretation is that Obama didn't realize troop withdrawals are a part of the SFA. This makes him guilty of ignorance, but not malice.

Not to mention that he would be guilty of tampering with official foreign policy and that could send a mere mortal, or any republican, to jail.

The democrat party has never wanted success in Iraq, they bet their future on it being a big quagmire and of course Obama wants the troops to stay until he can bring them home.
No one will try to pursue this because it would be seen as a politically motivated investigation/prosecution....but by god if Sarah Palin ate an extra cheese burger on an official expense account there will be hell to pay!!!!

[woodchip]

Obama, if elected POTUS, stands to gain from troop withdrawels. As President, Obama would be able to say when he officially pulled the troops out, that because of him the Iraq war was really won. If troops had been pulled out earlier and insurgency flared up, then of course Obama would be faced with how to handle it. While the Dems. would have liked to of seen a Iraq failure while Bush was in office (who cares what damage it may have done to the US), they most certainly would not of liked the failure to be on their watch.

So while everything is looking peachy in Iraq, it is easy for Barrack to posture like a hawk. I wonder what Obama would be suggesting if things were going like they were 2 years ago? What Obama needs to focus on is Afghanistan as that is where the next presidents mettle will be tested.

[Grendel]

The democrat party has never wanted success in Iraq, they bet their future on it being a big quagmire and of course Obama wants the troops to stay until he can bring them home.

This is the most funny thing I've read here in a while !!

[Herculosis]

The democrat party has never wanted success in Iraq, they bet their future on it being a big quagmire and of course Obama wants the troops to stay until he can bring them home.

This is the most funny thing I've read here in a while !!

I don't know if I'd say that the whole party NEVER wanted success. But, they sure pushed the "war is lost" theme before the surge. Since then, I think Will's comments are right on. And, Obama loses points if troop withdrawal is already occurring, and he's not the guy that does it. There's not enough DIRECT evidence (yet, or maybe ever) to undeniably demonstrate he actively tried to hold things up, but it sure looks questionable to me.

[Ferno]

The democrat party has never wanted success in Iraq, they bet their future on it being a big quagmire and of course Obama wants the troops to stay until he can bring them home.

yea, because i'm sure all them big bad dems want as many troops to stay in iraq for tour after extended tour, to get blown up by IED's, to incur the wrath of all the local civilians, to then be denied benefits from the VA for when they come home injured.. oh wait.