Posted on 07/24/2008 4:50:16 PM PDT by SJackson
Barack Obama recently gave an address on the Iraq war. It was a bizarre speech, as if it had been written two years ago, when it would have made more sense. Liberals ought to hate the speech. It will make their side vulnerable to the common conservative charge that they ignore crucial facts in favor of manufacturing their own reality.
The crucial facts in this case – absent two years ago – which have been emphasized repeatedly in recent months even by such bibles of the left as The New York Times and the Washington Post, is that the reconstruction effort in Iraq has improved tremendously under General Petraeus, to the point where we are not only winning in Iraq but, some say, we may have already won.
Obama’s speech is a troubling example of ignoring everything that has happened for the better over the last 18 months. It is suggestive instead of a defeated nation that needs to immediately hop on the last helicopter out of Saigon.
The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee probably thinks the speech will win him points among the angry extremists that fortify his base (which it will), but it will hurt him among responsible, fair-minded liberals and especially among the moderates who will decide this election. It is a giant softball for John McCain and for the GOP to turn into ad spots. It plays right into McCain’s chief strength and against Obama’s chief liability: their divergent experience in foreign and security policy.
It was a bad political move for a candidate who is ahead in the polls.
There was so much in this speech that merits a response, but I would like to draw attention to its most fatal flaw, which apparently stills persists among the far left, which is actually where Barack Obama – ranked the most liberal member of the Senate by the non-partisan National Journal – sits on the ideological spectrum.
In his speech, Obama argued that the true battle against terror has always been, and remains, in Afghanistan, not Iraq. He framed the Iraq intervention as a total distraction from the real War on Terror, which resides in Afghanistan.
Yet again, this positively maddening assertion is being made by a leader of the American left. It is absolutely, unequivocally, a post-Iraq War invention. I plead with my liberal friends: If you don’t believe me, then remember that throughout the latter 1990’s, Bill Clinton’s State Department, headed by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, listed Iraq among the leading sponsors of terrorism. It did so officially in its Patterns of Global Terrorism report, which is the formal, annual assessment on global terrorism mandated by Congress beginning in 1979 with the passing of the Export Administration Act.
The final such report by the Clinton administration, in 2000, highlighted the seven leading terrorist governments: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, and Sudan. Afghanistan was not even on the list. These were the same seven nations identified in previous years, with Iraq and Iran singled out as the worst offenders (1999 index, 1999 overview). In fact, the 2000 report devoted more words (and terrorist crimes) to Iraq than any other nation.
From providing safe haven to Abu Nidal to attacking UN personnel…well, there isn’t room to go into all the details here, but they’re available at the State Department website (www.state.gov). But liberals should be forewarned that they will not like what they see, because it will force them to reevaluate some sacred cows produced for convenience in the era of hating George W. Bush, including those that reared their heads in Obama’s speech last week.
The fact is that the fight against global Islamic terror is exactly that – global. It must occur on many fronts. To allege that the fight was never in Iraq but always in Afghanistan is amazingly simplistic and obviously inaccurate, and would never be made by supposedly sophisticated people if not for their seething hatred of George W. Bush.
That hatred forces them into back-flips and contradictions in the ugly, purely emotional process of opposing everything the president does. Bush’s identification of Iraq as a prime terror threat – pursued only after the removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan – is 100 percent consistent with what the Clinton administration stated throughout its eight years.
Liberals must know this. If they do not – and if Barack Obama, their standard-bearer, does not – then this speaks very poorly, and quite frighteningly, of their ability to run American foreign policy over the next four years. The explanation for their thinking is either ignorance or a blinding hatred of George Bush that obliterates their ability to assess reality and the world.
Whatever the answer, Obama’s speech was not a good moment for anyone who hopes this man can lead America in this historic battle facing the civilized world.
High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
I certainly wouldn't suggest Obama is as knowledgeable as either Clinton or Albright. Which doesn't bode well for his ability to chart a successful course for our nation.
Oh well, guess I'll just HOPE for CHANGE.
This is a softball to McCain and I am praying his media people are producing a youtube video as we speak.
Um, you're being sarcastic, right?
Where was this speech made and where can I go get a copy?
Full Text of Obama's Iraq Speech (The Teleprompter Kid Shoots Himself in the Foot)
I know Obama is dumb when it comes to this stuff, but he’s not writing these speeches. What does this tell us about his “team” that is, in fact, responsible for this insanity? These aren’t his off-the-cuff stupidities. These are planned by his advisors. How scary is that?
But we know the answer to where “Team ObamaZ” would take us. They’ll take us right back to the old, failed policies. And we’ll have another 9/11, only worse. I believe that to be true.
I don’t want that.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Nobody is entitled to their own reality..........
The fact is that the fight against global Islamic terror is exactly that – global. It must occur on many fronts.
From Obama's speech at the Link....there is NO Recognition of that....only that we could have devoted our full force to Afghanistan rather than do anything ELSEWHERE ....like Iraq...or Libya...or North Korea...
The more this jerk speaks his nonsense, the more I think he wishes to cut off his own round ones. He seems to be doing the bidding the reverend Jackson would wish to do to him.
“Obama’s speech is a troubling example of ignoring everything that has happened for the better over the last 18 months.”
He does exactly what libs, Dims, and the flaky MSM do:
Speak with a reckless disregard for the Truth.
He's counting on a repeat - of the British and the Russian defeats in Afghanistan.
I just started reading World Was IV, and that is exactly the theme of the book and THE TRUTH of the conflict we're in.
And yet many ill informed will vote for this clown.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.