Obama’s Opposition to Iraq War, Once Firm, Sometimes Has Wavered
By James Rosen
Barack Obama declared his opposition to the Iraq war early on — in a speech in Chicago in October 2002, some six months before the invasion began — but over the next five years, he has admitted having second thoughts about that early stand, even casting himself as a supporter of President Bush’s conduct of the war.
Speaking Wednesday in Fayetteville, N.C., Obama again said his opposition to the war has been unwavering.
“I am running for president because it’s time to turn the page of a failed ideology … so that we can make pragmatic judgments to keep our country safe,” he said. “That’s what I did when I stood up and opposed this war from the start.”
Yet Obama publicly acknowledged in his 2006 memoir, “The Audacity of Hope,” that he once harbored doubts about his initial anti-war posture. After watching the famous statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down by jubilant Iraqis and seeing President Bush declare the end of major combat operations aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, “I began to suspect that I might have been wrong,” Obama says in the book.
During the 2004 Democratic Party convention, Obama declined to criticize the party’s presidential nominee, Sen. John Kerry, for having voted for the war, saying: “What would I have done? I don’t know. What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made.”
The next day, Obama told the Chicago Tribune: “There’s not that much difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage.”
And that November, Obama echoed the president, telling PBS’ Charlie Rose: “Once we go in, then we’re committed.” Obama added: “We’ve got to do everything we can to stabilize the country to make it successful because we’ll have too much at stake in the Middle East.”
Obama’s comments on tactical adjustments in the war strategy haven’t always resembled the actual results. The troop buildup in Iraq in 2007 — much like the “surge” President Bush initiated in January of that year — offers an example. Once it was fully implemented, by last June, the surge helped dampen the sectarian violence in Baghdad, with casualties among U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians declining by some 60 percent.
Earlier, Obama had predicted a different result, telling Tim Russert on NBC News’ “Meet the Press”: “We cannot, through putting in more troops or maintaining the presence that we have, expect that the situation is going to improve.”
Obama did acknowledge the reductions in violence Wednesday. “Our troops, including so many from Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base, have done a brilliant, magnificent job under the most difficult of circumstances,” he said. “Yet, while we have a general who has used improved tactics to reduce violence — and General Petraeus deserves enormous credit for that — we still have the wrong strategy. … This is why the judgment that matters most on Iraq and on any decision to deploy military force is the judgment made first.”
In Obama’s reminders that he opposed the Iraq war in 2002, he contrasts his record with that of Hillary Clinton, who voted for the war.
Yet a comparison of all 85 votes the Senate has held on Iraq since Obama entered the chamber shows he and Clinton differed only once — when Obama voted to support the nomination of Gen. George Casey, the top commander in Iraq for nearly three years, to become the Army chief of staff.
Fox News is still in business? Why? What business?
So much for Obama’s infallible judgement. His one selling point for his campaign is he was against the war from the beginning. Once again when truth and Obama collide, Obama is shown to be the dishonest politician he is.
I am not sure why we are even having these discussions any longer. Mr. Obasma is like the tide, he comes and goes, seldom votes on anything in his seat in congress, changes his mind about every subject and now is bosting he will remove all troops from Iraq in 90 days or some totally unresponsible promise that he couldn’t accomplish even if he tried. This is a mad man that shouldn’t even be running for the President Of The United States. He has destroyed the Democratic party changes in November. I am 67 years of age, have been a union member all of my life and have not seen anything quite like this before. Yes we have had situation where the party got crossways with each other; but, this is turning into a race card with won’t be able to beat two pair.
FOX you never fail to disapoint me!!! Why have you choosen to personally attack Obama, yet ignore the other presidential candidates???
Oh fox. What happened to being fair and impartial? This is a weak article, this sensationalist spin.
Senator Obama needs to be brought up to speed on the war, national security, and foreign policy. The good news I think he is teachable. Hillary on the other hand is a dangerous person who will lead us down the road to socialism and eventual defeat. Hillary listens only to Hillary and that is a well known fact. She will stop at nothing to win and why I refer to her as the evil one.
This article is the propaganda untruth of Fox News who is owned by a small group of wealthy people that benefits greatly by confusing the poor. James Rosen, the writer is only a small pawn to their game. He keeps his job and psychological security that he is one class above the people he is trying to persuade. By using methods of pulling comments out of context and using history that has no relevance to his argument. I hope if you are reading this you can examine this article and see through this lie.
Obama’s Yo-Yo Iraq “Policy”
Definition of a yo-yo: “When thrown, the body of the yo-yo spins as the string unwinds”:
Hillary Clinton’s has wavered as well. Do an article on her.
Obama was against the war! There is nothing wrong with him re-examining his decision especially when he sees John Kerry, a senior senator, voting for the war and he sees the Iraqis’ excitement, but that is only a momentary re-examination!