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.
You know what’s better than the surge? Both democrats have plans that will drop the American death toll to zero and save the government nearly one trillion dollars a year.
Have a guess what their plans involve?
Did I miss something? People view things different at different times in life. I have second guesses myself a thousand times and I bet you have too.
The initial response is the only thing that matters to most of us. Also, had I been on a committee that opposed war but yet we were in the middle of a war, I would only give praise to our soliders it is the right thing to do. I would also ensure that while in war they have the funds to continue the war. It is not like they are coming home because I want them too. So exactly what is the point of this story?
“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.”
And what would you have had him say. He could not stop this war if he bolten himself to a tanker and neither could anyone else after giving the signature to go to war.
You people have too much technology in your hands, it is the worst thing in the world during a time of war and a pending election for a new president. We do not need to know every single thought, dream, candidates bathroom schedule, you get my point.
Is this a part of the tear down crew for Hillary. I do not see the discrepencies of her schedule listed, the Peter Paul vs Clinton case pending or the false records to the FEC. If you want to be fair to all candidates, then do it right.
Don’t forget John McCains borderline dementia or alheimzer episode yesterday.
Thank goodness for FOX news network! If it weren’t for your fair, and thought provoking coverage, I would not know the truth of what’s is going on. And, more importantly, we would still be in the dark about who Obama is. If people don’t want to know anything but someone’s personal agenda, they just need to stay tuned into CNN, because everytime I try to watch CNN, I have to switch to FOX to see what is really going on. A large part of the media is really letting us down at such an important time. Please continue to speak up on ALL the candidates. A lot of us really appreciate it.
What was the point of this article? Would the Fox News channel ever write an article underlying John McCain wavering on a political issue? No. You people are seriously partisan hacks. It amazes me you can write an article like this and think no one is going to call you on it. It looks like it was written by some hack at the RNC. There is nothing “new” in this article, it’s just a recycling of Republican talking points presented as fact.
All politicians are Liers but Obama is the bigest one.
FOXNEWS:
I really don’t see the American people allowing you to stay in business much longer. You are divisive, cunning and deceptive. You spread lies about your opponents and you incite racism. Barack Obama is a man of character and integrity. Yet, you are trying to destroy him and you are using the color of his skin to scare white voters. This is sinful.
NOT THIS TIME!
Should I stay or should I go now, if go there will be trouble, if I stay it will be double. Obama don’t have a clue.
FINALLY, the press is looking at Barack Obama! His Iraq war stance is not what he said it was, he lied to the media last week about never having heard his Pastor rant hate speech and he lied to the press about no one from his campaign speaking to Canada about NAFTA. Why are these facts not the lead story on EVERY newscast???
Of course he’s waivered…he doesn’t know what to do. Scary.
Vote Rebubican - less scary
Hillary has no more expereince than Obama, All she did was do what first lady normally do… pick flowers, schedule dinner, make plans for her husband. Sad thing she was home the nite Bill and Monica were having their affair…WOW, i sure dont trust Hillary to answer the phone at 3am! She mite not hear the phone ring..
If we can forgive Bill Clinton for disgracing us in the white house with Monica, then we can allow Obama to finish what he started without judging him for something HE DID NOT SAY…
PA has your back Obama!