Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsTuesday, July 22, 2008 12:52 PM CDT
Comments Comments (36) | E-mail this page E-mail this page | Print this page Print this page | Enlarge type Enlarge type | Reduce type Reduce type | Search archives Search archives | RSS RSS feeds | Add to My Yahoo! Add to My Yahoo!
Obama: Iraq now needs a political solution
By David Espo
Associated Press
Advertisement

AMMAN, Jordan -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Tuesday that security in Iraq has improved and that the United States urgently needs to turn its attention to Afghanistan. | Video | Photo gallery

“There is security progress, but now we need a political solution” in Iraq, Obama said in the first news conference of his highly publicized trip abroad. Afghanistan is now the “central front in the war against terrorism,” he added.

“The situation in Afghanistan is perilous and urgent,” he said. “We must act now to reverse a deteriorating situation.”

He reiterated his goal of withdrawing combat troops from Iraq within 16 months of becoming president. But he said he would consult with military commanders to determine how many troops to keep in the country to protect diplomatic and humanitarian operations, to train Iraqis and to conduct counterterrorism operations against al-Qaida in Iraq.

“My goal is to no longer have U.S. troops engaged in combat operations in Iraq,” he said.

Obama and his two traveling Senate companions, Democrat Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Republican Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, all emphasized at the news conference the need to turn U.S. attention to Afghanistan and to help Pakistan confront a growing terrorist presence within its borders.

Obama acknowledged that the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, does not want a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. combat forces.

“He wants to retain as much flexibility as possible,” Obama said. “What I emphasized to him was ... if I were in his shoes, I’d probably feel the same way. But my job as a candidate for president and a potential commander in chief extends beyond Iraq.” Obama said he also needs to take into account the security needs in Afghanistan, the views of the Iraqi government and the potential domestic uses for the money now being spent in Iraq.

Tucker Bounds, spokesman for Republican candidate John McCain, responded, “By admitting that his plan for withdrawal places him at odds with Gen. David Petraeus, Barack Obama has made clear that his goal remains unconditional withdrawal rather than securing the victory our troops have earned.”

Meantime in London on Tuesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Britain will begin a major troop withdrawal from Iraq in early 2009, if security continues to improve and work to train local security forces is completed. Britain currently has around 4,100 troops in Iraq, based mainly on the outskirts of Basra.

Brown told lawmakers Britain will keep current numbers in place for several months, but Britain’s role in Iraq will change next year from combat and military training to boosting the economy of the oil-rich southern region.

Obama arrived in Jordan after a tour of war zones in Afghanistan and Iraq. He stepped off his military aircraft carrying body armor, orange earplugs sticking out of his ears.

His joint news conference with Reed and Hagel was at the Amman Citadel, an ancient hilltop ruin that bears evidence of settlements dating to 2000 B.C. The skyline of modern-day Amman, cement dwellings and the occasional mosque, formed a made-for-television backdrop.

Later, he was scheduled to have talks with Jordan’s King Abdullah.

Before he left Iraq, Obama traveled to a former hotbed of the Sunni insurgency for talks Tuesday with tribal leaders who joined the fight against al-Qaida in Iraq and now seek a deeper role in Iraq’s political future.

Obama met leaders of the so-called Awakening Council movement in Ramadi, one of the main cities of the western Anbar Province where al-Qaida once had the upper hand against embattled U.S. and Iraqi troops.

Tribal sheiks last year began an uprising against insurgents that is credited with uprooting extremist strongholds and helping bring violence around Iraq to its lowest levels in four years.

The meetings came near the end of Obama’s two-day stop in Iraq, where he held discussions with Iraqi leaders on possible troops withdrawal initiatives and was briefed by top U.S. military commanders.

Iraq was the third leg of a tour that’s included Kuwait and Afghanistan. From Jordan, his trip moves on to Israel and Europe.

He leaves Iraq with a possible political boost: Iraqi backing for his hope of withdraw U.S. combat troops by 2010.

Iraqi leaders on Monday stopped short of giving specific timetables or endorsing Obama’s proposal to withdraw combat troops within 16 months if he wins the presidency. But their comments fit roughly into Obama’s campaign pledge.

The Iraqi government appears increasingly confident to press for timeframes as violence drops and Iraqi security forces expand their roles alongside the 147,000 U.S. soldiers in the country.

“We are hoping that in 2010 that combat troops will withdraw from Iraq,” the government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said Monday after Obama met with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Obama released a statement late Monday noting that Iraqis want an “aspirational timeline, with a clear date,” for the departure of U.S. combat forces.

“They do not want an open-ended presence of U.S. combat forces. The prime minister said that now is an appropriate time to start to plan for the reorganization of our troops in Iraq — including their numbers and missions. He stated his hope that U.S. combat forces could be out of Iraq in 2010,” Obama said in a joint statement with Hagel and Reed.

The senators said that while there has been some “forward movement” on political progress, reconciliation and economic development, there has not been “nearly enough to bring lasting stability to Iraq.”
Take a look
Presidential candidate Barack Obama, left, and top U.S. military commander in Iraq Gen. David Petraeus take a helicopter ride over Baghdad on Monday. (AP Photo/Ssg. Lorie Jewell, HO)
Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 36 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

91241 wrote on Jul 23, 2008 4:06 PM:

" Noober I agree with you 100% Change!!!! Change!!!! Change!!!! "TO WHAT"
I am still waiting for anyone to give me just one reason why I would want to vote for Obama.
2tired maybe you can wake up from your stupid comment and give me a reason?
It is very sad when such a large amount of citizens are getting their information and talking points from the many, many yapping Chihuahuas leading our nation. "

DT wrote on Jul 23, 2008 8:55 AM:

" ktlin, I do not support McCain but he did call for more troops within months of the invasion. He also redoubled that call in early 2007 before the administration agreed and when Obama was introducing his Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007. McCain was not a johnny come lately to the surge as you have described him. "

ktlin wrote on Jul 23, 2008 7:46 AM:

" to Annienap: If Obama is so incompetent why does he think of the solutions first and the others follow through? Now McCain wants to play the if game. For some reason he wants Obama to say the surge worked. Obama has said it helped reduce violence. What does work mean when McCain doesn't even want to say we are done there? And if McCain is so great if you want to play the if game, why did he not suggest the surge about 5 or so years earlier when people kept saying more troops, more troops. And they kept saying no no no. That is all the surge was. It was suggested long before McCain called it a surge by the way. After one situation that we cleared an area, moved on and then the enemy went back to that area, someone should have asked for a surge. How many years did it take McCain to ask for this? If we had had a surge immediately we may have lost a lot less troops. If it was only the surge that accounts for the success. Was it? "

DT wrote on Jul 23, 2008 7:09 AM:

" Hoping is not declaring. And the only reason we're nearing a point for a political solution is because of the military steps which Obama opposed. "

Annienap wrote on Jul 23, 2008 1:20 AM:

" Yes, Iraq needs a political solution, Mr. Obama, but that political solution is NOT YOU! This man does not have a clue about the military OR about how to be president of the U.S. As a Democrat, I am NOT voting for Chicago politics to be the head of the U.S. government. For me, it's either an Independent or McCain and McCain scares the hell out of me, too. However, I will vote for McCain IF my vote will help to keep Obama OUT of the White House. "

ES wrote on Jul 22, 2008 2:42 PM:

" DT, he got them to declare a time to release. Give it up, he did well and you dang neocons cannot handle it. Come on say, President Obama. Come on big boy, say it. "

ktlin wrote on Jul 22, 2008 12:34 PM:

" UPdate: On tv, the GOP says now we have to stay in Iraq until the Iraqi army can support itself. Wonder how many years. I know it will be over 2. And if we left that wouldn't be a surrender would it? To who?Or admitting defeat to what? The surge took care of the other problem didn't it? And I always have wondered why only 1 person thought about a surge. What were the generals doing and the president and all the other people involved? I am sure glad McCain was in the senate to offer that wonderful bit of strategy since noone else had the foresight or knowledge to think of it. If it hadn't worked McCain just couldn't have ran for president. What was he running on in 2000 again? I guess being a pow. Haven't heard anything else. "

ktlin wrote on Jul 22, 2008 12:24 PM:

" I think anyone who refers to Obama as the Messiah has a few problems that an election won't cure. Think about if he is or if he isn't, where does that leave you? McCain says he knows how to win wars and we have been successful in Iraq. However, he is getting tangled up in his own rhetoric because today he said if we leave Iraq starting in next January we will be surrendering. Why surrender when we've won. Why stay when we've won? If we haven't won and can't leave yet for at least the next 2 years, does McCain know how to win or what winning is and have we even won yet. If not how can he say the surge has been successful if we haven't really won yet. Doubletalk on the straight talk express? "

DT wrote on Jul 22, 2008 12:05 PM:

" Obama's current position is little different from what Bush said years ago. We'll get out troops out when it makes sense to do so. And he's already started drawing down troop levels. None of this was Obams's idea but he seems to be getting credit for it. "

Kathy wrote on Jul 22, 2008 11:02 AM:

" Questions to Obama and the stuttering begins!! Hood to White House? Not in my lifetime. "

Noober wrote on Jul 22, 2008 9:59 AM:

" Vote Bob Barr. He stands for real change, plus his name is fun to say . "

The other Dave wrote on Jul 22, 2008 9:47 AM:

" Wait one minute. This article says that there is a former hotbed in Iraq. Why is it a FORMER hotbed. Are all of the evildoers at the Dark Knight movie? Maybe they moved to Orlando Drive. Why is it FORMER. Maybe because of the surge????? Score 1 for Bush.

Also, the article mentions tribal leaders in Iraq fighting Al-Qaida in Iraq. I thought OCarter said that Al-Qaida was only in Afghanistan. You mean that the terrorists responsible for 9/11 were and are in Iraq too. Score 2 for Bush.

I could go on but you get my point. This is a great article. It shows how many lies were spread by the news and the democrats for so many years. And OCarter never knew any of it because he is on the democrat kool-aid. Maybe Bush and MCCain do know something after all. "

grizzly77 wrote on Jul 22, 2008 2:23 AM:

" what was his purpose here. was he telling innocent iraqi families that when i'm elected prepare to be on your own? I guess he picks and chooses which lives are important. I'm mean face it Chicago looks like a warzone. Obama and his cronies Daley and blago want to call in the national guard to fix it! So hows this lunatic gonna fix things in the middle east!!!!!!!! "

Dave wrote on Jul 21, 2008 8:55 PM:

" Depending on major networks for news leaves one misinformed. They're selling the sizzle.
I just read that Henry Kessinger said "It's not a matter of what is true that counts but a matter of what is perceived to be true."
Another thing. Bob Barr is pulling as much as 11% of the vote in some states. Chuck Baldwin will be on the ballot in every state. How many of you all know who they are or have heard their names on the major networks? "

Two Cents wrote on Jul 21, 2008 8:29 PM:

" It will be interesting to hear what Obama has to say after his trip to Iraq. I hope he will be fair and unbiased in his comments even though he has been totally opposed to the war and surge from the onset. It is good that he is there and seeing for himself what kind of progress has been made. "

ES wrote on Jul 21, 2008 6:03 PM:

" dorf4me, I have been EXTREMELY critical of the Governor; and as a teacher watching my fellow educators and my pension being squandered by Mod Rod, I have been very disappointed and even horrified by his careless and thoughtless spending and foolishness. So try again, pal. Your turn, show some criticism of one of your neocons. I am sure you cannot. "

mdorf4 wrote on Jul 21, 2008 3:55 PM:

" ES
How many republicans are you going to vote for? Don't be a hypocrite about voting party politics. I have never seen you disagree with criticize anything the democrats say or do. "

mdorf4 wrote on Jul 21, 2008 2:48 PM:

" ES
Just because only 21% support GWB, doesn't mean only 21% favor Republicans. I gaurantee you McCain will get more than 21% of the vote. Is Blago THE Democratic party? What's his approval rating? "

The Peanut Gallery wrote on Jul 21, 2008 1:51 PM:

" to who ES wrote on Jul 21, 2008 9:59 AM:

" The neocon Republicans are a joke. Face it, if he doesn't go to Iraq: you whine he does not know what he is talking about. If he does go and looks at the situation and ADJUSTS his policies, you whine that he flip flops ... "

And you mush-head libs are nothing if not predictable. He announces his policy and THEN travels to talk to the ground commanders. And then you fools complain that people note that he has done things precisely BACKWARDS. Go aheand and offer more sputters. It's another thing we can predict about you. "

ES wrote on Jul 21, 2008 1:50 PM:

" BJR, glad to provide humor, but I think anyone who supports Bush's policies is not laughable: he/she is frightening and foolish. You can take your pick, I suppose. And what is all this Kool-Aid junk mean? I drink water, diet dew, and beer. I think you drink wine (get it?). I gave you a choice: you could be a party-folower (and a blind one at that) or you could have some problems with ethnic issues. Your choice. And speaking of flipping, McCain came out against the way Bush was handling the war when we first went in, and now he is embracing it. BJR, as pointed out so many times on these blogs, if you are so gung-ho, go fight. If not, admit your boys blew it. "

Super Grover wrote on Jul 21, 2008 12:59 PM:

" Are you suprised he opposed ousting President Hussein ??
He IS a Hussein !!!!!

Christians and Jews are in a lot of trouble if he is elected................. "

9%er wrote on Jul 21, 2008 12:46 PM:

" According to the numbers Obama should win (oh well, Italy survived Mussilini)........but should McCain win what will all the goofy crazy leftists on the blogs do? Gosh darn but they will be mad. "

BJR wrote on Jul 21, 2008 12:26 PM:

" ES, your posts are laughable at best. You always elude to the fact that if you aren't worshipping the Messiah, you are a racist. BHO is a flipflopper. In 2004, he stated clearly his position on Iraq was in line with GWB. But, when it started to become apparent that the easiest way to the Dem nomination was an anti-war platform, he jumped all over it. Now that he could get elected (God help us) he realizes that he can't just pull every one out right now. Even his campaign is leaking some troops may need to stay behind. Seriously, put down the liberal BHO kool-aid and educate yourself. "

bottleneck wrote on Jul 21, 2008 11:56 AM:

" This headline should read as follows: "Obama Caving In to Global Military-State, One-World Government Plan for Endless Wars"

Oliver "

Grandma of Two wrote on Jul 21, 2008 11:00 AM:

" I won't profess to understand what all is going on in Iraq/Afganistan. However, I believe what Obama wants is a timetable for when these countries can stand on their own two feet. In the meantime, based on GAO reports, the USA is handing out blank checks to contractors (to the tune of alot of OUR money) with no explanation of how the money was spent. I believe in helping "rebuild", however, I don't believe the construction of an Olympic size swimming pool was a "rebuild". Why would the countries try to push for independence when another country is willing to give out blank checks? It's reassuring that Iraq is looking for a pull-out schedule, since they seem to be doing better with the high price of fuel. "

ES wrote on Jul 21, 2008 9:59 AM:

" The neocon Republicans are a joke. Face it, if he doesn't go to Iraq: you whine he does not know what he is talking about. If he does go and looks at the situation and ADJUSTS his policies, you whine that he flip flops. That is so closed-minded. In the meantime, you think Bush who skipped out of a war knows better or McCain who spent a war in a prison camp knows better. Huh? And besides, do we need to take advice from guys who were a part of a war that we so totally lost? Admit you either do not like democrats and you vote straight party politics or you do not like Obama for some othe reasons (gosh, I wonder what it could be: I just can't put my finger on it) and move on and vote with 21% that think the Republicans are right and prepare for President Obama. "

The Peanut Gallery wrote on Jul 21, 2008 9:15 AM:

" Why did he go? He has already said that he is going to order withdrawal within 16 months of his inaguration. Nothing that the ground commanders say can change that. Accordingly, the trip was for naught. "

Josh wrote on Jul 21, 2008 9:12 AM:

" Iraqi officials can press Obama all they want; he has no long-term vision. He wants Change, but what kind of change? No specifics have been forthcoming. He's totally focused on Afghanistan and will ignore Iraq. He wants to be the hero that stops Osama and will let Iraq and Iran continue to be terrorist nations. "

Cthulhu wrote on Jul 21, 2008 9:01 AM:

" "What - me worry?" Alfred E. Obama "

republicrat wrote on Jul 21, 2008 8:28 AM:

" To floyd:
Right, because what we need is more of someone who's too proud to change their tune, no matter how wrong they (and the world) find out they are. "

Noober wrote on Jul 21, 2008 8:15 AM:

" Obama will tell the Iraq officials he represents CHANGE. When they ask what kind of change, he will reply " The Good kind". That should give them all confidence. "

2tired wrote on Jul 21, 2008 7:25 AM:

" I not an Obama fan, but no clue? If your comparing him to the current person in charge he's a genious. Talk about not having a clue. "

Meh wrote on Jul 21, 2008 7:03 AM:

" Occam, its been obvious to everyone ...except Bush. Compared to what we have now, it IS bold policy. "

floyd wrote on Jul 21, 2008 6:14 AM:

" Maybe Bozo Obama should grab a gun and lead the troops! I'm sure next he'll be teaching strategies at all the military academies. He believes in change all right. He changes his tune daily! "

cats55ire wrote on Jul 21, 2008 4:29 AM:

" OK then . . . .

He's stating the obvious--DAH!!!!!!!!! "

Occam wrote on Jul 20, 2008 8:09 PM:

" Restating what has been obvious for months and claiming it as his own bold policy. This guy has no clue. That aside, isn't he just wonderful? "
Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Lee Enterprises Customer Service | 301 W. Washington St., PO Box 2907, Bloomington, IL 61701-2907 | Ph. 309-829-9000 | 800-747-7323
Copyright © 2008, Pantagraph Publishing Co. and Lee Enterprises. All rights reserved. | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy