Iraqi PM supports Obama's withdrawal plan

[TexasTiger 13,053]

Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan: report

Sat Jul 19, 2008 7:38am EDT

BERLIN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

It is the first time he has backed the withdrawal timetable put forward by Obama, who is visiting Afghanistan and us set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East.

Obama has called for a shift away from a "single-minded" focus on Iraq and wants to pull out troops within 16 months, instead adding U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan.

Asked if he supported Obama's ideas more than those of John McCain, Republican presidential hopeful, Maliki said he did not want to recommend who people should vote for.

"Whoever is thinking about the shorter term is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems."

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidate...198009020080719

[RunInRed 16,497]

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told a German magazine that he supports Barack Obama’s plan to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.

“U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes,” al-Maliki told Der Spiegel. He said he wants U.S. troops to leave “as soon as possible.”

The apparent endorsement of a cornerstone of Obama’s foreign policy is a big boost for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee ahead of his scheduled meeting with al-Maliki. Obama, who is touring both Afghanistan and Iraq for the first time since becoming a presidential candidate, arrived Saturday in Afghanistan, where he is meeting with U.S. troops.

“Senator Obama welcomes Prime Minister Maliki’s support for a 16 month timeline for the redeployment of U.S combat brigades,” Obama foreign policy adviser Susan Rice said in a statement Saturday. “This presents an important opportunity to transition to Iraqi responsibility, while restoring our military and increasing our commitment to finish the fight in Afghanistan.”

Al-Maliki said for the first time earlier this month that the U.S. military should work toward a timetable for withdrawal — something President Bush and Obama’s rival John McCain oppose. The White House also reported Friday that Iraq and the United States are discussing a “general time horizon” for reductions in troop levels.

Both developments gave Obama fuel in his argument that U.S. involvement in Iraq soon must draw to a close. But al-Maliki’s comments to Der Spiegel seemingly were the deepest the foreign leader has waded into the tense foreign policy debate between the two major presidential candidates.

Al-Maliki told the magazine that his comments were “by no means an election endorsement.”

But he seemed to refer disparagingly to McCain when he said “short time periods” in Iraq are more “realistic,” while “artificially prolonging the tenure of U.S. troops in Iraq would cause problems.”

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/19/ma...awal-timetable/

[bigsixfive 328]

Which plan would that be?

Barack's many positions on Iraq.

[RunInRed 16,497]

If you want to play that game...

[RunInRed 16,497]

And it gets better...

White House sends press corps al-Maliki praise for Obama plan

Posted: 05:31 PM ET

From CNN Correspondent Kathleen Koch

An embarrassing slip up for the White House press office Saturday, when an aide hit the wrong button and mistakenly sent to the news media a Reuters article saying Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki backs presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's troop withdrawal plan.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel says, "It was a mistake. Clips list for staff was supposed to be the addressee."

The Obama campaign quickly took advantage of the mistake, forwarding an ABC report detailing the incident to its press list.

This is not the first time the White House has emailed in error. But its timing is particularly embarrassing as the Bush administration's recent agreement with al-Maliki on a "general time horizon" for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq is being cited by some as resembling Obama's proposal that U.S. forces should leave within 16 months.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

[tiger88 934]

Maliki knows he will need tropps there longer. He is playing a political game to appease certain factions in his country. American tropps will be there for longer than 16 months no matter who says what. jmo.

Hey, lets let arab leaders determine american policy and help us decide who to elect for president, not.

[autigeremt 6,719]

The Obama dream is for America to become a member of a global government, so it's only right for a foreign leader to dictate policy for us.

The United States as we have known it to be may very well be on the verge of a non-hostile takeover from within.

Now red........your turn.

[Tigermike 3,063]

If you want to play that game...

Why don't you just play the truth game?

Iraqi PM disputes report on withdrawal plan

(CNN) -- A German magazine quoted Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki as saying that he backed a proposal by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.

Nuri al-Maliki told Der Spiegel that he favors a "limited" tenure for coalition troops in Iraq.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months," he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.

"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes," he said.

But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks "were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately."

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush.

In the magazine interview, Al-Maliki said his remarks did not indicate that he was endorsing Obama over presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain.

"Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited," he said.

"Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic," al-Maliki said.

The interview's publication came one day after the White House said President Bush and al-Maliki had agreed to include a "general time horizon" in talks about reducing American combat forces and transferring Iraqi security control across the country.

The Bush administration has steadfastly refused to consider a "timetable" for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

In a statement issued Friday after a conversation between Bush and al-Maliki by closed-circuit television, the White House said that conditions in Iraq would dictate the pace of the negotiations and not "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

The two men "agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal," the White House said.

In an interview to air Sunday on "Late Edition," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that "those goals are being achieved now, as we speak. And so, it's not at all unusual to start to think that there is a horizon out there, in the not too distant future, in which the roles and responsibilities of the U.S. forces are going to change dramatically and those of the Iraqi forces are going to become dominant."

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said al-Maliki had made it clear that such decisions will be based on continuing positive developments.

"It is our shared view that should the recent security gains continue, we will be able to meet our joint aspirational time horizons," he said.

The prime minister's remarks emerged as Obama visited Kuwait and Afghanistan before embarking on a tour of the Middle East and Europe to boost his foreign policy credentials. He also plans to visit Iraq.

The Democratic candidate says he supports a phased withdrawal of troops, promising to remove all combat brigades from Iraq within 16 months of taking office if he becomes president.

McCain does not think American troops should return to the United States until Iraqi forces are capable of maintaining a safe, democratic state.

He has been a strong advocate of the 2007 "surge" to escalate U.S. troop levels and says troops should stay in Iraq as long as needed.

McCain says Obama is wrong for opposing the increased troop presence, and Obama says McCain's judgment is flawed. (And Obama will be changing his opinion tomorrow or the next day or sometime in the very near future. And when he does he will then be saying that was what he was saying all along.)

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/19/...tion=cnn_latest

[autigeremt 6,719]

Uhhhhh Ohhhhhhh...... Obama camp will have to retract their pre-eruption of "Look at Us".....

What a joke!

[autigeremt 6,719]

CNN has reported that the Iraqi Prime Minister was mis-translated.

(CNN) -- A German magazine quoted Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki as saying that he backed a proposal by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.

Nuri al-Maliki told Der Spiegel that he favors a "limited" tenure for coalition troops in Iraq.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months," he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.

"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes," he said.

But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks "were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately."

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush.

In the magazine interview, Al-Maliki said his remarks did not indicate that he was endorsing Obama over presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain.

"Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited," he said.

"Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic," al-Maliki said.

The interview's publication came one day after the White House said President Bush and al-Maliki had agreed to include a "general time horizon" in talks about reducing American combat forces and transferring Iraqi security control across the country.

The Bush administration has steadfastly refused to consider a "timetable" for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

In a statement issued Friday after a conversation between Bush and al-Maliki by closed-circuit television, the White House said that conditions in Iraq would dictate the pace of the negotiations and not "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

Don't Miss

U.S., Iraq see 'time horizon' for withdrawal

British PM: 'No timetable on Iraq troop cuts'

Obama makes first trip to Afghanistan

Sunni Arab bloc rejoins Iraqi Cabinet

The two men "agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal," the White House said.

In an interview to air Sunday on "Late Edition," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that "those goals are being achieved now, as we speak. And so, it's not at all unusual to start to think that there is a horizon out there, in the not too distant future, in which the roles and responsibilities of the U.S. forces are going to change dramatically and those of the Iraqi forces are going to become dominant."

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said al-Maliki had made it clear that such decisions will be based on continuing positive developments.

"It is our shared view that should the recent security gains continue, we will be able to meet our joint aspirational time horizons," he said.

The prime minister's remarks emerged as Obama visited Kuwait and Afghanistan before embarking on a tour of the Middle East and Europe to boost his foreign policy credentials. He also plans to visit Iraq.

The Democratic candidate says he supports a phased withdrawal of troops, promising to remove all combat brigades from Iraq within 16 months of taking office if he becomes president.

McCain does not think American troops should return to the United States until Iraqi forces are capable of maintaining a safe, democratic state.

He has been a strong advocate of the 2007 "surge" to escalate U.S. troop levels and says troops should stay in Iraq as long as needed.

McCain says Obama is wrong for opposing the increased troop presence, and Obama says McCain's judgment is flawed.

Sorry to steal your glory, but it's not that easy in politics.

[rexbo 104]

The problem with NObama is that he wanted to withdraw when it would have insured defeat. He then opposed the surge plan by Gen Patraeus. Now that his cut-and-run strategy isn't so harmful due to the current policies of George Bush, and the sacrifices made by our soldiers; you believe his 'grand strategy' is exactly what Iraq wants and needs? If we had listened to NObama a year ago Iraq would be in complete chaos and the US would be retreating further every day at the hands of the Islamic Fascists.

[Tiger Al 0]

al Maliki is saying the misunderstanding is his possible perceived endorsement of Obama for president, not Obama's withdrawal plan. I don't think anyone here is touting al Maliki's remarks as being an endorsement for Obama.

[RunInRed 16,497]

al Maliki is saying the misunderstanding is his possible perceived endorsement of Obama for president, not Obama's withdrawal plan. I don't think anyone here is touting al Maliki's remarks as being an endorsement for Obama.

exactly

[tiger88 934]

"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal,with the possibility for slight changes ," he said.

Who wouldn't want all the troops home that quickly if it were the right thing to do? It's not going to happen, but it is a good theory. Obama will not be able to stick to his plan because it is an ignorant plan made without knowledge.

[Tiger Al 0]

"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal,with the possibility for slight changes ," he said.

Who wouldn't want all the troops home that quickly if it were the right thing to do? It's not going to happen, but it is a good theory. Obama will not be able to stick to his plan because it is an ignorant plan made without knowledge.

Yet, the leader of Iraq, who is not just on the ground but LIVES on the ground agrees, with his plan. You emphasize the part about "slight changes" as if that means longer than 16 months when it could just as easily mean 14 months.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration is moving towards the position Obama holds except they have coined the phrase "time horizon," the difference being in name only.

[RunInRed 16,497]

Meanwhile, the Bush administration is moving towards the position Obama holds except they have coined the phrase "time horizon," the difference being in name only.

This might be the biggest irony of all...and has really been under reported.

The same thing is happening on the economic side - once a "free market" adminstration, now can't wait to jump in and prop up fannie and freddie and preach for the need for more government intervention in our markets.

[tiger88 934]

"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal,with the possibility for slight changes ," he said.

Who wouldn't want all the troops home that quickly if it were the right thing to do? It's not going to happen, but it is a good theory. Obama will not be able to stick to his plan because it is an ignorant plan made without knowledge.

Yet, the leader of Iraq, who is not just on the ground but LIVES on the ground agrees, with his plan. You emphasize the part about "slight changes" as if that means longer than 16 months when it could just as easily mean 14 months.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration is moving towards the position Obama holds except they have coined the phrase "time horizon," the difference being in name only.

They are moving towards "obama's" position because the surge is working. Obama's position will not be the path taken but looks a lot better now that the surge is working. The surge he didn't want. His position was idiotic when he first stated it but now that the measures he didn't want are taking effect, his position is getting better. If you can pull some sort of twisted mental victory out of that, go for it.

[RunInRed 16,497]

More Iraqi support for Obama's plan:

Iraq Points to Pullout by 2010

Senior Official Is Second in Recent Days to Back Timetable Similar to Obama's

By Sudarsan Raghavan and Dan Eggen

Washington Post Foreign Service

Tuesday, July 22, 2008; A01

BAGHDAD, July 21 -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama conferred with senior Iraqi leaders, U.S. officials and military commanders Monday, as a spokesman for the Iraqi government declared that it would like U.S. combat forces to complete their withdrawal in 2010.

The comments by spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh mark the second time in recent days that a senior Iraqi has endorsed a timetable for U.S. withdrawal that is roughly similar to the one advocated by Obama. Dabbagh suggested a combat force pullout could be completed by the end of 2010, which would be about seven months longer than Obama's 16-month formulation.

Dabbagh made the statement following Obama's meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has faced pressure from the White House in recent days to clarify published comments that he supported Obama's 16-month plan.

Dabbagh declared that his government was working "on a real timetable which Iraqis set" and the 2010 deadline was "an Iraqi vision."

"We can't give any schedules or dates, but the Iraqi government sees the suitable date for withdrawal of the U.S. forces is by the end of 2010," Dabbagh told reporters.

The White House responded quickly to Dabbagh's remarks, which along with Maliki's earlier comments have been a thorny political problem for an administration that has opposed attaching firm dates to troop withdrawals as it negotiates the future U.S.-Iraqi relationship.

"We don't think that talking about specific negotiating tactics or your negotiating position in the press is the best way to negotiate a deal," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said, suggesting that Dabbagh was responding to domestic pressure.

Obama's visit comes at a time when American troops levels, the timing of withdrawal and overall U.S.-Iraq strategy have become central issues in the U.S. presidential campaign, as well as in Iraqi politics.

Dabbagh said Maliki did not discuss troop withdrawals with his visitor. "Senator Barack Obama is a candidate, and we are talking to the administration which is in power," he said. But in many ways -- from the red carpet rolled out at Maliki's residence to Obama's seat of honor next to Maliki during formal consultations -- he was treated like a visiting head of state.

The White House said Friday that Maliki and President Bush had reached an agreement to set a "time horizon" for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops. But administration officials have steadfastly declined to indicate what that time horizon might be, saying only that it will be based on security conditions on the ground.

Perino said Monday that an agreement with "an aspirational time horizon" could include dates of when Iraqi security forces should be able to take control of given provinces. At the same time, Perino said: "It will not have any discussion about troop levels. The next commander-in-chief is going to have to make those decisions."

U.S. officials have emphasized in recent days that the security gains in Iraq are reversible. "I think that they think they've done very well over this past year," Perino said of the Iraqis. ". . . But they have got a long ways to go and I think that they recognize that, they know that the American troops have been critical to helping them get where they are."

Over the weekend, Maliki appeared to support Obama's time frame in an interview published by the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel. After the interview began generating headlines Saturday, officials at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad contacted Maliki's office to express concern and seek clarification on the remarks, according to White House spokesman Scott Stanzel.

Later in the day, the U.S. military distributed to media organizations a statement by Dabbagh saying that Maliki's comments, which were translated from Arabic by his own office, had been "misunderstood and mistranslated." It did not cite specific comments.

But by Monday, Maliki's office had posted on its Web site the Arabic version of the Der Spiegal interview. It was clear that Maliki, without prompting, expressed support for Obama's position.

"Obama's remarks that, if he takes office, he would withdraw the forces within 16 months, we think that this period might increase or decrease a little, but that it might be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq," Maliki said, according to a translation by The Washington Post.

"Obama is closer to Iraqi opinion on the issue of withdrawal of U.S. forces," said Ali al-Adeeb, a top official in Maliki's Dawa Party. "We don't know him personally, but we like his opinion and his calls to set a timetable to withdraw forces."

The presumptive Democratic presidential candidate arrived in Iraq on Monday morning, traveling as part of a congressional delegation that includes Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.), both critics of the war.

The U.S. delegation's first stop in Iraq was the southern city of Basra, where the Iraqi army -- with support from British and U.S. troops -- recently wrested control from extremist Shiite militias. The senators did not venture into the city center, where about 30,000 Iraqi soldiers patrol the streets.

Instead, they remained at the Basra base for about three hours, receiving what Maj. Tom Holloway, a British military spokesman, called a "situational update," from British, Iraqi and U.S. military commanders.

Gen. Muhammad Jawad Huweidy, the top Iraqi military commander in Basra province, said Obama did not discuss troop withdrawals or Iraqi troop readiness, instead focusing on Basra's economic condition.

In Baghdad, a red carpet with yellow trim was unfurled at 1:50 p.m. outside Maliki's residence.

Ten minutes later, the senators and their entourages arrived, accompanied by U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker and David M. Satterfield, the State Department's Iraq coordinator. After meeting for nearly an hour with Maliki, Obama declined to say what they discussed.

Obama's convoy arrived next at the residence of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. President Talabani, chief of staff Naseer al-Ani and two other senior advisers were waiting to greet Obama.

After that meeting, the delegation visited with Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi. They discussed Iraq's political and security conditions, displaced Iraqis and the readiness of Iraqi forces in the event U.S. troops withdraw, according to a statement from Hashimi's office.

Members of Obama's party later said he suggested in the meeting that to build on the reduction in violence and help Iraqis prepare to increase their responsibilities, the United States needs to responsibly remove its combat brigades and leave no permanent bases. Obama also expressed support for giving U.S. troops immunity from Iraqi prosecution while they are in Iraq.

The delegation also met Adel Abdul Mahdi, the Shiite vice president. Obama later toured the U.S. military hospital inside the Green Zone and took a helicopter over Baghdad with U.S. commander Gen. David H. Petraeus, with whom he was to dine.

The delegation began its trip with two days in Afghanistan, then flew to Kuwait.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2001416_pf.html

[WinCrimson 61]

I hope you guys are watching as our national news media refuses to state that the Iraqi P.M. endorsed the Obama 16-month withdrawal time frame even though that's exactly what happened.

What should be the death knell for the crumbling McCain candidacy remains propped up by our broken media's refusal to report factually.

Facts:

Obama -- We should set a 16 month time frame to withdraw troops from Iraq

McCain -- No time frame as you can "walk through the streets of Baghdad freely"

Iraq P.M. Maliki -- American troops should withdraw by 2010 (16 month timeframe from January)

News Media -- *crickets*

Anyone want to guess the lead story blaring everywhere if the Iraqi P.M. endorsed John McCain's position? I realize Brad and Angelina had a kid and that a new Batman movie is out, though...

They're terrified the Hannity brigade will call them LIBRULS so they refuse to report basic facts. Unreal. If they weren't propping up McCain, Obama would win 40 states.

[RunInRed 16,497]

No worries WinCrimson - most Americans are pretty smart and know exactly what is going on here...

Mean while, McCain is back home criticizing an elected official abroad, talking about the "Iraq/Pakistan" border, and about a surge that he dreamed up all on his own.

[autigeremt 6,719]

You guys are the most rhetorical, one way street people I have ever read or heard. There's no reason for civilized people to look at things in such a one way, closed minded point of view as you guys do. I can understand to some degree why you support the Obama manifesto of take and give and government control. BUT I DO NOT understand how those who say they are open minded can look at things through a pipe and claim it's the best way for all.

[CCTAU 3,351]

No worries WinCrimson - most Americans are pretty smart and know exactly what is going on here...

Mean while, McCain is back home criticizing an elected official abroad, talking about the "Iraq/Pakistan" border, and about a surge that he dreamed up all on his own.

Yes they do. They realize achmed is out "blowing" the world and saying anything to look good (Iraq for example). Achmed's plan is s*** before the surge worked, but now he wants to pretend it was all his doing. Yes. Americans do see through his BS. Thank you for pointing that out.

[autigeremt 6,719]

SURGE+McCain=Obama making a 180.....

[tiger88 934]

I hope you guys are watching as our national news media refuses to state that the Iraqi P.M. endorsed the Obama 16-month withdrawal time frame even though that's exactly what happened.

What should be the death knell for the crumbling McCain candidacy remains propped up by our broken media's refusal to report factually.

Facts:

Obama -- We should set a 16 month time frame to withdraw troops from Iraq

McCain -- No time frame as you can "walk through the streets of Baghdad freely"

Iraq P.M. Maliki -- American troops should withdraw by 2010 (16 month timeframe from January)

News Media -- *crickets*

Anyone want to guess the lead story blaring everywhere if the Iraqi P.M. endorsed John McCain's position? I realize Brad and Angelina had a kid and that a new Batman movie is out, though...

They're terrified the Hannity brigade will call them LIBRULS so they refuse to report basic facts. Unreal. If they weren't propping up McCain, Obama would win 40 states.

Perhaps the media isn't covering it more because your representation as you present it here is pitifully innacurate. The iraqi pm rebuffed immediate reports because they didn't portray what he was trying to say accurately.

The press, like you, want to skew things for obama, but they know to try and do so here would not work.

"O'bama's" plan is only remotely possible becaue the surge is working. Had he gotten his way and there was no surge he wouldn't have a leg to stand on afa his 16 month plan. So for you to make this argument as you have here is beyond pathetic.

Troops will be in Iraq longer than 16 months from now (combat troops that is), everyone knows it, including obama. He's just playing politics.

[arnaldoabru 11]

I hope you guys are watching as our national news media refuses to state that the Iraqi P.M. endorsed the Obama 16-month withdrawal time frame even though that's exactly what happened.

What should be the death knell for the crumbling McCain candidacy remains propped up by our broken media's refusal to report factually.

Facts:

Obama -- We should set a 16 month time frame to withdraw troops from Iraq

McCain -- No time frame as you can "walk through the streets of Baghdad freely"

Iraq P.M. Maliki -- American troops should withdraw by 2010 (16 month timeframe from January)

News Media -- *crickets*

Anyone want to guess the lead story blaring everywhere if the Iraqi P.M. endorsed John McCain's position? I realize Brad and Angelina had a kid and that a new Batman movie is out, though...

They're terrified the Hannity brigade will call them LIBRULS so they refuse to report basic facts. Unreal. If they weren't propping up McCain, Obama would win 40 states.

Perhaps the media isn't covering it more because your representation as you present it here is pitifully innacurate. The iraqi pm rebuffed immediate reports because they didn't portray what he was trying to say accurately.

The press, like you, want to skew things for obama, but they know to try and do so here would not work.

"O'bama's" plan is only remotely possible becaue the surge is working. Had he gotten his way and there was no surge he wouldn't have a leg to stand on afa his 16 month plan. So for you to make this argument as you have here is beyond pathetic.

Troops will be in Iraq longer than 16 months from now (combat troops that is), everyone knows it, including obama. He's just playing politics.

It's hard to "skew it" when they have an audio tape.