Obama on Iraq: the doubletalk begins

I've always maintained that Barack Obama is too intelligent and- yes- responsible a man to simply pull American troops out of Iraq in eighteen months if he is elected president. It would be a move so breathtakingly disastrous in both humanitarian and in foreign policy terms that the only people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about (or worse, don't care) could possibly see this as a rational course of action- especially now that, thanks to the surge, Iraq seems well on its way to achieving stability and being able to stand on its own if only we are patient.

And now, Obama is broadly hinting that he might revise his eighteen-month timetable- if withdrawing our troops within that time would either endanger our troops or destabilize Iraq.

Which is like saying "if the sun comes up tomorrow morning."

Obama, in his naivette, might once have actually intended to pull our troops out of Iraq in eighteen months, and thought that he could pull it off. But to borrow a bon mot from the late William F. Buckley, I refuse to insult Obama's intelligence- or his humanity- by believing that, now that he's being forced to confront the consequences of such foolishness, he would ever actually follow through.

Whether Obama is elected or not, the troops will still be in Iraq at the time of the 2010 midterm elections- and if he's the president, his nutty supporters will eat him alive for it.

Which raises the essential dilemma posed by the Obama pledge: did he start out so utterly naive that only now beginning to sense the lay of the land in Iraq? Or has the pullout plan been a cynical lie all along?

I, for one, choose to believe the former.

ADDENDUM: Sure enough- the moonbats have begun barking about Obama's recently saner tone on Iraq- and he's flip-flopping again!


Popular Posts