Praying for Obama's Defeat

[deleted15807]

Some recent WSJ pieces:

06/21/08 WSJ Sen. Obama and Economics 101
06/20/08 WSJ Farewell, New Democrats
06/20/08 WSJ Hillary for Veep? Check Back Later
06/20/08 WSJ Obama Turns FDR Upside Down
06/19/08 WSJ Barack of Arabia?
06/19/08 WSJ Mrs. Obama and the Tuskegee Superstition
06/19/08 WSJ Obama and McCain Spout Economic Nonsense
06/17/08 WSJ Why Iraqis Back McCain
06/12/08 WSJ Leaving Obama
05/30/08 WSJ The Obama Gaffe Machine
05/29/08 WSJ Obama's Revisionist History
05/23/08 WSJ The Obama Learning Curve
05/12/08 WSJ Obama and the Values Question Mark
05/08/08 WSJ It's Obama, Warts and All
05/05/08 WSJ Why Obama's Fans Seemed Scarce As Things Got Hot
05/02/08 WSJ Obama's Other Radical Friends
05/01/08 WSJ Wright Is Right
05/01/08 WSJ Pastor Millstone
05/01/08 WSJ Where Were Obama's Friends?
04/30/08 WSJ The Wright Side of the Brain
04/29/08 WSJ Yeah, Wright
04/24/08 WSJ Is Obama Ready for Prime Time?
04/23/08 WSJ Don't Call Me a Protectionist
04/23/08 WSJ Obama's Media Army
04/22/08 WSJ The Obama Quarantine
04/18/08 WSJ A 'Bitter' Misstep
04/18/08 WSJ Bad Night for Barack
04/18/08 WSJ Obama's Tax Evasion
04/15/08 WSJ Obama's Flaws Multiply
04/15/08 WSJ The Wright Stuff and Senator Obama
04/14/08 WSJ Are You Bitter Off?
04/09/08 WSJ Obama's Minister Problem
04/05/08 WSJ Obama's Capital Loss
03/27/08 WSJ Where Does Obama Invest His Money?
03/21/08 WSJ Democrats Are Still Weak on Security
03/20/08 WSJ Obama and the American Flag
03/13/08 WSJ Obama and the Race Card
03/04/08 WSJ Obama's Border Incident
03/03/08 WSJ Obama and Chicago Mores
02/27/08 WSJ Obama's 'Patriot' Act
02/27/08 WSJ Obama Inspires Many to Participate in Politics, but on His Terms
02/22/08 WSJ Obama's Cash Games
02/21/08 WSJ Obama's New Vulnerability
02/21/08 WSJ Obama's Teamster 'Diplomacy'
02/21/08 WSJ Obama and Race
02/18/08 WSJ Has Obama Crested?


Guess how many back Obama? Zero would be the number. If Hillary had won the nomination you could have shoe-horned her name in place of Obama's.

 

[B_Nick4444]

true, you would be hard-pressed to find a pro-Obama piece, but you will be hard-pressed to find one where they did not marshal objective, verifiable facts to support their position

this particular piece, of course, focuses on viewpoint, specifically, the viewpoint of Iraqis

it remains an intresting question, how the election of Obama, or McCain would impact the fate of these people and their region

Some recent WSJ pieces:

06/21/08 WSJ Sen. Obama and Economics 101
06/20/08 WSJ Farewell, New Democrats
06/20/08 WSJ Hillary for Veep? Check Back Later
06/20/08 WSJ Obama Turns FDR Upside Down
06/19/08 WSJ Barack of Arabia?
06/19/08 WSJ Mrs. Obama and the Tuskegee Superstition
06/19/08 WSJ Obama and McCain Spout Economic Nonsense
06/17/08 WSJ Why Iraqis Back McCain
06/12/08 WSJ Leaving Obama
05/30/08 WSJ The Obama Gaffe Machine
05/29/08 WSJ Obama's Revisionist History
05/23/08 WSJ The Obama Learning Curve
05/12/08 WSJ Obama and the Values Question Mark
05/08/08 WSJ It's Obama, Warts and All
05/05/08 WSJ Why Obama's Fans Seemed Scarce As Things Got Hot
05/02/08 WSJ Obama's Other Radical Friends
05/01/08 WSJ Wright Is Right
05/01/08 WSJ Pastor Millstone
05/01/08 WSJ Where Were Obama's Friends?
04/30/08 WSJ The Wright Side of the Brain
04/29/08 WSJ Yeah, Wright
04/24/08 WSJ Is Obama Ready for Prime Time?
04/23/08 WSJ Don't Call Me a Protectionist
04/23/08 WSJ Obama's Media Army
04/22/08 WSJ The Obama Quarantine


Guess how many back Obama? Zero would be the number. If Hillary had won the nomination you could have shoe-horned her name in place of Obama's.

 

[Northland]

But Pew did not poll Iraqis, ...Constraints of time and money being what they are, I have not gotten round to phoning 1,000 Iraqis to get their views on Obama-McCain. But I did sit down last week with four key provincial Iraqi leaders, Sunnis and Shiites, who -- without actually endorsing Mr. McCain -- made their views abundantly clear.
"The Iraqis are really fearful about some of the positions the Democratic Party has adopted," says Sheik Ahmed Abu Rishah. "If the Democrats win, they will be withdrawing their forces in a very rapid manner."
Mamoun Sami Rashid al-Awani, the governor of Anbar province, agrees. "We have over a million casualties, thousands of houses destroyed," he says. "Are we going to tell [Iraqis] that the game is over? That the Americans are pulling out?"
Throughout our interview, the men did not stop fingering their prayer beads, as if their future hinges on their ability to make their case to the American public. They're right: It does. Which is why Iraq, all but alone among the nations, will be praying for a McCain victory on the first Tuesday in November.

Do you actually believe half the crap you post? Are you really this stupid? You give an article which clearly tells us it is nonsense. Here, let me walk you through a few of the highlights.

1)Pew did not poll Iraqis- yeah, why bother polling the group you are assailing? Just go elsewhere and create fictitious facts.
2)I haven't gotten around to phoning 1000 Iraqis-and I can bet they never will. Well, in all fairness they might-probably while handing them weapons and finance.
3)The Iraqis are really fearful...this is according to two Sunnis and two Shiites it is not according to all leaders of all groups of Iraq, and it is not according to the majority of citizens. If Iraqis are fearful it is in large part from the decades, nay, centuries of brutal force brought against them. It is from the centuries of supposedly helpful, supposedly well meaning interfering hypocrites pitting one group against another and not allowing us to have our own government and to work through our problems on our own. Newsflash, the Iraqis do not need, nor do the majority want, any outsiders. Ask the Iraqi man, woman or child what matters most with regard to the outsiders and they will tell you in no uncertain terms that first (second at most) on their slate is to have the British, the Americans and any other group which wants to come galloping in to remount their horses and gallop away at twice the speed at which they came in. They (the outsiders) are unwelcome. The only ones who welcome these interfering persons are at the governmental level and only those of the group which the interferers are currently holding up as being the best. Try to recall a time a few short years back when the person they loved was Saddam Hussein.

Additional reasons for the leaders to be fearful, would be the end of their blood money. Government changes means the money circle must be reworked. New people to befriend, new lies to tell, new lies to be heard and of course the ultimate fear-the new regime wants them out. Best not to go against that last one-just ask the now quite dead Saddam Hussein (who, I again remind all of you, was initially selected BY the U.S.A., the very people who later sat back and watched him die).

Are the Iraqis as a whole fearful of what will happen next? Why don't you go door to doorway (or bombed out crater to bombed out crater) and ask the common folks who sweat through each day wondering what will be happening next. The biggest fear is that the supposed protectors will never leave.

Going to Iraq on a larger scale, how can the leaders not be somewhat leery? After all, parts of the nation have been sawed off before-need I remind you of Kuwait?

If the mission of the world at large has been to destroy Iraq, you have all failed miserably. The Iraqi populace may be a worn down and tired group but the Iraqis aren't going anywhere soon, so, at the end of the day, you the interfering people of the world are the ones who lose the most.

 

[Northland]

OK...I didn't read all of your post...but here's my thing. If the Iraqis are wanting to have a successful democratic country, and the US out of the Middle East, then THEY NEED TO PULL THEIR HEADS OUT OF THEIR ASSES! If these religious screw balls (the Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds) would stop trying to be self rightous, holiler than thou, and stop sending in assholes to blow everyone up,
.

The sad part is that much of what you had written was intelligent and bordering on informed. Unfortunately you blew it when you decided to use the screw ball terminology and then say they are being self rightous and blowing everyone up. Iraq is fortunate enough to have the U.S. and others blowing us up in even greater numbers.

 

[deleted15807]

true, you would be hard-pressed to find a pro-Obama piece, but you will be hard-pressed to find one where they did not marshal objective, verifiable facts to support their position

That's the beauty of propaganda non-sense you do not have to prove a damn thing. These are opinion pieces not pieces from the news desk journalists, a key difference. But I'm certain most Americans don't differentiate between the two. Faux News (Fox) has done a text book case of blurring news and opinion.

It's blatently obvious from the sheer number of opinion pieces written on Obama that the Republican Slime Machine will be running 24 hours a day through November. And I just put the ones that had his name in the title there are a slew of other slime pieces that don't.

Need we recall this is the same Wall Street Journal that suggested the Clintons had Vince Foster killed. So no you do not have to prove a thing in an opinion piece.

 

[zumzum]

Long life to Obama!

and Bush can eat my pants!

because of his glamorous trip to Europe (THE LAST ONE), I was stuck for 40 minutes in a bus in trafalgar square here in London, I didn't know but I went waiting for a bus EXACTLY in White Hall (1 minutes walking from No.10) EXACTLY the time the twat came to London (and I didn't know it!!), I waited for the bus, it didn't come, and police asked sorry (we're in England after all) and said we had to leave.

So managed to catch the bus at another stop, abd as I got in we were stuck, then after 40 minutes it started to move and again stuck in the traffic on a diverted route going nowhere, then I left and after having spent 5 minutes begging the driver for a transfer ticket (I damned had to pay that ticket) I even couldn't use it.

Bush give me a favour, stay at home! we don't want you over here!

 

[marleyisalegend]

I echo everything northland said.

 

[Jovial]

Don't worry folks, the troops will be in Iraq for a long time even if Obama is elected. There's too much at stake in Iraq. He just has to take his position before the election to try to get elected.

 

[TinyPrincess]

But I did sit down last week with four key provincial Iraqi leaders, Sunnis and Shiites, who -- without actually endorsing Mr. McCain -- made their views abundantly clear.
"The Iraqis are really fearful about some of the positions the Democratic Party has adopted," says Sheik Ahmed Abu Rishah. "If the Democrats win, they will be withdrawing their forces in a very rapid manner."

So four Iraqi leaders living fat and on the grace of the US army, are scared that their jobs, position, bribes etc. might seize to exist??? I can't imagine why they would prefer Bush III... eh, McCain...

 

[JC8]

Soldiers are trained to carry out missions, missions are based on policy. It is here the disconnect arises.

Bad policy or not, soldiers want to finish their mission. I could expound, on and on, but I think the following sums it up:

"The problems of victory are more agreeable than the problems of defeat, but they are no less difficult."

Winston Churchill

Or maybe they were soldiers on tour with him. He didn't mention anything about x-box or call of duty over there. Their are doing what the signed up to do. They go to war, whether they believe in it or not. War sucks. They want to go home. But they know when someone is bullshitting about what they will do if elected regarding a war because they know, unlike us arm-chair soldiers here in america, that withdrawing probably isn't the best course of action right now. Regardless of whether we should be in this war or not, we are.

Yes some of them are disappointed and concerned that they have to continue serving tours of duty, but does that mean they can't be concerned with someone who they think is a stooge being their commander?

 

[dreamer20]

His constant refrain of an immediate pullout, regardless of the consequences, is just troubling in so many aspects

Why would we believe anything from the Wall Street Journal? The Wall Street Journal is owned by... Faux News. And as we all know that anything that comes from Faux News is complete BS. This story is a plant to make Obama look bad and big up John Mccain.

They're worried now because Obama has a pretty decent lead in the polls.

Obama isn't an idiot. I'm SURE he understands that you can't withdraw everything immediately. We're probably looking at a time of 1.5-2 years. That should be more then enough to transition and train the remaining Iraqi's.

why, then, doesn't he say that?

Obama said he won't withdraw all troops immediately here:

Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Iraq

{quote}

Bringing Our Troops Home


He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.


Press Iraq’s Leaders to Reconcile

The best way to press Iraq’s leaders to take responsibility for their future is to make it clear that we are leaving. As we remove our troops, Obama will engage representatives from all levels of Iraqi society – in and out of government – to seek a new accord on Iraq’s Constitution and governance. The United Nations will play a central role in this convention, which should not adjourn until a new national accord is reached addressing tough questions like federalism and oil revenue-sharing...


{quote}


The foreign occupation must end. Iraq must govern itself.

 

[Qua]

Don't worry folks, the troops will be in Iraq for a long time even if Obama is elected. There's too much at stake in Iraq. He just has to take his position before the election to try to get elected.

Bingo. I predict he pulls a "Circumstances have changed which dictate my rescinding my prior position completely" move.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Bingo. I predict he pulls a "Circumstances have changed which dictate my rescinding my prior position completely" move.

Sidenote Observation: Your candidate changing their mind is necessary adaptation. The opposing party changing their mind is "a crafty, weisely move."

 

[B_Nick4444]

Do you actually believe half the crap you post? Are you really this stupid? You give an article which clearly tells us it is nonsense.

Again, this an op piece in the WSJ (not my op piece) which addresses a question I would sorely like answered

A question I still do not have an answer to -- while it is clear that some Iraqis would like to see an immediate withdrawal of US forces, it is also clear that some would prefer a more continued presence -- the question is what segments favor what? and why?

The posting of the article at this site was: (1) A counter-point to the overwhelming support for an immediate withdrawal that I sensed here; and, (2) A stunning absence, I also sensed (and I may be wrong here) of the concern or consideration of the impacts on the Iraqis and the region of either an immediate withdrawal, or a more sustained presence

This is, of course, ignoring for the moment, the longer range strategic questions posed by the proximity of Iran.


Many thanks for ALL your perpectives.

 

[Qua]

Sidenote Observation: Your candidate changing their mind is necessary adaptation. The opposing party changing their mind is "a crafty, weisely move."

Yep. In all honesty I was gonna precede it with "Bush-esque", but I feared being taken to task for evidence which I didn't wanna look up. Shoulda realized this is LPSG; I don't need to defend my accusations of Bush .

 

[Trinity]

The US can't keep their presence over there for the next 100 years trying to play peace keepers, when the radicals in the country don't want peace. If the people who went out and voted in elections and really want peace and harmony in their country would get off of their asses, grow some balls, and stand up to these fucktards that are killing their own people, then a free, democratic Iraq is possible. From what I see though, the people are too scared (and understandably so) to get up and do something to change their world, and are too dependant on the US to do everything for them.


I have no problem with us staying in Iraq, if the citizens of Iraq get up and take a stand against these religious fanatics. I think we should be there to give support, train, and help rebuild Iraq (along with other countries of the world) , but if the citizens are not willing to work to get there country back in order, we should pull out and let them continue to self distruct.

I think that summed it up...but left out one thing: The Money $$$

Why isn't Iraq footing the bill? A few months ago Hillary, Barack and McCain grilled the Generals on Iraq and costs for the War. Why is the United States not only paying for the War but for rebuilding Iraq? If the Iraqi people wanted liberation from Saddam and want Democracy that does not come cheap.

The Iraqi government must meet the benchmarks set out and agreed upon. Drawing down troops and making the Iraqi Government foot the bill for the military presence and recontruction is the way to go.

The U.S. military must turn focus on Al-Quaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran's control in the region.

Iraq needs to repay all the trillions of dollars the U.S. has spent and that money needs to go to releasing our dependency on foreign oil.

 

[B_theOtherJJ]

I dont think its about Obama now. Its about having a Democratic White House. The Republicans have spent enuf time ruining the country..

 

[deleted15807]

I dont think its about Obama now. Its about having a Democratic White House. The Republicans have spent enuf time ruining the country..

Exactly. Some people can't move beyond personalities and stick to the many huge issues facing this country.

 

[D_Cyprius Slapwilly]

I didn't read all of the thread, but this article is about the opinion of Iraqi leaders, not Iraqi citizens. I doubt the citizens care one way or another who wins our election - they just want our troops to leave. I'm honestly not sure that they are convinced that either candidate will do what they want.

(Yes that article is old, but it's the only one I could find with Google. Most polls I've seen since 2006 have been pretty much the same, but if anyone would like to provide newer stats then feel free)

 

[D_Cyprius Slapwilly]

I have a very good friend in the marines who has done two tours in Iraq and now that he is in the reserves he is going back. He tells me all the soldiers over there laugh at obama and think of him as a stooge. I guess being on the frontlines of a war, whether justified or not, allows you to see through someone's bullshit. And I am not saying that obama won't be good for this country, just pointing out how the soldiers, that everyone wants to bring home and therefore vote for obama, think.

Not saying your friend is a liar, but at least earlier in the year the "stooge" joined Ron Paul in claiming the title for the most money raised from military servicemen. Many soldiers may stay mum about it, but Obama has more military support than most people think.