Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama: Don't stay in Iraq over genocide

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 11:43 PM
Original message
Obama: Don't stay in Iraq over genocide
I agree with him. The Republican talking point that we need to stay in Iraq in order to prevent genocide is incredibly weak. First, if genocide was such a priority for Republicans they would have called for intervention in Darfur years ago and supported President Clinton's intervention in the Balkans. When it comes to staying in Iraq, just say no.

==SUNAPEE, N.H. - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.

"Well, look, if that's the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now — where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife — which we haven't done," Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven't done. Those of us who care about Darfur don't think it would be a good idea," he said.

Obama, a first-term senator from Illinois, said it's likely there would be increased bloodshed if U.S. forces left Iraq.

"Nobody is proposing we leave precipitously. There are still going to be U.S. forces in the region that could intercede, with an international force, on an emergency basis," Obama said between stops on the first of two days scheduled on the New Hampshire campaign trail. "There's no doubt there are risks of increased bloodshed in Iraq without a continuing U.S. presence there."==

Read the rest at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070720/ap_on_el_pr/obama_ap_interview
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hey Mario... I thought about you the other night...


Did you happen to catch Bill Maher on Leno?

If so.. I'll bet you liked what he had to say!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bullet1987 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wow...a positive Obama post by DMC!!!
I agree 100%, the genocide argument is incredibly hypocritical amoung the defenders of the war. Because you don't hear a damn thing from those same people about the Congo and Sudan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 11:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. I am stunned! But, nice thing to do DMC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
4. Iraq is an endless war as long as we are there. How many deaths is it worth? /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. So, why would Obama say this is his vision of Foreign Policy?
When it is nothing more than a continuation of the Bush/Cheney Iraq Policy?...:

"Our men and women in uniform are performing heroically around the world in some of the most difficult conditions imaginable. But the war in Afghanistan and the ill-advised invasion of Iraq have clearly demonstrated the consequences of underestimating the number of troops required to fight two wars and defend our homeland. That's why I strongly support the expansion of our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.

But adding troops isn't just about meeting a quota. It's about recruiting the best and brightest to service, and it's about keeping them in service by providing them with the first-rate equipment, armor, training, and incentives they deserve. It's about providing funding to enable the National Guard to achieve an adequate state of readiness again. And it's about honoring our veterans by giving them the respect and dignity they deserve and the care and benefits they have earned.

A 21st century military will also require us to invest in our men and women's ability to succeed in today's complicated conflicts. We know that on the streets of Baghdad, a little bit of Arabic can actually provide security to our soldiers. Yet, just a year ago, less than 1% of the American military could speak a language such as Arabic, Mandarin, Hindi, Urdu, or Korean. It's time we recognize these as critical skills for our military, and it's time we recruit and train for them".

Of course, how we use our armed forces matters just as much as how they are prepared.

(...)

"A recent report detailed Al Qaeda's progress in recruiting a new generation of leaders to replace the ones we have captured or killed. The new recruits come from a broader range of countries than the old leadership - from Afghanistan to Chechnya, from Britain to Germany, from Algeria to Pakistan. Most of these recruits are in their early thirties.

They operate freely in the disaffected communities and disconnected corners of our interconnected world - the impoverished, weak and ungoverned states that have become the most fertile breeding grounds for transnational threats like terror and pandemic disease and the smuggling of deadly weapons.

Some of these terrorist recruits may have always been destined to take the path they did - accepting a tragically warped view of their religion in which God rewards the killing of innocents. But millions of young men and women have not."

(...)

"We have heard much over the last six years about how America's larger purpose in the world is to promote the spread of freedom - that it is the yearning of all who live in the shadow of tyranny and despair.

I agree. But this yearning is not satisfied by simply deposing a dictator and setting up a ballot box. The true desire of all mankind is not only to live free lives, but lives marked by dignity and opportunity; by security and simple justice."

(...)

"As President, I will double our annual investments in meeting these challenges to $50 billion by 2012and ensure that those new resources are directed towards these strategic goals.

No President should ever hesitate to use force - unilaterally if necessary - to protect ourselves and our vital interests when we are attacked or imminently threatened. But when we use force in situations other than self-defense, we should make every effort to garner the clear support and participation of others - the kind of burden-sharing and support President George H.W. Bush mustered before he launched Operation Desert Storm.

And when we do send our men and women into harm's way, we must also clearly define the mission, prescribe concrete political and military objectives, seek out advice of our military commanders, evaluate the intelligence, plan accordingly, and ensure that our troops have the resources, support, and equipment they need to protect themselves and fulfill their mission.

We must take these steps with the knowledge that while sometimes necessary, force is the costliest weapon in the arsenal of American power in terms of lives and treasure. And it's far from the only measure of our strength.

In order to advance our national security and our common security, we must call on the full arsenal of American power and ingenuity. To constrain rogue nations, we must use effective diplomacy and muscular alliances. To penetrate terrorist networks, we need a nimble intelligence community - with strong leadership that forces agencies to share information, and invests in the tools, technologies and human intelligence that can get the job done. To maintain our influence in the world economy, we need to get our fiscal house in order. And to weaken the hand of hostile dictators, we must free ourselves from our oil addiction. None of these expressions of power can supplant the need for a strong military. Instead, they complement our military, and help ensure that the use of force is not our sole available option.

The third way America must lead again is by marshalling a global effort to meet a threat that rises above all others in urgency - securing, destroying, and stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

As leaders from Henry Kissinger to George Shultz to Bill Perry to Sam Nunn have all warned, the actions we are taking today on this issue are simply not adequate to the danger."


Obama's examples for security ALL pointing to a continuation of The Republican/Neocon leadership we all despise, to the year 2012 and if Mr.Obama is reelected, 2016. Let me know if theres any part of Obama's 5 Step Foreign Policy Plan that indicates he plans on ending the Wars and bringing our troops home, if he's elected.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/04/remarks_of_senator_barack_obam.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 04:31 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Enlighten me? WTF is RealClearPolitics.com?!? Sounds like yet another HIT site, hum?
:crazy: :eyes:

If not, these geniuses representing such a site certainly didn't "stay up all night" brainstorming a name for this, IMO, collage of hit-pieces and bunk. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 04:56 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. What? Not thrilled at the hypocrisy of Obama's speech made in April and the OP?
Hit piece? The article is the verbatim contents of a speech given by Obama a few months ago in Chicago outlining his foreign policy... The feel good article above, is Obama telling you what you want to hear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ripple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. This quote, included in your post
Blows your neocon strategy theory (or that of the article's author) out of the water:


No President should ever hesitate to use force - unilaterally if necessary - to protect ourselves and our vital interests when we are attacked or imminently threatened.

That is not at all inconsistent with Obama's most recent statement.

I think you're just irritated, because you saw an Obama thread from d_m_c and thought it would give you yet another opportunity to trash Obama. Guess he fooled ya this time! ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rudeboy666 Donating Member (959 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
6. But
Couldn't the argument be made that since we directly caused the conditions for a genocide in Iraq (i.e. by invading, destabilizing, etc.) we are therefore morally compelled to prevent it from occurring?

Of course, it all depends on the likelihood of a genocide occurring. And I agree with Obama that a mere possibility is not enough.

However, if the possibility of a genocide is very high (and we have confirmation), then it would be morally repulsive for us to abandon Iraq.

p.s. This does not necessarily imply a full US commitment. The are options e.g. The United Nations
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. We also need to bring Iran and Syria to the table
Whether we like it or not, those countries will have a huge amount of influence over Iraq's future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 03:46 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Bingo. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 04:35 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. The UN is not about to get involved when the USA and it's beloved Corporations control every ...
Edited on Fri Jul-20-07 04:36 AM by ShortnFiery
damn financial element within Iraq. That's precisely why we have NOT attracted outside commitments to Iraq's stability and will continue to "go it alone."

Why should the UN or other nations assist US when we DEMAND that "our corporate boys and girls" continue to CONTROL *all* the financial elements (profits) of Iraq? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamJordan23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
7. Use any drugs today, DMC? haha. just kidding. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
9. I also agree.
Hadn't seen this story, thanks for the post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ripple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
15. Nice post, d_m_c
and I agree with Obama, as well.

The neocons using that particular talking point are the same ones complicit in setting the stage for genocide in Iraq. Hypocritical bastards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC