Obama: Iraqi vote will help set U.S. course

[sabra]

http://www.sj-r.com/sections/news/stories/73206.asp

Obama: Iraqi vote will help set U.S. course

The outcome of next week's elections in Iraq will be a key factor in determining future U.S. policies there, including the eventual withdrawal of troops, Sen. Barack Obama said Wednesday.

Parliamentary elections are scheduled for Thursday to select a permanent Iraqi government.

"One of the things that I think is going to be most interesting is what statements are going to be made by the folks who win this election Dec. 15," Obama, a Democrat from Chicago, told The State Journal-Register editorial board.

For instance, he said, the newly elected leaders could demand a timetable for U.S. troops to leave the country.

[MrPrax]

1. Delusional Idiot...

Is Obama really under the impression that Iraqis need a vote to tell the US to get out of their country?

Good to see Obama has good political horse sense gauging the public's opinion.

Nevermind, the government HE'S actually elected to "could demand a timetable for U.S. troops to leave the country."

Why wait for the Iraqis to develop democracy, Obama? You're already in one and apparantly as an elected represented, you have LESS power than the average Iraqi?

You Phoney Warmongering Opportunist

[Mechatanketra]

2. Not exactly ...

I agree my junior Senator seems to be delusional. But don't think it's because he's "under the impression that Iraqis need a vote to tell the US to get out of their country".

Rather, I think he's under the impression that if the Iraqis have a vote to tell America to leave, it would make a difference in America's (read: the GOP's) willingness to actually do so. And in this, sadly, he is not alone in the universe (even just the officed Democratic universe); it's what I've dubbed "the Call-On Fallacy", wherein Dems constantly "call on" Republicans to do this or that Act Of Basic Human Decency, with an implicit presumption that the Republicans would listen to them this time because underneath it all they're just wrong-headed guys still trying to do the right job.

But they're not. This one thing people must understand, or else they'll never be able to deal competently with this administration: the GOP isn't trying to govern competently. They didn't take on these jobs to protect the nation or improve the lot of the citizenry -- they got them for perks, power, and prestige. And hence, all the tragedies, struggles, and failures besetting the people of this country don't mean a frickin' squat to these people in and of themselves; there is no woe in-itself, except where it hurts their own bank accounts or their press image.

And so, back to Obama: I think he says this because deep down, there's an innocent flag-waving little boy who just can't shake the idea that the President of America wouldn't ever just start a war because he could, and hence he must actually mean at least a little of what he says about 'liberation' and 'Iraqi freedom', and so if he sees the people of Iraq coming together democratically, even if just to get us out, his heart (and maybe his brain) will grow three sizes that day and he'll suddenly be reasonable. We so-called 'liberal peaceniks' know better, of course, just as we knew that no matter HOW many handshake deals and promises Bush made, if he got IWR he was going to use it circumstances be damned, just as we knew the WMD case was BS even in the absence of all the infamous classified intel Congress couldn't see. Bush didn't go to war to free Iraq -- he went there to TAKE it.

[warrens]

3. Your reading skills need a bit of sharpening

If the winners tell us to get out, and we've said they are the legitimate leaders of the country, that holds a bit more weight than some provisional stooge saying the same thing. That is what he meant.