PDA

View Full Version : Obama tried to sway Iraqis on Bush deal


Preacher
10-10-2008, 03:01 AM
At the same time the Bush administration was negotiating a still elusive agreement to keep the U.S. military in Iraq (http://washingtontimes.com/themes/?Theme=Iraq), Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama (http://washingtontimes.com/themes/?Theme=Barack+Obama) tried to convince Iraqi leaders in private conversations that the president shouldn't be allowed to enact the deal without congressional approval.
Mr. Obama's conversations with the Iraqi leaders, confirmed to The Washington Times by his campaign aides, began just two weeks after he clinched the Democratic presidential nomination in June and stirred controversy over the appropriateness of a White House candidate's contacts with foreign governments while the sitting president is conducting a war. . .


Read the rest of the article please...

Then ask these three questions...

Who has the most to lose by telling the truth,

Who has the most to gain by telling a lie here...

Why wouldn't Obama just let a campaign aide talk, like others have.



Sorry, something in this smells... REAL BAD.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/10/obama-sought-to-sway-iraqis-on-bush-deal/?page=3

stlrtruck
10-10-2008, 09:24 AM
You're right preach, something is going on that doesn't sound right.

While he may be a hopeful presidential candidate, he shojuldn't be involving himself in those types of discussions until he is officially the president. Otherwise, let the current or the next president (in case obama isn't the next president) take care of the country's business!!!

revefsreleets
10-10-2008, 09:33 AM
Too little too late...

MACH1
10-10-2008, 12:24 PM
What a back stabber. Should change his name to ray ray.

Preacher
10-10-2008, 04:32 PM
I was thoroughly ticked off when I read this article.

I was on the phone last night to my best friend actually defending Obama in our conversation (who would you rather have in office, Obama or Clinton).

Then I read this article.... and now I have to change my mind.

No way, no how. I was comparing Obama to Carter before... but that doesn't work.

MARK MY WORDS... He WILL be the next Nixon. Destroying the economy and flirting with treason.

CantStop85
10-10-2008, 05:05 PM
Destroying the economy
What's left to destroy?

Preacher
10-10-2008, 05:18 PM
What's left to destroy?

Way too much...

Steelerstrength
10-10-2008, 05:32 PM
Just thought I would take the bait on this story. Here’s what a quick search found:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/undermining-mcc.html

Scroll down a bit for the information.

http://journalstar.com/articles/2008/09/22/news/local/doc48d6ccaad7dd1870929898.txt

There isn't much on the net regarding this non-story. (my opinion) When prominent Republicans debunk a story like this because they were actually there, I can understand why there's not much to find.

Gotta believe what we want to.

Dino 6 Rings
10-10-2008, 05:40 PM
I'm going to guess here that Obama was trying to be subtle and suggest that the Iraqis not commit to anything that would be subject to change should a new administration (namely his) take over in 09. Of coarse, keeping it on the hush and on the down low until he would be able to take credit for it, wouldn't hurt either.

Preacher
10-10-2008, 05:49 PM
Just thought I would take the bait on this story. Here’s what a quick search found:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/undermining-mcc.html

Scroll down a bit for the information.

http://journalstar.com/articles/2008/09/22/news/local/doc48d6ccaad7dd1870929898.txt

There isn't much on the net regarding this non-story. (my opinion) When prominent Republicans debunk a story like this because they were actually there, I can understand why there's not much to find.

Gotta believe what we want to.

Chuck Hagel is becoming to the republicans what Zell Miller is to the Democrats... So I wouldn't put much faith in that line of argument...

Furthermore, the charge from NOT REPUBLICANS... but an IRAQI OFFICIAL... is that it DID NOT happen at the meeting, but during a PHONE CALL a week or two LATER.

So Hagel has no idea whether it happened or not, because he wasn't there at that phone call...

It will take more than a quick sweep of a brush to make this pass by. At least for me.

Hines0wnz
10-10-2008, 06:30 PM
I want to believe things like this arent true but.......it seems to fit for some reason. Obama says this election isnt about personality but about issues but it seems clear to me that his personality is attracting voters and not his "non talk" about his plans for the country's future. I dont know why the fire hasnt been stoked about some of these issue regarding Obama. Have the Republicans really thrown in the towel for this election?

revefsreleets
10-10-2008, 06:57 PM
That's a damned good question. THIS Republican has...because McCain wants to attack the man and not the issues, and there';s not much to attack as far as the man. I mean, he hasn't even DONE anything one way or another to attack.

McCain should have done what Obama did. Just hammered "I'm not Bush" over and over again (in whatever way he needed to do it) and he'd have won. But he failed. Now he's going to attack and attack on the wrong front about all the wrong stuff . Why not attack his ads? Obama has given up honesty and integrity and is just flat-out lying in his ads now.

I just don't get it...

Havik
10-12-2008, 11:19 AM
I totally trust the Iraqi government to tell the truth. After all, it's not like they would benefit from a McCain Presidency where they wouldn't have to foot the bill for rebuilding their country.

Preacher
10-12-2008, 11:31 AM
I totally trust the Iraqi government to tell the truth. After all, it's not like they would benefit from a McCain Presidency where they wouldn't have to foot the bill for rebuilding their country.

Seeing as how Iraq govt. officials are talking about the US being out by 2009 or 2010, I doubt that there is much relevancy in your post.