73 Comments

1. bobal:

Listen, this guy is going to end global poverty, save the earth from climate change, give us all free health care, and tax us to prosperity. And do it without a coherent energy policy. Sure, we can!

It’s gonna be every man for himself.

Jul 11, 2008 - 4:43 pm 2. F:

Bobal:

I wish it were every man for himself. In fact, it’s every man for Obama. Look at his work in Chicago — housing projects that enriched contractors who in turn sent lots of money his way — but soon had to be shuttered because of poor construction and/or maintenance. The important issue was never housing the poor, it was lining his pockets. When his ‘hood is the entire US instead of Chicago you can imagine what wealth will be his. A taxpayer supporting Obama is like a pig supporting Oscar Mayer. F

Jul 11, 2008 - 7:50 pm 3. RWE:

The logistics of the withdrawal notwithstanding, the real problem is the basic attitude.

If on 8 Dec 1941 a politician had suggested we establish a timetable for withdrawal before we went into Germany or Japan he would have been laughed off the stage. And probably run out of town on a rail as well. He would have been hardly better received if he had suggested it in 1946.

Going to war for the purpose of winning the war is one thing. Going to war for the purpose of coming home afterwards is quite another.

Jul 11, 2008 - 7:50 pm 4. Al Reasin:

I am absolutely committed to ending the war,” Obama recently declared. “I will call my Joint Chiefs of Staff in and give them a new assignment and that is to end the war.”

I can well imagine that his supporters were pleased with this position. However, there is a small problem with this statement. His Joint Chiefs of Staff will be his military advisors not the ones who control the military’s actions.

From Wikipedia: After the 1986 reorganization of the military undertaken by the Goldwater-Nichols Act, the Joint Chiefs of Staff do not have operational command of U.S. military forces. Responsibility for conducting military operations goes from the President to the Secretary of Defense directly to the commanders of the Unified Combatant Commands and thus bypasses the Joint Chiefs of Staff completely.

Now I know that in 1986 Mr. Obama was only 25 and had not even started Harvard Law School, but this again shows his and his campaign’s advisors’ lack of knowledge of military issues and how they relate to the Presidency. Worse, they don’t know what they don’t know.

As stated, ABC reported from interviews with military personnel, to leave Iraq in 16 months we can get the troops out but not the equipment. It might have been wise to consult with the military or even General Petraeus when he testified before congress prior to Mr. Obama setting his position in concrete. Unfortunately for him, apparently he didn’t. One could say that they don’t know what questions to even ask of the military. But I’m sure he had a good reason why he didn’t seek the military’s input and advice before he opened his mouth.

Jul 11, 2008 - 8:05 pm 5. edwin hubble:

How’s the sound inside the echo chamber, guys?

OK – it may or may not be a wise and prudential withdrawal plan…but it won’t work because there are not enough wash stations to wash the jeeps on the way out?

Please come up with a serious argument, then there can be some rational dialogue.

Jul 11, 2008 - 8:16 pm 6. Alexis:

Wretchard:

You’re making it sound as though a responsible withdrawal of American forces may take at least twenty years to accomplish. After all, there is reason to believe that a complete withdrawal of American forces within four years would leave Iraq at the mercy of its neighbors. It would probably take about twenty years for Iraq to develop the military capability to deter its neighbors from meddling in its internal affairs.

Any long term treaty between the United States and Iraq with an expiration date effectively constitutes a timetable for withdrawal. Even the UK’s 99-year lease of Hong Kong from China constituted a timetable for withdrawal. It will be rather interesting if liberal Democrats continue to talk about timetables, but start talking about them in longer increments of time. The question will be whether the pace of withdrawing troops will be measured according to the geological time scale.

Jul 11, 2008 - 8:35 pm 7. wretchard:

I think there will be a withdrawal immediately; in fact a series of withdrawals. first, individual provinces will be turned over to the Iraqis. This is already happening. Secondly, US forces will be withdrawn to bases in the desert, outside of populated places. This is being negotiated in the SOF. Third and lastly, forces may be withdrawn out of theater.

Each of these is a different type of withdrawal, with different purposes. It is not, as some would understand it, simply a problem of where to wash vehicles so that they can be evacuated in compliance with cleanliness regulations.

Obama has said he would “consult” with the commanders and modify his timetable. Presumably he’ll ask the logistical questions at that time. Presumably he’ll ask the strategic questions at that time. Or maybe not. It seems his strategy is settled with the object of ‘ending the war’.

I can see how the whole discussion of logistics can actually be considered illegitimate; as if it were some kind of annoying detail. And to some extent it is, but how leaders approach the problem speaks volumes about the way in which they think.

Jul 11, 2008 - 8:44 pm 8. Lifeofthemind:

Part of the problem is that we, that is the United States of America, can do just about about anything if we are willing to pay for it. The problem with “I want” thinking is that it is coupled with economic irrationality. Many things can be desired and the US can do amazing things but it cannot defy basic laws of physics and economics. Can the US build a force capable of extricating the entire army and it’s equipment within two years? Probably yes, if you are willing to devote truly enormous resources to the project. We could build a new seaport and build a half dozen major airfield and build heavy airlift and sealift and build new rail lines. We can do it. We cannot do it on the cheap and spend billions on everything else Obama has promised. We can not do it while chained to the social and legal regulations and agencies that have grown over the last 50 years. We simply have to choose what we want to do. Eventually however the regulated nanny state will sap enough of the fiber out of America that we will be just like the Europeans. We will be able to look at a problem and say, “No we can’t.”

Jul 11, 2008 - 8:51 pm 9. Steve Y.:

Sports metaphors are over-used but I can’t resist. Senator Obama reminds me of the team that ran away with its division by mid-year and is heavily favored to march to the title. But then he drops games inexplicably (sit down with our enemies, Pastor Wright, invade Pakistan, campaign financing reversal, “bitter”, guns, FISA, #states in the Union, Auschwitz, tax hikes, pull out of Iraq no matter what, etc. etc.) and and looks all too human. He’d better hope that the Convention happens soon or he might not even get to the Championship.

Jul 11, 2008 - 9:03 pm 10. Wadeusaf:

An agreement with the Government of Iraq may make most of this academic. Still any ordered reverse of forward movement could be called an advance to the rear. Obama did not, as near as I can tell, include the withdraw of Air support for the Iraqi forces in his calculations for running away, er retreating, um withdraw. I doubt he seriously considered ordering any but the optimum withdraw scenario as provided by his military advisory. It all leads me to question what they’re drinking, er, smoking um, thinking?

However, the withdraw en mass starts out, by announcing the flee market location and time with no room for error and nothing to keep them guessing, the exercise will quickly turn our hard earned advances into a rout not witnessed since the days of Paul Revere, and with prospects potentially more bleak than Dunkirk. Of course any agreement made with the Iraqi government would negate or at least forestall most of the tomfoolery.

Jul 11, 2008 - 9:25 pm 11. Ammo Guy:

If you’ve never done the military logistical piece, it’s hardly worth discussing with know-it-alls sitting safely at home behind their computers. Like it or not, equipment must be cleaned properly before it can leave certain geographical areas (gypsy moth infestations were our bane in Europe) otherwise we’ll be bringing home all sorts of interesting wildlife to our fruited plains which you stay-at-homes may not appreciate in your backyard. And this all after our troops may have had to fight their way out of the box; perhaps not as likely now thanks to the surge, but every commander will have to plan accordingly. Beyond equipment, you toss in HAZMAT shipping requirements and you have some real headaches. Finally, our troops will be discouraged and tired after being yanked away from their mission before completion, so all the bureaucratic hoops we will make them jump thru will not be appreciated. Heck, clearing the property book will be an interesting exercise since most units have been falling on equipment left behind by the unit they’re replacing. So, we can either “redeploy” according to doctrine or we can do so according to Obama and end up with endless Congressional investigations about missing and unaccounted for equipment and supplies. Yeah, it’s an echo chamber in here, but it’s better than the earplugs some folks wear.

Jul 11, 2008 - 9:26 pm 12. Charles:

Here’s another analystM giving a thumbs down with pics to obama’s birth certificate.

Here is a google search of obama birth certificate

Jul 11, 2008 - 9:47 pm 13. Dave:

If somebody is hell-bent on a 16-month timetable to “end the war”, then it would be advisable to simply use thermite and HE on the equipment and let the troops board their
transportation with nothing but the clothes they are wearing.

I am not being faceticious. In the aftermath
of a precipitate withdrawal, the equipment will be useless after being returned to the US. No American soldier would be allowed to use it anywhere in the world other than on those Americans who disapproved of the rout.

Matter of fact, why don’t we just e-mail the soldiers their discharge papers where they are and let them find their way home, if they
can. We shall have no farther need of military personnel once the Obama-messiah proclaims peace. Oops, I take all this back.
Gotta invade Pakistan you know.

Jul 11, 2008 - 10:35 pm 14. NahnCee:

Might be sort of fun watching the various Arabs and their tribes fighting over billions of dollars worth of left-behind equipment that they don’t know how to make, how to run, or how to maintain. What the hell — we’re a rich country and under Obama we’ll get used to throwing things overboard because *he* thinks it’s the morally correct thing to do (and because it will hurt whitey). Can you say $7 per gallon gas?

Jul 11, 2008 - 11:13 pm 15. Cannoneer No. 4:

edwin hubble you have no freaking clue what hoops must be jumped through to prepare a vehicle for redeployment back to CONUS.

USDA inspectors require every speck of alien nematode-bearing dust, every clod, every streak of dried mud to be pressure-washed out of every nook and cranny to keep crop-blighting bacteria from crossing the ocean. Entire Chemical Decontamination companies were worked to exhaustion redeploying from OIF I. Quite a bit less Decon capability is available in theater now.

Spend some time under a tank holding a fire hose. Until you do, don’t expect to be taken seriously by those who have.

Jul 11, 2008 - 11:15 pm 16. abu al-fin:

Mr. Obama can not be expected to dirty his mind with thoughts about “cleaning equipment.” He is the one for speech-making, he is the one for providing inspiration, he is the one for giving us hope with his strong pronouncements. Obama is the one to send his dictates out on the airwaves, for everyone to hear. To hear is to obey. The presidential frontrunner and baby senator from Illinois has never done a lick of real work in his life.

Jul 12, 2008 - 3:55 am 17. hdgreene:

It is the original “plan” to “end the war” that marks Sen. Obama as a great political manipulator with little to no knowledge of what the job of Commander in Chief requires and even less concern to find out.

When AQ and the Mahdi Army were seen as the comming winners and before the Iraqi army was organized, The Democrats, with Sen Obama in the lead, wanted to pull out in a year. It was: “Damn the truck bombs: full speed retreat!” In the US Congress they wrote a law that was a planned US military rout with the enemy (sorry, Edwin, I have to use that word to communicate the idea) getting a copy of the plans.

And if AQ had a problem attacking US during the withdrawal, they could truck bomb schools along the path. And those that think a “car wash” is a technicality — lack patching a leaky roof on public housing or not letting the entire estate turn into a drug market and a no go area for police — will blame the death of every Iraqi child on the US. The forgoing does not even qualify as speculation.

And the final collapse in Iraq would be happening now — not of our enemies (sorry, I used the word again) but of those who sided with us to build an independent future for their country. And the US would be blamed for every summary execution and every rapidly filling mass grave. Turn on your TV. That’s the news now if the Democrats had their way.

Jul 12, 2008 - 5:14 am 18. MarkJ:

Obama’s really big problem is that he’s fixated on “ending this war”…while concurrently assuming that History will hit the snooze button on 20 January 2009.

If Obama were half as smart as he and his supporters claim he is, he’d be thinking about the NEXT war–I’ve got a sawbuck it’ll happen within the next three years. But, hey, when you’re a Messiah, how can you be bothered with inconsequential details?

Jul 12, 2008 - 6:26 am 19. 3Case:

What!? WHAT!?!! The Democrat is talking out his a**!? Quelle suprise!!

Jul 12, 2008 - 6:41 am 20. programmer:

One of the problems with the current political situation in the US is that any kind of withdrawal is immediately identified as a victory for the anti-Iraq war group and a defeat for the pro-Iraq war group. So even if it makes tactical and strategic sense to start pulling troops out and turning things over to sovereign Iraqi forces, both sides here in the states starts putting their spin on it. So, the pro-war group never wants to leave and the anti-war group continues to demand immediate withdrawal. What a mess. Exit strategy is not a dirty word. It is or at least should be a carefully thought out (and probably very secret) plan BY THE MILITARY on how to serve the best interests of the United States first, and sovereign Iraq second, politics be darned, with, as usual, the military doing the best they can in difficult circumstances to preserve life and limb, and honor.

Jul 12, 2008 - 6:44 am 21. Cannoneer No. 4:

Exit strategy is not a dirty word

It is when used in place of the word VICTORY.

Jul 12, 2008 - 6:59 am 22. Marine 83:

edwin hubble. I once spent an entire day getting a jeep clean enough to get on an air force c-141 just to take it back into California from Washington. Getting a Brigades worth of gear clean is a monumental task. That’s just one of the reasons the experts are telling us BHO’s plan will not work.

Jul 12, 2008 - 7:50 am 23. Ammo Guy:

Hey Cannoneer No. 4, ya missed a spot!

Sorry, couldn’t resist and when I think of the mud pit at Slavonski Brod where we “redeployed” 1st AD back to Germany in late 1996, I shake my head and wonder how we pulled it off…and no one was shooting at us either! Still not sure the Austrians knew what we were shipping thru their country on the way back to garrison, but I digress. Even so, I’m sure some poor planning cell in CENTCOM is busy wasting its time prepping a 16-month “redeployment” plan for President Obama as we speak because that’s what we do…plan for all possibilities, whether we like it or not. And when W’s picture comes off the wall next January, I have no doubt that our troops will well serve the CINC whose picture replaces him – I just wonder if their service and sacrifice will be appreciated by the next POTUS.

Jul 12, 2008 - 8:01 am 24. Tony:

Hey, why shouldn’t we be able to “end this war” rapidly under Obama? Heck, that’s nothing compared to his powers as he explained them in his acceptance speech:

“generations from now,
we will be able to look back
and tell our children

(with mounting excitement)

that this was the moment
when we began to provide care for the sick,
and good jobs for the jobless.

This was the moment
when the riiiiise of the oceans began to slow,
and our planet began to heal.”

(Quote from American Thinker)

Moses has nothing on this guy!

I still miss the good old days (a few months ago) when the libs were painting our retreat as a second Dunkirk, with our beaten forces under fire from the almighty Mahdi Army (remember when the success of the Surge was due to Mookie’s “cease-fire).

Ah well, knock on wood, but the war on Iraq seems to have passed the point where the Dems can now lose it on purpose to make a point. However, the destruction of our very promising missile defense program will be a piece of cake for Obama.

Jul 12, 2008 - 8:28 am 25. Jamie:

edwin hubble, you poor guy… Not to pile on too hard, but you don’t want to talk about “wash stations”? That concern doesn’t constitute a “serious argument”? I hope you’ve read the follow-up comments and that they’ve sunk in. The problem with being “reality-based” (and why we on this side laugh so hard at that snooty designation) is that for some reason the “reality-based community” tends to ignore actual reality in favor of its putative (and detail-challenged) “basis.”

Optimism is a valuable trait. But it ought to be (a) tempered with realism, and (b) preferably applied toward things that the Reasonable (American, in this case) Person would feel optimistic about (in other words, not a full-scale running retreat, which is what pulling American troops out without an orderly and by-the-book redeployment of materiel would look like). I liked (I think it was) Austin Bay’s comment about how the Democrat template for “withdrawal” is that iconic helicopter-on-the-roof photo: sure, that kind of withdrawal we could do.

Jul 12, 2008 - 8:34 am 26. Jamie:

programmer – your point is well taken, but it ought to be unnecessary as well. Of course there’s some little space where not just a victorious redeployment but also a desperate retreat must be planned. But when the public debate is over the exit strategy? Especially when things are going well? That’s bad.

I worked for a dot.com for a while just before the big giant ka-boom; its business plan was in fact just an exit strategy, as so many of them were: how much we could sell out for, in a timeframe of less than three years. In even blunter terms, how much we could convince some patsy we were worth, without ever having generated a penny’s worth of demonstrable value. The answer in our case was… diddly. Retreat!!

Jul 12, 2008 - 8:40 am 27. programmer:

Cannoneer No. 4,

This is a tad off topic, but just who do you think is going to proclaim VICTORY? How about if I state unequivocally that we (the US), have acheived VICTORY? Is that sufficient? Does it change any thing? How about if the next President of the US (whoever that is) states in front of the world, “We have acheived glorious VICTORY”. Now what? “Mission Accomplished” was proclaimed and look at the resulting uproar of “No it wasn’t!”,”Yes it was!”, ad infinitum.

Bragging rights for a particular ideology are not really important in the grand scheme of things, although they are personally satisfying. What is important is achieving important foreign policy goals in a cost effective manner, where the cost is measured not just in money but human lives, human potential that may never be realized. The benefit better be worth the cost when we ask our military to take on great tasks. Bragging rights at the neighborhood blog are not worth one extra life.

Jul 12, 2008 - 8:54 am 28. programmer:

Jamie,

This is turning into more of a debate than I intended. As I indicated, my thoughts on EXIT STRATEGY is that it should be a high level foreign policy (what are our [the US's] goals) issue and then a military implementation, in as much as fortune and enemy capability permit. However, and there is always a however, the US is probably one of the coolest democracies that has ever existed (at least in my lifetime). We, the people, actually believe that we run the government. And to a great extent, we do. So that involves public debate of things that in most countries/governments would never be exposed to public commentary. And when you factor in the Internet, well Katy, bar the door.

I will now don my flameproof suit and say that I have always liked the idea that the US military is ultimately answerable to the civilian government. And the civilian government, to great extent, is answerable to the people, from whence the military comes. Seems kind of symmetric.

Jul 12, 2008 - 9:19 am 29. Charles:

It looks like Hawaiian officials are stone walling the release of Obama’s birth certificate.

Jul 12, 2008 - 9:35 am 30. Ammo Guy:

OTOH, “bragging rights” are important to some people. Witness the Israeli “redeployment” from Southern Lebanon a few years ago. The Israelis tried to paint it as a sound move militarily while Hezbollah tossed a few rockets at the IDF on their way out and immediately proclaimed “victory.” The perception that Hezbollah drove out the IDF is a popular one amongst the downtrodden in that “neighborhood” and the repercussions have been playing out ever since…and not in Israel’s favor either. Methinks it will be no different under President Obama’s brillant plan.

Jul 12, 2008 - 9:45 am 31. Charles:

In her remarks on MSNBC Michelle Obama says of Barak. “His own mother, she said at the beginning of her remarks, was “very young and very single when she had him.” ”

Its reasonable to conclude that the Obama campaign would be hesitant to release his birth certificate because it would show that he was born illegitimate. Since a significant porportion of the US population is illegitimate–you would think that this would not be a problem for the obama campaign. So it might be something else. But maybe not.

Jul 12, 2008 - 10:06 am 32. Charles:

Jesse Jackson’s remarks about wanting to cut off baraks nuts came because of baraks speach that exhorted fathers to take part in their children’s lives–especially black fathers.

That speach may have come because of speculation on the internet about baraks birth certificate–which would show that his mom was single when she gave birth.

Jul 12, 2008 - 10:09 am 33. NahnCee:

“…because it would show that he was born illegitimate. Since a significant porportion of the US population is illegitimate–you would think that this would not be a problem for the obama campaign.”

Gee, because that would make him a black bastard like a stereotypical majority of black men in America?

Jul 12, 2008 - 10:43 am 34. Charles:

As well Michelle remarks that barak’s mother was “very single” means that barak obama was born “barry dunham”

Jul 12, 2008 - 10:49 am 35. tanarg:

“Since neither Obama nor all of his followers can be considered stupid the reason for these impossible demands must be that they either have not given the matter serious thought or simply engaging in an “I want” moment, where you don’t care about feasibility.”

I disagree. I think one can call it “stupid.”

Jul 12, 2008 - 10:56 am 36. Charles:

But then you have to wonder. Aren’t Obama’s people going through too much trouble to hide Obama’s birth certificate. I mean, so what if obama was born Barry Denham. So what if his father does not appear on his birth certificate.

Jul 12, 2008 - 11:28 am 37. Eggplant:

Slightly off topic:

Brilliant article by Ralph Peters, refer to:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07122008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_dissent_deceit_119522.htm

Jul 12, 2008 - 11:37 am 38. Teresita:

As stated, ABC reported from interviews with military personnel, to leave Iraq in 16 months we can get the troops out but not the equipment.

What are you talking about? On January 1, 2003, the first division (3rd ID, 17,000 troops) was deployed to the Gulf in preparation for the war, with only its second brigade pre-positioned in Kuwait. The 60,000 troops already in the Gulf region was doubled in three months in the run up to the invasion, along with all of their equipment, and these forces were ready to fight. Now you tell me with all the troops disengaged from combat (they’re rolling up the last thousand al Qaeda in Mosul now) we can’t pull them all back in sixteen months without leaving all their gear behind. It doesn’t wash.

Jul 12, 2008 - 11:38 am 39. trangbang68:

I can’t help but remember the photos of sailors pushing a Huey off the side of a transport ship into the South China Sea in April 1975 as the last rats were brought off the sinking ship of Lyndon Johnson’s excellent adventure in Indochina. Other than a few million Asians in postwar Communist graves; its all a memory now. Fat old vets can try to crawl through the Cu Chi tunnels and get back to Ho Chi Minh City in time for dinner. Hell, maybe the domino theory in the Middle East is just a warmonger’s fantasy also.Either that or we’re in for the wildest ride since about 1939.The Messiah knows, he do!

Jul 12, 2008 - 11:48 am 40. trangbang68:

Teresita,
Uh, did you happen to read the informed gentlemens’ point about having to de-contaminate and clean all the equipment? I don’t reckon they had to do that on the way in.

Jul 12, 2008 - 11:53 am 41. Charles:

Barry Denham should read Barry Dunham

Jul 12, 2008 - 12:02 pm 42. Ammo Guy:

Exactly Trangbang68, thank you. As I was issuing ammo to Task Force Eagle on their way into Bosnia in Dec 95, I told my boss that this was the easy part because it was all clean and brand new – I said just wait for the turn-in a year from now because that’s where we’ll earn our dough.

Jul 12, 2008 - 12:14 pm 43. elhombrelibre:

Anyone who has been in Iraq knows that retrograde of equipment and materiel out of there will be a very slow process under the best of circumstances. Mr. Edwin Hubble is mistaken when he pooh poohs the bottle neck of not enough wash racks. Perhaps Obama will wave US Customs Laws and allow us to simply import all the various and sundry bugs and ecological threats that our EPA tries to keep out. But I suspect he’ll realize that he cannot do that, so people will just blame the Neo-Cons. We have a huge amount of equipment in Iraq. Pulling out as quickly as Obama says is the pronouncement of a dilettante to fool the philistines.

Jul 12, 2008 - 12:17 pm 44. Cannoneer No. 4:

programmer, the people of the sovereign, functioning, Westphalian nation-state of Iraq, through their legitimately elected representatives, to declare victory by either teling us to hit the road or agreeing to a Status Of Forces Agreement.

Exit Strategies are Clintonian weasel words for how to retreat from unpopular, questionably legitimate Operations Other Than War in places of no critical strategic interest, where intolerance for casualties makes Force Protection a higher priority than Mission Accomplishment.

By definition, the term biases discussion in favor of foreign military commitments that can be terminated easily and against those that appear more open-ended. By making an exit strategy a prerequisite for the deployment of troops, neoisolationists preempt consideration of some worthwhile operations, allowing a general rule rather than specific arguments to do their work for them. Some of the missions that would have failed to meet such a standard include American participation in NATO, the post-armistice defense of South Korea, the post-Camp David peacekeeping in the Sinai, and the post-Gulf War containment of Iraq-not to mention the stated U.S. intention to maintain 100,000 troops in Asia. Indeed, an exit strategy in Asia would contradict the very purpose of the American presence there.

By emphasizing lockstep adherence to original plans and precise cost and time estimates, the idea of an exit strategy contributes to a false notion that military interventions are mechanical tasks like building a new kitchen, rather than strategic contests marked by friction and uncertainty.

“Bragging rights” are critical in JUDGING who was right and who was wrong, who stuck to their guns and who ran, or tried to run, who supported the mission and who undermined it, who had balls and who was a pussy, who has earned the right to be heard and who should STFU.

“Bragging rights” = victory in the War of Ideas.

Jul 12, 2008 - 12:43 pm 45. Teresita:

Trangbang68: Uh, did you happen to read the informed gentlemens’ point about having to de-contaminate and clean all the equipment? I don’t reckon they had to do that on the way in.

Recently Bush reduced the time in-theater for deployments from 15 months to 12 months. Are any of these returning brigades being hung up for lack of time to de-contaminate and clean their equipment? No. Suppose Obama said he wanted everyone home in twelve months. That means the brigade that just arrived in Iraq will come home last, while the brigade that has been there twelve months already will start decon now and begin packing for home, which is what everyone would have done anyway. The only difference is that no new brigades will arrive in the empty C-17s to relieve them.

Jul 12, 2008 - 1:28 pm 46. whiskey:

Wretchard, Obama *IS* stupid, and does not have a clue. About much of anything beyond his experience: the Ivy League, minority grievance politics, Black Nationalism, yuppie concerns.

It goes FAR beyond Iraq. It’s a “bubble.” At a time of global recession, brought on by rising energy/food prices, Obama has no “plan” to lower energy and food costs. Indeed, he wants them both HIGHER. Because he lives in the bubble. No wonder Bill Clinton has contempt for him. Obama disdains the middle class and their values and thinks he can win with yuppies, blacks, and college kids.

The “I Want” fantasy of simply throwing money at a kitchen remodel, or swinging a sleazy/corrupt real estate deal, without any costs or consequences, is what characterizes most yuppies. There are no real choices, which invariably involve costs and trade-offs. This is why our political class has mostly failed, and lives in a fantasy world every bit equal of Osama’s. The fantasy of doing something, “global warming fighting” without sky-high energy/food bills, mass starvation, food rationing (already in Britain), and political aggression by resource hungry nations like China. The fantasy of withdrawing from Iraq by waving a magic wand and incurring no costs, not the least of which is AQ declaring victory and getting a freer hand from Muslim nations to attack the US from safe havens, is just part of that fantasy.

Jul 12, 2008 - 1:38 pm 47. Andrew:

Are any of these returning brigades being hung up for lack of time to de-contaminate and clean their equipment?

No, because they leave it there.

Jul 12, 2008 - 2:01 pm 48. programmer:

Cannoneer No. 4

I can see you feel strongly about ‘Bragging rights’ and VICTORY, hence I won’t try to change your opinion. A question though, which is probably a non-sequitur, but what is your opinion on the long term strategic implications of Pickett’s charge at Gettysburg and the disagreement between Longstreet and Lee?

Jul 12, 2008 - 2:06 pm 49. NahnCee:

Whoosh — if you’re losing an argument, change the subject.

Jul 12, 2008 - 2:25 pm 50. Teresita:

Andrew: Are any of these returning brigades being hung up for lack of time to de-contaminate and clean their equipment? No, because they leave it there.

Andrew, are you telling me that when the Stryker Brigade rotated home recently to Fort Lewis, they just came home with the clothes on their back, and they didn’t bring their Stryker vehicles with them? Because if that’s the case, who’s maintaining and using them now? And that means we don’t really have an operational Stryker brigade, because all the troops are here, but their gear is back in Iraq because its too hard to decontaminate and clean them, and apparently we can’t do that here in the US. I hope somebody is watching all those dirty Stryker vehicles, because despite reports of our tanks and other vehicles being worn to pieces, we can’t leave them in Iraq or else the Iraqis might get them and use them to become a sovereign nation. So Obama is out to lunch. You’re right! We need to stay there for 100 years and guard all this contaminated materiel.

Jul 12, 2008 - 2:34 pm 51. programmer:

Actually, for a military and history buff, it is most germane to the topic at hand. A move around the center to the right flank, so to speak.

Jul 12, 2008 - 2:35 pm 52. Cannoneer No. 4:

programmer,

I have opinions on Gettysburg, which we can discuss to our heart’s content on my blog where we won’t be cluttering up Wretchard’s thread with extraneous OT excursions.

Jul 12, 2008 - 2:45 pm 53. section9:

Nice to see Teresita back, btw.

Right flank at Gettysburg, actually, on the previous day, and overrun the Round Tops. Makes the whole Pickett’s Charge thing rather moot, don’t you think?

This has nothing to do with Brigade Capability, btw. Rather, it has everything to do with standing up the Iraqi government over the next few years (which is about to come into about 250-300 billion barrels of oil) and keeping out the neighbors, and getting out responsibly.

Having actually won the conflict and achieved our main strategic objectives of getting rid of Saddam and standing up a Arabist “democracy”, we can now begin to leave. However, a withdrawal timeline of, say, three years as proposed by the Maliki Government makes a whole lot more sense than the 16 month bugout that Obambi promised his primary supporters.

It’s always humiliating when the head of an Arab Government is the one who has his head screwed on properly, while the Democratic Nominee is the guy in search of a clue.

Jul 12, 2008 - 3:40 pm 54. Richard:

I talked this spring with an ex-student of mine, who had served a tour in Iraq as a marine artillery officer and was preparing to go back. He was contemptuous and exasperated when talking about Obama’s timetable for withdrawal. He said that not only was it impossible, but that the plan revealed such ignorance of the military that the man who propagated it was clearly incompetent to be commander in chief.

Richard Moorton

Jul 12, 2008 - 3:55 pm 55. Cannoneer No. 4:

Teresita, what is it about units falling in on the equipment left by the unit they relieved that escapes you?

4/2 SBCT came home with the ACU’s on their back, bug out bags in the overheads, individual weapons between their knees, and duffel bags in the hold of bloody great DC-10’s, the same way they went out.

Jul 12, 2008 - 3:59 pm 56. NahnCee:

…sits up and takes notice at the promise of 250-300 million barrels of oil “in the next few years”.

Any chance Iraq will see the light and want to repay their great friends and good liberators with a percentage of that there oil? Like, starting next week?

Jul 12, 2008 - 5:30 pm 57. Charles:

I checked over at littlegreenfootballs and found that they’re not buying the forgery angle on the

Jul 12, 2008 - 5:53 pm 58. Charles:

So why wouldn’t obama’s people allow Hawaii to release the original.

Jul 12, 2008 - 5:56 pm 59. Charles:

Here is how the McCain campaign handled questions about his birth certificate. Its pretty prefunctory. They issued a hard copy of his birth certificate.

Jul 12, 2008 - 6:05 pm 60. Andrew:

Teresita,

Yes, that is what I am telling you. Not just me, either. Anyone who has been on an operational deployment can tell you that unless you are on Roto zero or the last Roto your major equipment stays in place. How much sense would it make to ship thousands of vehicles back and forth across the world every year or so.(Think of the carbon footprint for goodness sakes! (sarcasm))

The washing is done in theater to prevent bringing contaminants back to the continent so washing them here would kind of defeat the purpose, no?

You ignorance of such matters is not surprising but your unwillingness to listen to those who know is astounding.

Jul 12, 2008 - 6:47 pm 61. CPT. Charles:

Perhaps I’m missing something, but isn’t a fair part of the ‘back-and forth’ in this discussion working under the premise that Obama actually GIVES A SHIT about the future condition, equipment-wise & morale-wise, of the Armed Forces [in general] and Army [in particular]?

It would take an utter fool who’s slept-walked through the past 45+ years to think ANY post-Scoop Jackson [Zell Miller, probably Lieberman, being the last I'll acknowledge...] donk gives a flying rats-ass about the condition of the Republic’s Constitutional sword and shield.

Anyone who served under Carter or Clinton knows what’s in store for the future. Only this time, I’ll be worse.

Jul 12, 2008 - 6:49 pm 62. fred:

For the last six months I have been voraciously reading everything about Obama that I can get my hands on, trying to find anything in his two books and in his speeches and public statements which indicate anything at all that he has the potential to be a good commander in chief. There is nothing at all out there. Nothing.

The man, like all Leftists, knows jack shit about things military. Hell, over thirty years ago when I was on the Left I was the only Leftist I knew of in the circles I ran in who had:

a. served in the military
b. knew how to use a rifle and handgun
c. knew any military history at all, including tactics, strategy, and campaings.

I’ll bet Obama knows nothing about the chain of command, officer and enlisted. I’ll bet he knows nothing whatsoever about the weapons’ systems he and Joe Cirincione want to eliminate. And that, my friends, is the huge jackpot our enemies are working for and hoping he can bring about. The end of missile defense. The end of the F-22 Raptor. The end of the Virginia Class submarines. And the end of every cutting edge technological infantry and mobile system coming on line.

Our new POTUS will essentially have this nation assuming the position: bend over and grab your ankles.

We are in deep trouble starting in January. But maybe this is a lesson the nation needs to finally repudiate what I thought was repudiated under Jimmy Carter. Obama’s four years will be worse in every way than Carter’s worst.

Jul 12, 2008 - 9:19 pm 63. NahnCee:

Seems to me that if the State Department can thwart Dubya for 8 years, Defense and Pentagon (or any bureaucrats worth their salt) should be able to tap dance B. Hussein for a mere 4. Because you just *know* that if he should manage to get himself elected for one term, a la Jimmy Carter, that’ll be all she wrote for Obama and his lady before he’s tossed out unceremoniously.

Jul 12, 2008 - 10:18 pm 64. Eggplant:

NahnCee said:

“Seems to me that if the State Department can thwart Dubya for 8 years, Defense and Pentagon (or any bureaucrats worth their salt) should be able to tap dance B. Hussein for a mere 4.”

Chances are good that in the next 4 years the Iranians will become a full blown national security problem (assuming the Israelis don’t nuke em first). My guess is the Israelis would see no option but to pre-emptively attack Iran if the Messiah ended up as our next President. It’s very doubtful that B. Hussein has the ability to pick up the pieces after Israel turns everything upside down. Why would Israel or any nation trust a two-bit demagogue like B. Hussein?

Jul 12, 2008 - 10:53 pm 65. Doug:

Fred,
I was thinking of you after I heard Obambi’s laundry list of military don’ts.
My favorite for absurdity was “untested missile defense.”
I would hope if he still lived in Hawaii, he might have heard of a few successes, but in the bubble of Marxist anti-Americanism that he chooses to exist in, even that probably would remain a mystery to the man who never wrote squat for the Harvard Review, and mangles grammar and logic as though he never attended college
Haven’t read Horowitz in some time, he must be pulling his hair out, having listened to and deconstructed all this scat thousands of times over the years in left field.

Jul 13, 2008 - 12:04 am 66. CPT. Charles:

NahnCee—apples and oranges. With State your talking about a ‘handful’ [compared 1mil+ for the Armed Forces...] of individuals, WITH civil service regs shielding them.

No disrespect to you, but you haven’t the faintest idea how bad things were when Dubya took office in 2001. The number of AF squadrons with non-operational aircraft [hanger-queens], the number of Army manuver battalions at CAT-3/-4 readiness levels, etc. I won’t print the numbers here, my OPSEC reflexes won’t let me. I’ll give one hint: everybody babbles on about the troop levels for OIF…there was NO plan B force structure. We went with what was capable of fighting, 2+ years into Dubya’s 1st term. The rest were either still rebuilding, or reserves [in case something else happened...]. You don’t advertise the fact that your army is a shattered mess.

No NahnCee, for the military, money is air and water. No ammo, no POL, no training=no readiness. Want an example? Korea—Task Force Smith. Yeah, you can send them out against the Bad Guys, just don’t expect that many of them are coming back.

The same under Carter. I know. I was there.

Jul 13, 2008 - 3:19 am 67. Teresita:

Eggplant: It’s very doubtful that B. Hussein has the ability to pick up the pieces after Israel turns everything upside down.

But Barack can and will cut Israel loose with no financial aid if they make a move against Iran without prior approval from the USA. With gas at $10 a gallon, there would be nary a peep from the electorate.

Jul 13, 2008 - 8:08 am 68. Robohobo:

Just move the dates from this out a few years and you can get the idea. This piece IS grounded in reality and quite possible.

http://www.therant.us/staff/kraft/10242006.htm

Jul 13, 2008 - 10:38 am 69. Ammo Guy:

Though a bit off topic, Robohobo, an interesting scenario. OTOH, I always wondered what would have happened if AQ had been able to strike a year earlier during the aftermath of the 2000 election brouhaha. Of course, with the planning lead times and the inability to predict US election outcomes, it would have been an accident in timing for Osama, but can you imagine the situation on 7 Dec 2000 with two possible President-elects and the resident egomaniac on the job vying to respond to that attack? Watching the aftermath in NYC with the cancellation of the 9/11/00 mayoral election and some serious discussion of Mayor Giuliani continuing in office as the only person who could deal with the city’s tragedy, can any of us not imagine President Clinton trying to pull the same stunt? I can just hear him now. And, this scenario is why I always argue that SCOTUS did the right thing by ending the election controversy because America needs a President at all times and can’t afford endless legal appeals that do nothing but titillate lawyers and encourage our enemies. I still believe that the lost month of planning (from election day to 12 Dec 00) contributed in some way to the Bush’s administration inability to be leaning forward in the foxhole on 9/11/01. I could be wrong, but I doubt it )

Jul 13, 2008 - 3:28 pm 70. patterns:

Sometimes I see patterns. Cedarford enemy == jew whiskey enemy == yuppie.

Are these the same people having fun? They’re starting to come off as algorithmic.

Jul 13, 2008 - 5:37 pm 71. Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e27v1:

[...] On Mr Obama’s plan to withdraw 2 brigades each month from Iraq for 16 months after taking office. [...]

Jul 14, 2008 - 6:17 am 72. andrewdb:

Wretchard –

excellent discussion here of the problems in India/Pakistan when the Brits left.

http://www.capitalreach.com/rt/aei9475?du=/a/aei/mp3.jsp

Jul 14, 2008 - 12:48 pm 73. Jay:

I agree with Fred but I take a stronger position. The Obama people do not see the military as an important part of our strategic and tactical environment. I bet most view the military with contempt, fools who would spend their lives not maximizing their income. Sure officers seek power and prestige in their own world but they are middle class (Patton was an exception since he was wealthy).
So they will bring the troops back and leave the weapons either in working order or destroyed. I bet that they would be unconcerned about the possibility that the Iranians will seize the weapons and conquer Iraq. Forcing college students to do “community service” is more important while enriching the big contributors such as ADM and Soros.
But the reality of our financial problems and the foolish personal concerns of many of our young people will be the making of a new type of civil war. Bankrupting pension plans and stealing public monies are not a way to govern UNLESS the rulers have a dedicated armed youth organization that will kill for the rulers under some ideology.
But perhaps the American people are defeatist the way the Israeli left is.

Jul 14, 2008 - 1:39 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.