Iraq Reviews > Graham Questions Clinton over ”Ending the War in Iraq While ...
![]()
[SCHotline Press Releases] “Senator Clinton made an interesting statement last night. She said, “We’re ready to end the war in Iraq and win the war in Afghanistan.” No one doubts we must win in Afghanistan, the country that gave rise to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. But Senator Clintons Iraq statement about “ending” the Iraq war was quite troubling.
Some related posts from Technorati and Google.
![]()
[Real and "Informational" Bombs] Cost of Iraq War: Now, let’s add into that figure the whole private crew of non-government employees operating in Iraq, including all the cooks, weapons technicians, translators, interrogators, and other private-contract support personnel. That combined cost probably comes closer to $300 million per week, or almost as much as is spent on uniformed personnel by the Air Force, Army, Navy, and Marines.
![]()
[Sister Toldjah] Attitudes on Iraq are changing: McCain has a clear national security advantage and knows this, because the focal point of his speech last night was winning the war on terror, including the war in Iraq - in fact, Iraq was one of the first things (if not *the* first - I can’t remember) that he mentioned in his victory speech last night. I anticipate that if McCain can keep America’s eyes focused on where it needs to be, which is our national security, and Iraq keeps improving, BO and Hillary either one will have a hard time convincing the American people that they are the candidate (respectively) who has the best CIC credentials to lead in the GWOT.
![]()
[Cafe Talk] Obama, Judgement and Iraq: As a consequence of Obama's dereliction of duty on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a feckless administration has had absolutely no oversight as it careens from disaster to disaster in Afghanistan, including the central governments loss of control over 70 percent of the country and yet another bumper crop of opium to fuel the efforts of the Taliban and their terrorist allies. Of course, if you don't hold hearings, conduct oversight, make recommendations or sponsor legislation, then you have no record to explain or defend and you are free to take whatever position is convenient when attacking those who actually did address issues.
![]()
[The Avid Editor's Insights] Hussein Absent At Afghanistan Strategy Hearings: ”Unlike John McCain, Barack Obama opposed a war in Iraq that diverted resources from Afghanistan, and introduced comprehensive legislation last January that would end the war in Iraq and called for more troops in Afghanistan, Burton said. ”The American people understand that both John McCain and Barack Obama have missed Senate hearings and votes during their campaigns, and they are responding to Obamas judgment, record, and plans for finishing the fight in Afghanistan.
[Comedian For President] The $3000000000000 Iraq War: Was It Worth It?: Far better, he suggests, to leave rapidly and in a dignified manner, and to spend some of it on helping Iraqis reconstruct their own country - and the rest on investing in and strengthening the American economy, so that it can retain its independence, and have the wherewithal, at least, to play a responsible role in the world. The book ends with a list of 18 specific reforms arising from Stiglitz and Bilmes’s discoveries, focusing on exactly how to fund and run a war from now on (depend not on emergency funds and borrowing but on surtaxes, for example, so that voters know exactly what it is they are paying for, and can vote accordingly).
![]()
[Pat Dollard | Young Americans] Hussein Absent At Afghanistan Strategy Hearings: In his second trip overseas as a sitting senator, Obama was part of a congressional delegation that was scheduled to go to Afghanistan after visiting Iraq. Obama made the Iraq part of the trip but peeled off to visit Jordan and Israel instead of visiting Afghanistan, according to reports published at that time.
![]()
[Digital Press] Obama and Clinton Gaffs Dangerous to National Security: […] digitalartpress wrote an interesting post today on Obama and Clinton Gaffs Dangerous to National SecurityHere’s a quick excerptIt does not matter which Democrat candidate, Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, are dangerous for our country. Both candidates say they will pull troops out of Iraq and spend the money at home on domestic issues.
![]()
[Musashi's blog] What costs more per year than the Iraq war? (my response): wars in Iraq and Afghanistan WILL be much greater than the cost of the. public service programs quoted in this e-mail:.
![]()
[The Long Goodbye] People who fight fire with fire usually end up with ashes: [ ]…The Bush administration also feels it does not need to seek the authorization of Congress to ratify two pending agreements with Iraq: a “Strategic Framework” that would govern “normalized” relations with the U.S., and a Status of Forces Agreement that would govern the “authorities and protections” of U.S. troops in Iraq past Dec. 31, the expiration of a U.N.
![]()
[The Eclectic Blog] Economist Stiglitz Says Iraq War Costs May Reach $5 Trillion: The Congressional Budget Office said last month that $752 billion will have been appropriated so far for the Iraq war, the conflict in Afghanistan and other activities associated with the war on terror once lawmakers approve the remainder of President George W. Bush’s 2008 war-funding request.
![]()
[Sister Toldjah] Todays Barack Obama Digest: “I dont know what all that experience got her, because I have enough experience to know that if you have a National Intelligence Estimate and the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee says, `You should read this, this is why Im voting against the war, you should read it.” ”
![]()
[Koreanpower999's Weblog] Obamas Hollow “Judgment” and Empty Record: As a consequence of Obama’s dereliction of duty on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a feckless administration has had absolutely no oversight as it careens from disaster to disaster in Afghanistan, including the central governments loss of control over 70 percent of the country and yet another bumper crop of opium to fuel the efforts of the Taliban and their terrorist allies. Of course, if you don’t hold hearings, conduct oversight, make recommendations or sponsor legislation, then you have no record to explain or defend and you are free to take whatever position is convenient when attacking those who actually did address issues.
![]()
[mydd] She Delivered A Body Blow Tonight (Afghanistan): NBC News' Domenico Montaro - `That was a solid body blow by Clinton on Obama not holding a single hearing on Afghanistan.' "That was a solid body blow by Clinton on Obama not holding a single hearing on Afghanistan despite that he talks about it being the front line on terrorism and that he chairs the subcommittee on Europe, which oversees NATO. While Obama's explanation may be realistic -- that he became chair at the beginning of his campaign -- doesn't it reinforce Hillary and Bill Clinton's points that he is inexperienced, that he has only been in the Senate for a limited time and hasn't cut his teeth yet.
[The Democratic Daily] Hillarys Stance on the Iraq War: “Of course, as it became obvious to Hillary and other Democrats who supported the wars authorization that the Iraq adventure was becoming a catastrophe, her tone and words changed, though later than many of her democratic colleagues.” Then he provides another direct quote from Hillary: “If I had known then what we know now, there would never have been a vote and I never would have voted to give the president the authority.”
[Mudville Gazette] Dawn Patrol: On Thursday's The O'Reilly Factor, FNC analyst Karl Rove quoted an AP story by Christopher Wills from September 18, 2004, which had reported not only that Barack Obama had previously been open to a U.S. troop increase in Iraq when he was running for Senate, but had warned against a premature troop withdrawal as a "slap in the face to the troops fighting there" which could make Iraq "an extraordinary hotbed of terrorist activity."
![]()
[Stumper] Clinton's Closing Argument: Once Obama chomped down and decried the spot as fear-mongering--accurately, I think--Clinton was free to say, "My opponent and I are in an important debate about national security." Now she's redefining the terms of that debate--to her advantage. While Obama's original charge of "fear-mongering" applied solely to the ad, today Clinton is claiming that "my opponent says it's fear-mongering to talk about who is ready to protect America." That's patently ridiculous, of course.
Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, Revisited - The Real Reasons For The Upcoming War In Iraq: A ..., Top US Commander: Afghanistan Is Bad, But Iraq Is Worse - Politics ..., Top US Commander: Afghanistan Is Bad, But Iraq Is Worse - Politics ..., Op Ed News -- War Iraq, Mudville Gazette, Iraq Reviews