Looks Like Obama Flip Flopped On The Iraq War!!

[rational thinker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kFrFIFizkU

[ryanmkeisling]

He most certainly did:

The war in Iraq:

Let’s start with his signature position against the Iraq war. Obama has sent mixed messages at best.

First, he opposed the war in Iraq while in the Illinois state legislature. Once he was running for US Senate though, when public opinion and support for the war was at its highest, he was quoted in the July 27, 2004 Chicago Tribune as saying, “There’s not that much difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who’s in a position to execute.” The Tribune went on to say that Obama, “now believes US forces must remain to stabilize the war-ravaged nation – a policy not dissimilar to the current approach of the Bush administration.” This makes me sick! Is there an explanation for this type of behavior from someone we want to lead our already problematic country into the next term?

You guys at the campaign say he was referring to the ongoing occupation and how best to stabilize the region. But why wouldn’t he have taken the opportunity to urge withdrawal if he truly opposed the war? Was he trying to signal to conservative voters that he would subjugate his anti-war position if elected to the US Senate and perhaps support a lengthy occupation? Well as it turns out, he’s done just that.

Since taking office in January 2005 he has voted to approve every war appropriation the Republicans have put forward, totaling over $300 billion. He also voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State despite her complicity in the Bush Administration’s various false justifications for going to war in Iraq. Why would he vote to make one of the architects of “Operation Iraqi Liberation” the head of US foreign policy? Curiously, he lacked the courage of 13 of his colleagues who voted against her confirmation.

And though he often cites his background as a civil rights lawyer, Obama voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act in July 2005, easily the worse attack on civil liberties in the last half-century. It allows for wholesale eavesdropping on American citizens under the guise of anti-terrorism efforts among other things. This was a huge mistake and a very contradictory stance. Where is this mans sense of principle? Liberty? I do not see change.

And in March 2006, Obama went out of his way to travel to Connecticut to campaign for Senator Joseph Lieberman who faced a tough challenge by anti-war candidate Ned Lamont. At a Democratic Party dinner attended by Lamont, Obama called Lieberman “his mentor” and urged those in attendance to vote and give financial contributions to him. This is the same Lieberman who Alexander Cockburn called “Bush’s closest Democratic ally on the Iraq War.” Why would Obama have done that if he was truly against the war?

Recently, with anti-war sentiment on the rise, Obama declared he will get our combat troops out of Iraq in 2009. But Obama isn’t actually saying he wants to get all of our troops out of Iraq. At a September 2007 debate before the New Hampshire primary, moderated by Tim Russert, Obama refused to commit to getting our troops out of Iraq by January 2013 and, on the campaign trail, he has repeatedly stated his desire to add 100,000 combat troops to the military. Again where is this change we keep hearing about?

At the same event, Obama committed to keeping enough soldiers in Iraq to “carry out our counter-terrorism activities there” which includes “striking at al Qaeda in Iraq.” What he didn’t say is this continued warfare will require an estimated 60,000 troops to remain in Iraq according to a May 2006 report prepared by the Center for American Progress. Moreover, it appears he intends to “redeploy” the troops he takes out of the unpopular war in Iraq and send them to Afghanistan. So it appears that under Obama’s plan the US will remain heavily engaged in war.

[rational thinker]

Thanks for that quote. It's amazing how people view this man as a god, when in reality he is no different than any of the other politicians.

[Peace&Freedom]

If Obama cared more about winning than in licking the elite's boots, he would have stuck to his guns about opposing the war, and at least hinted at a rapid pullout. Kerry lost getting a sweeping victory in 2004 because he refused to give the public a clean choice---all he would have had to say was, "vote for Bush, and we'll be in Iraq at least another 5-6 years. Vote for me, and we're out in 5-6 months." If Obama said the same kind of thing this year, he'd get 300 electoral votes easily.

[winston_blade]

LOL. If Obama doesn't stand for something, then how do we stand a chance?:D

[Agent CSL]

Everyone I've come across so far who voted for Obama are beginning to regret their choice. All I can say is "We told you so."

[brandon]

Yes Obama did flip-flop on the war, and as he begins his general election campaign his rhetoric will become more hawkish to appeal to the pro-war demographics, as the anti-war voters have no other choice at this point (other then baldwin).

However, this youtube video is 4 years old. This isn't anything new.

[Bruno]

I've said this all along, as have others. He now has the nomination, and took only a few days to flip 180 on this .

[pinkmandy]

He's all about change. Literally. ;)