Obama Was Right

His statement today on voting for a new course in Iraq:

“This vote is a choice between validating the same failed policy in Iraq that has cost us so many lives and demanding a new one. And I am demanding a new one.”

“We must fund our troops. But we owe them something more. We owe them a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else’s civil war. We need a plan to compel the Iraqi people to reach a political accommodation and to take responsibility for their own future. It’s time to change course.”

“I opposed this war in 2002 precisely because I feared it would lead us to the open-ended occupation in which we find ourselves today.”

“This President has led us down a disastrous path and has arrogantly refused to acknowledge the grim reality of this war, which has cost us so dearly in lives and treasure.”

“After he vetoed a plan that would have funded the troops and begun to bring them home, this bill represents more of his stubborn refusal to address his failed policy.”

“We should not give the President a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path.”

“With my vote today, I am saying to the President that enough is enough. We must negotiate a better plan that funds our troops, signals to the Iraqis that it is time for them to act and that begins to bring our brave servicemen and women home safely and responsibly.”

… discussing the war with fellow Americans.

A perfect quote from our candidate regarding the passing of Iraq war funding bills with withdrawal language:

We are one signature away from ending the Iraq War. President Bush must listen to the will of the American people and sign this bill so that our troops can come home.

Obama is right.

The key piece of Senator Obama’s ground breaking foriegn policy address regarding Iraq:

We now know how badly this Administration squandered that opportunity. In 2002, I stated my opposition to the war çnot only because it was an unnecessary diversion from the struggle against the terrorists who attacked us on September 11th, but also because it was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the threats that 9/11 brought to light. I believed then, and believe now, that it was based on old ideologies and outdated strategies – a determination to fight a 21st century struggle with a 20th century mindset.

There is no doubt that the mistakes of the past six years have made our current task more difficult. World opinion has turned against us. And after all the lives lost and the billions of dollars spent, many Americans may find it tempting to turn inward, and cede our claim of leadership in world affairs.

I insist, however, that such an abandonment of our leadership is a mistake we must not make. America cannot meet the threats of this century alone, but the world cannot meet them without America. We must neither retreat from the world nor try to bully it into submission – we must lead the world, by deed and example.

We must lead by building a 21st century military to ensure the security of our people and advance the security of all people. We must lead by marshalling a global effort to stop the spread of the world’s most dangerous weapons. We must lead by building and strengthening the partnerships and alliances necessary to meet our common challenges and defeat our common threats.

And America must lead by reaching out to all those living disconnected lives of despair in the world’s forgotten corners – because while there will always be those who succumb to hate and strap bombs to their bodies, there are millions more who want to take another path – who want our beacon of hope to shine its light their way.

This election offers us the chance to turn the page and open a new chapter in American leadership. The disappointment that so many around the world feel toward America right now is only a testament to the high expectations they hold for us. We must meet those expectations again, not because being respected is an end in itself, but because the security of America and the wider world demands it.

This will require a new spirit – not of bluster and bombast, but of quiet confidence and sober intelligence, a spirit of care and renewed competence. It will also require a new leader. And as a candidate for President of the United States, I am asking you to entrust me with that responsibility.

There are five ways America will begin to lead again when I’m President. Five ways to let the world know that we are committed to our common security, invested in our common humanity, and still a beacon of freedom and justice for the world.

The first way America will lead is by bringing a responsible end to this war in Iraq and refocusing on the critical challenges in the broader region.

In a speech five months ago, I argued that there can be no military solution to what has become a political conflict between Sunni and Shi’a factions. And I laid out a plan that I still believe offers the best chance of pressuring these warring factions toward a political settlement – a phased withdrawal of American forces with the goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31st, 2008.

I acknowledged at the time that there are risks involved in such an approach. That is why my plan provides for an over-the-horizon force that could prevent chaos in the wider region, and allows for a limited number of troops to remain in Iraq to fight al Qaeda and other terrorists.

But my plan also makes clear that continued U.S. commitment to Iraq depends on the Iraqi government meeting a series of well-defined benchmarks necessary to reach a political settlement. Thus far, the Iraqi government has made very little progress in meeting any of the benchmarks, in part because the President has refused time and again to tell the Iraqi government that we will not be there forever. The President’s escalation of U.S. forces may bring a temporary reduction in the violence in Baghdad, at the price of increased U.S. casualties – though the experience so far is not encouraging. But it cannot change the political dynamic in Iraq. A phased withdrawal can.

Moreover, until we change our approach in Iraq, it will be increasingly difficult to refocus our efforts on the challenges in the wider region – on the conflict in the Middle East, where Hamas and Hezbollah feel emboldened and Israel’s prospects for a secure peace seem uncertain; on Iran, which has been strengthened by the war in Iraq; and on Afghanistan, where more American forces are needed to battle al Qaeda, track down Osama bin Laden, and stop that country from backsliding toward instability.

Burdened by Iraq, our lackluster diplomatic efforts leave a huge void. Our interests are best served when people and governments from Jerusalem and Amman to Damascus and Tehran understand that America will stand with our friends, work hard to build a peaceful Middle East, and refuse to cede the future of the region to those who seek perpetual conflict and instability. Such effective diplomacy cannot be done on the cheap, nor can it be warped by an ongoing occupation of Iraq. Instead, it will require patient, sustained effort, and the personal commitment of the President of the United States. That is a commitment I intend to make.

The entire speech is a breath of common sense fresh air after many years of foolish foreign policy.

Senator Obama isn’t just making promises about the future and claims about the past. He’s talking about the present:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama called on voters to pressure the state’s two U.S. senators to support the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, once President Bush vetoes a pending bill…

“If Bush vetoes the bill, we have to ratchet up the pressure,” Obama said.

“I’ll be honest with you. The only way we are going to do that until I am president – this president is not going to change his mind – is to have 16 additional senators and a bunch of additional congressmen be willing to override the veto.

“That is the only way we are going to bring about a change.” …

“I am not going to put anybody on the spot here, but there are two New Hampshire senators who have not made a commitment, and the power is in their hands right now,” Obama said.

“We have no other mechanism of forcing the president’s hand, other than overriding his veto.”

This isn’t just about a campaign issue. Senator Obama is calling on us to pressure these GOP Senators who are still backing the failed “stay the surge” policies of the administration to come to grips with reality. And if we support Senator Obama for being right about Iraq, then we should take the next step and support his call to pressure these other Senators to take the right stance as well.

“So I make a solemn pledge to you, as president we will be out of Iraq,” Senator Obama promising to withdraw American troops from Iraq, April 20, 2007.

In response to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ statement on the Congressional debate on the Iraq War.

“After the President has repeatedly ignored the will of Congress and the American people, his own Secretary of Defense now recognizes that the only way to pressure the Iraqi government toward a political settlement is to make clear that American troops will not be in Iraq forever. President Bush has had a long history of ignoring the advice of his commanders on the ground, but let’s hope that he follows the advice of his Defense Secretary so that we can finally begin the process of ending the war in Iraq in a responsible way.”

According to the Washington Post, Gates said today while traveling in the Middle East, “The debate in Congress . . . has been helpful in demonstrating to the Iraqis that American patience is limited. The strong feelings expressed in the Congress about the timetable probably has had a positive impact . . . in terms of communicating to the Iraqis that this is not an open-ended commitment.”

Out of all the GOP presidential candidates, John McCain is the biggest supporter of Bush’s ever-failing Iraq policy. And today Sen. Obama kept the pressure on him:

” … I think he is flat wrong on this issue, and I think he has been wrong for some time,” Obama told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “What we have continued to see over the last four to five years is the constant presentation by the administration and prominent supporters like John McCain that we are making progress and that things are terrific in Iraq, and that’s not the case.”