RECENT POSTS
- VP Biden's Thanksgiving Dinner for the Troops
- Life and Debt
- Obama To Cabinet: “We Cannot Sit Back and Be Satisfied” With Some Progress Amid High Unemployment Rate
- Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 11/23/2009
- Obama Calls for Annual Science Fair: Achievement Should be Recognized like NCAA Championship Win
- Obama Decision on Copenhagen Summit Attendance “In the Coming Days”
- Gitmo Detainees Intend to Plead Not Guilty in U.S. Court
- President Obama Calls 9th War Council Meeting for Tonight
- Health Care Hurdles
- The Presidential Planner
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Escapes (Not Makes) Iraqi Headlines
July 22, 2008 5:32 PM
ABC NEWS' NATALIE GEWARGIS REPORTS:
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, can’t seem to make any stops along his whirlwind tour without a press parade following him.
But if you’ve only read Iraq's papers Tuesday morning, you wouldn’t even know the presumptive nominee was there.
With the exception of one paper, Asharq Al-Awsat, a widely read Saudi publication, most local and regional papers seemed decidedly under-whelmed by the candidate’s visit.
Local issues dominated the headlines, including news of increasing typhoid outbreaks, a full Iraqi cabinet meeting (for the first time in about a year), and a story about the frequency of Iraqi visits to a local Baghdad park, among others.
On Tuesday, the newspaper Al Mashriq continued to report on the death of Husam al-Shakti, the son of Hamid Hummud al-Shakti, the governor of Iraq's Salaheddin province. Al-Shakti’s son was shot by Coalition Forces Sunday during a raid on the family’s home in the town of Beiji.
In addition to security developments, most Iraqi papers track the activities of Iraq’s Council of Ministers and the Iraqi parliament on a daily basis. Other issues that elicit frequent coverage include the occurrence of power blackouts and a daunting fuel crisis, and water shortage.
Given all that’s occurring (and making the news) in Iraq, it seems that the majority of Iraqis think that the junior senator from Illinois is just a senator from Illinois.
And while Obama's camp may sometime seem a little too ready for their "Mission Accomplished" moment, Iraqis seem less apt to jump the gun.
- Natalie Gewargis
July 22, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (30)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Maybe it means the Iraqi press corp isn't in love with Obama, the way the American press corp is.
Posted by: Echo21 | Jul 23, 2008 8:27:28 AM
The reason many Democratic supporters will not vote for Obama is because they are embarrassed of him, his life, his unfair tactics and his beliefs. And they still don't know all about him.
1. They don't want a candidate that has been in a twenty year relationship with Reverend Wright and the Trinity United Church of Christ.
2. They don’t’ want a candidate that has a twenty year relationship with Father Pflaeger as his compass in life
3. They don’t want a candidate that went to a church that supports Louis Farrakhan, an anti Semitic racist.
4. They don't want to defend Black Liberation theology.
5. They don’t want a candidate that lies about his relationship with Tony Rezko, the Syrian Criminal that sold his property to Obama and supported his campaign.
6. They don't want a candidate that could work with a domestic terrorist, William Ayers.
7. They don’t want a candidate that Hamas supports.
8. They don’t want a candidate that Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam support
9. They don’t want a candidate that has a wife that has just now realized she was proud of our country.
10. They don’t want a candidate that denies Florida and Michigan their voices
11. They don’t want a candidate that mentions 57 states in his speeches. 50 states in the USA and 57 states in the Nation of Islam (IOC website)
12. They don’t want a candidate that fights unfair and steals Michigan delegate votes from his opponent.
13. They don't want a candidate that is inexperienced, especially dealing with military issues.
14. They don’t want a candidate that considers it a loss to not to be able to attend his anti American, racist Church.
15. They don’t want a candidate that has a “non practicing” Muslim father, but avoids the entire discussion of his father.
16. They don’t’ want a candidate that won’t debate
17. They don’t’ want a candidate that misleads the youth with an ‘Obama girl and her behind in their face”
18. They don’t want a candidate that says he’s an African American and missed the MLK Remembrance Day and the Louisiana Black Caucus meeting
19. They don’t want a candidate that enjoys laughing at sexism
20. They don't want a candidate that switches his position on gun control, FISA, the war in Iraq, religion and government....
21. They don't want a candidate that showcases his daughters on TV shows.
22. They don’t’ want a candidate that has poor judgment.
23. They don’t' want a candidate named; Barack Hussein Obama
24. He is embarrassing.
25. He scares them to death.
Posted by: Al from NJ | Jul 23, 2008 7:16:39 AM
The media is pushing the Obama coronation so hard, it's really laughable. Jon Stewart seems to be the only one getting it, but what does he know, he's a comic...
Posted by: From | Jul 23, 2008 1:29:47 AM
Obama's little trip to Iraq is much to do about nothing-just like him.
Posted by: RL in Illinois | Jul 23, 2008 12:11:55 AM
Maybe, just maybe - the Iraqis have noticed that Obama has continually opposed the surge (which has helped bring stability, reconstruction and given their own military and police time, additional training and strength to stand proudly on their own more and more to take on these radical thugs trying to destroy them and their country), blamed the Iraqis for failure, wanted to get the troops out immediately, has toed the line with the other Dems that would have Iraq and its people in the grips of beheading terrorists, and Iran - fomenting division and chaos, bombing Mosques to cause civil war within thier country?? Just maybe - you think? Nah, that couldn't possibly be - I mean, after all isn't Obama the savior of the world, for everyone?
Guess NOT!!
right4us
Posted by: right4us | Jul 22, 2008 11:51:15 PM
I am soooooo thrilled that no one, except the press who are so infatuated by Obama, gave him any attention. I guess he thought he'd be like JFK when he visited Germany. lolol You have to actually ACCOMPLISH something before you get that kind of attention or they erect a statue of you. I am a Hillary supporter who now supports John McCain 100%. Brcause an elephant is better than a total jack _ _ _ any day!!!
Posted by: Mary Anne | Jul 22, 2008 9:37:23 PM
At least there is one media outlet that's not fooled.
Posted by: SadStateOfAffairs | Jul 22, 2008 9:22:07 PM
Marci " The war on Iraq has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.."
And in causing so many deaths has furthered the development of terrorism. Marci, I don't think our posts and expression of conscience will last long.
Posted by: kat | Jul 22, 2008 9:20:25 PM
I don't know what's meant by the reference of "mission accomplished" to Obama, but it's obvious that the daily survival challenges for the Iraqis trump a visiting political figure from the occupiers.
Posted by: kat | Jul 22, 2008 9:14:41 PM
The war on Iraq has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people (for those who only care about the brainded: including fetuses).
The UN says there are now 4.9 MILLION refugees that the Bush Regime says we must not mention. There are tens of thousands of horribly maimed Iraqis, including children who've lost limbs, sight and/or hearing.
If Putin had invaded Iraq and done what we have done, and it was just as obvious that he did it to control the oil, America would have bombed Russia and taken Putin to the War Crimes Tribunal.
There is no such thing as the US "winning" in Iraq when it is and has been a massive war crime.
Posted by: Marcia C | Jul 22, 2008 9:06:44 PM
Adria Soto,
Contrary to what you've been told by the Bonehead in Chief, Gen. Petraeus works FOR the President, vice versa.
So he doesn't read anyone the riot act, he does what he is told. Or at least that's how its SUPPOSED to work when you have a strong Commander in Chief.
Posted by: Nobodys fool | Jul 22, 2008 8:04:26 PM
Awww, ya needed SOMETHING negative to say, huh?
Good job. Ya got your dig in.
*brushes off shoulders*
Posted by: Nobodys fool | Jul 22, 2008 8:02:46 PM
Did Patraeus read Obama the Riot Act? No withdrawl without Iraqi domestic and foreign security forces being able to secure Iraq. The U.S. generals and commanders have already said this several times for the media. It may take not less than several years.
I'll wait 'til Obama gets back and tells his followers what his "refined" policy looks like without withdrawl. No more end the war. No more troop withdrawl in 16 months. No more Obama. His followers will be very, very upset. Vote for McCain! He's always Right-On.
Posted by: Adrian Soto | Jul 22, 2008 7:33:18 PM
truth, what does Hillary have to do with anything being discussed here?
Posted by: Jaison | Jul 22, 2008 7:15:02 PM
Man, you people were never taught about Korea, were you. In 3 years, we lost 33,000 Americans and millions of Koreans - and it took TWENTY YEARS before Korea even saw a hint of represenative democracy. They had two military dictatorships back to back while we stood there occupying their land, protecting it from the North Koreans. Be thankful that Iraq has jumped that part (so far)
Posted by: Rachel | Jul 22, 2008 7:14:37 PM
Jayhwak, you keep bringing up the Soviet Unions occupation of Afghanistan. The Soviets did this thirty years ago and used Vietnam era military tactics. They didn't fail, they just did it wrong. Our modern military, given the chance, could have Afghanistan peaceful in no time. But the loud obnoxious "activists" such as yourself cry so loud when our military does what it has too to win, that they end up fighting while trying to appease your precious sensibilities. Just keep your mouth shut and let the military do its job.
Posted by: Jaison | Jul 22, 2008 7:13:02 PM
Jaison - And Sen Clinton is just a JR Senator barely from NY.
Jayhawk - Um, Afghanistan is where Osama Bin laden is, you know the guy that attacked us. Iraq never had anything to do with it...where have you been?
Posted by: try the truth | Jul 22, 2008 7:06:13 PM
Good for them. We could only wish that our media focused on the real issues...
Posted by: George | Jul 22, 2008 7:02:03 PM
The occupation of Vietnam started with advisors.
Then it escalated into a disaster.
The occupation of Afghanistan would escalate by 3 brigades (until another "revision") with the same result.
Anyone with even the most remote geographic and historical skills can understand that Afghanistan will be a more difficult occupation that that of Iraq.
For those who don't think so, consider what success the army of the Soviet Union had in Afghanistan.
Simply put, this is not "bringing our troops home within 16 months' as Obama promised.
Rather, it is shifting the war to another region.
The drain on American lives and resources will remain the same.
Posted by: Jayhawk | Jul 22, 2008 6:56:59 PM
Jayhawk: How about you go read up on why we're in Afghanistan to begin with and why we have to go back after leaving Iraq. Then maybe you can write a post that contains an iota of truth to it.
Posted by: linda n carolina | Jul 22, 2008 6:56:30 PM
Post a comment


