White House Accidentally E-Mails to Reporters Story That Maliki Supports Obama Iraq Withdrawal Plan

Meant to also state in my post directly below, to add this to the list of gaffes for his holiness

Obama will destroy us all -with a smile on his face....

I think most Liberal Democrat (aka Obama) will concede that the War in Iraq has largely been won. So its logical to espouse a policy or troop removal, now. Of course, if we followed his lead a year ago, its likely a catastrophy of terrible suffering (like Vietnam) would likely have followed.

There is a certain logic to saying the same thing over and over again. After all a broken clock is right twice a day.

Was it right in hindsight to invade Iraq? Perhaps not. Is that country moving forward beyond the Saddam regime? Certainly.

Everyone thinking Obama is a Peacemaker should take a good look at Afghanistan and the war he will escalate over there.

You folks can argue all you want about the things you THINK are wrong about America (Obama Potion Drinkers), BUT when did things really go haywire? (Church Lady speaks) Could it be two years ago when THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER CONGRESS!

b kush, i think the issues you raised are good ones. thinking people all round the world want to see iraq self governed and policed. the other issues about your desires and those of others to get to travel, pay for transportation, save money for retirement, keep in good shape and enjoy the quality things in life are shared by me as well.

Regarding the war in Iraq, everyone is confused. Pelosi has always told Obama to pull out, but now he doesn't want to. I'm sure that Michelle Obama wants her husband to pull out. Throughout his political life, Bill Clinton has never advocated pulling out. Barney Franks believes no one should have been in there in the first place and is completely turned off.

So someone in the President's administration accidently hit the wrong button in sending an e-mail? Wow. Who cares! Why is that worthy of a entire news article? For goodness sake, I'm sure there are more pressing things going on in the world to write about than that - unless of course you have an agenda.

It is not the president that decides the source of energy, it is the invisible hand of commerce. There is a lot of energy everywhere, its just that these days the world runs on what it runs on....wood, coal, oil, gas, solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, hydro-electric.

Once Obama is elected we'll see how high the oil prices can go.

We could get off foreign oil with a project to use geothermal energy from the Yellowstone caldera to extract oil from oil shale in Green River - both in Wyoming. That formation has 5.2 trillion barrels of oil (Saudi started with 1/3 trillion). Who needs middle east? THAT would certainly end speculation against the dollar and on high continued oil prices. Meanwhile we should be pushing nuclear energy - fission now, fusion asap, to stop polluting the air. (For energy from wind or sun, you need to store it, which in practice means huge water pumping areas and immense (and probably rather unsafe) reservoirs. Even fission, if you recycle the U238 into Pu, gives comparatively tiny amounts of radioactives, which decay most of their dangerous radiation away in a few decades or less. Fusion can be done emitting only energy, from the basic reactions.)
I suspect Obama can understand this, though he may not go further just now due to uninformed critics afraid of radiation and believing overstatements of how dangerous wastes remain. McCain seems to understand the need to get off fossil fuels. Neither has bothered asking solar/wind advocates where they will flood to make great saltwater reservoirs to store energy for use at nights or tines of low winds. (Maybe we can turn all of, say, New Jersey into a saltwater lake and let it drain into a mud flat every day or two.)
Much of the trouble in this area is that lies have been told for many years and you can't expect a Presidential campaign to correct them. (I include failure to mention energy storage by solar power advocates among the lies.)
However the basic intelligence of the candidate should allow proper action when time comes to govern. Obama shows much promise that way, has been willing to consider merits of issues and seems to be pretty well reality based. He also seems to have better understanding of the Constitution than McCain (although less than Ron Paul).

Actually, who knows -- and that's the way it must be; President Bush may very well support a 16 month withdrawl plan (of most troops) from Iraq. He would love to have them out by the end of his term, and call it a roaring success. However, in the end, if he is to show courage - he cannot broadcast a withdrawl schedule. It's been a difficult adventure - it may be close to the point where the people of Iraq, after 30 years of horror - following the JFK era CIA led coup to put the Baathists in charge - will have their country back and a serious chance at a future. Remorse? Yea, you bet. Too bad the world let it go on for so long and too bad that the effort to bring it to an end did not come of better. Bush did a lousy job of ending it, but nobody else did a better job.

DOES NOT MATER. OBAMA IS GETTING PRESS WHILE MCCAIN DOES NOTHING.

BRING BACK NEWT.

Dan in MI said:
"Keep in mind Obama was agianst it [the war in Iraq] when everyone else who had access to the intel was for it."

Keep in mind it is not wise to make uniformed and untruthful statements on the internet where information is quickly and readily available. Behold the US senate voting records:

23 Senate dissenters with access to intelligence who voiced by their vote a position similar to that of Obama's at the time he opposed the measure from his state senate post. At that time the majority wasn't right. Senator Obama was.

Here are some thoughts: First, every president must surround himself with educated expert advisors and has to made decisions based on that from national security to the economy. Anybody disagree? The President is 1 person. So, the real question is a question of leadership and judgment and not necessary experience. You would hope the any president would choose the right people to help make the right judgments and decisions in running the country. Barak Obama's credentials as an intelligent man, his ability to inspire and gain bipartisan support, articulate his positions and understand insight into global and domestic issues are qualities that I think John McCain is a long second to Barak. Let's talk about negotiating serious issues with other countries. Negotiation requires savy communication skills. Look at the people Obama chooses to work for him in his campaign and how savy they are compared with John McCain? Who do you think knows how to lead people better and choose people he must consult with and rely on their judgment? Again, John McCain is not even a close second. Experience does not necessary equate to leadership or good judgment and John McCain has proven over and over again he does not learn from his mistakes and his leadership is very well shown in how he runs his campaign and is poor communication skills. Let's talk about energy and the economy for a minute. John McCain and the Republicans want to sell the american people on the rediculous idea that if we pump more oil domestically it will bring down the price of a barrell of oil. Are people really that stupid? OPEC produces probably 85 percent of the worlds oil. If the US takes the position of "We will drill for our own oil" all that is going to do is tell OPEC we continue to support Oil as our primary source of engery and it will NOT DO ANYTHING TO AFFECT OPEC'S PRICE OF A BARRELL OF OIL because it will take 20 years or more for the US to drill enough oil to make a dent in the supply we will still need to depend on OPEC to provide us for our engery consumption. So basically throwing our financial resources at drilling for more Oil domestically is a waste of time to bring down oil prices and will most likely have the reverse effect. So what happens if we prove to OPEC we are going to dedicate 150 billion dollars to getting completely off oil? That my friends will cause them to reduce the cost of oil because the US is the number 1 consumer and they would want to try and discourage that. Obama's energy plan is correct for so many reasons. Anyone that has a brain can see what Global Warming is doing to our planet and do keep with policies that allow us to let the Oil Companies dictate our future could be the end of our country and the world as we know it in 10 to 20 years. THINK ABOUT IT.

Too bad Maliki just said Der Speigel had mistranslated him and misrepresented his position. He doesn't support Obama's withdrawal plan after all!

The Iraqi Prime Minister's words have as usual with the press, been "misaligned". He does not "support" the 16 months time frame as indicated and he does not support or endorse the the empty suit.
GEE,WOULD YOU HIRE THE GUY TO BE CEO OF
CITIBANK? ...OF GE?
OF COURSE NOT! AND PEOPLE THINK HE HAS THE JUDGEMENT,, FORGET ABOUT INTEGRITY, HE HAS DISPLAYED NONE AT ALL.. TO LEAD US TO WHERE..?

our oil? It is not our oil. We (the west) merely funded and supported the exploitation of the resource. At first we were the only ones with the demand. Now all countries are rising in wealth so they need it to.

We are not in fight for oil, we are maintaining the world balance of power and we are paving the way for it to continue to be a peaceful world. If the world seems to be at war now, check back about 70 years ago. We are great friends with most of the leadership throughout the world. Friendships based on positive interdepence.

OBAMA Hillary, Biden, Pelosi Reid even though they ALL VOTED FOR THE WAR
__________________________
FICTION
Obama did not vote for the war. Get your "facts" straight.

You should also state WHY !
He was not a Senator or US Congressman at the time - he was not elegible - it is easy to say what YOu "would have" done AFTER the fact and after you have seen how the political winds are blowing.

Why not just buy their oil without war, occupation, or invasion? They do not want us there; we do not want to be there, although our leaders want us to be there:

How did our oil get
under their sand?

Now that "the chosen one" advocates surge in afghanistan, those of democratic pacifist ilk may have to redefine justifiable intervention.

It's wrong that Obama is getting the headlines about the war. He is a fool. Bring back Newt!