RECENT POSTS
- White House Study Looks at Job Creation in Illinois if Gitmo Prisoners Transferred There
- President Obama: Asia Trip Helped Usher in a New Era of American Engagement
- Secretary Sebelius Celebrates the Tenth Anniversary of National Adoption Day
- Organizing for America Targets Sarah Palin
- Obama Administration Starts to Publicly Raise Issue of Detained US Citizen Xue Feng
- President Obama Gives Interview (of Sorts) to Dissident Cuban Blogger
- "You Guys Make a Pretty Good Photo Op," President Obama Jokes to Troops at Osan Air Base
- Did the Chinese Government Crack Down on an Obama Interview?
- Our Trip to the DMZ
- President Obama Greets U.S. Troops in South Korea, Wraps Up Week in Asia
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama in Never-Before-Aired 'Nightline' Interview From 2004: Praises John Kerry's Experience, Disses 'Cut and Run' Proposals From Iraq
August 27, 2008 7:50 PM
It was a very different time, the Iraq war was just over a year old, and then-State Sen. Barack Obama was in a very different place.
In 2004, former "Nightline" anchor Ted Koppel interviewed the keynote speaker of the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
It never aired, though it will air tonight.
Some very interesting stuff.
Koppel asked Obama about comments he'd made to the Chicago Tribune about the convention focusing on the war.
"There were people who supported the war and people who opposed the war inside that convention hall," Obama said. "But what people are unified about is that, when we make a decision to go to war, that it should not be ideologically driven, that it should be driven by a set of facts and common sense with regards to how we mobilize our country and our national interest.
"And I think that there is a strong feeling that, even among those that supported George Bush’s decision initially to go in, that there was some fudging of the numbers and shading of the truth, and that, as a consequence of our inability to create a strong alliance around our actions, that we are now stuck in a quagmire that is going to cost us not only billions of dollars, but thousands of lives, and will require a much longer-term commitment than the American voters had intended when they rallied behind the president."
Asked Koppel: "Well, how does electing John Kerry resolve that dilemma for America?"
Obama said, "If you look at what has happened over the last several months, I think there is a convergence. Basically, the Bush administration has moved in the direction of its critics in trying to internationalize the reconstruction process. So, I am not sure that, on paper, the differences between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration would be significant."
Obama continued, "All of us assume that when we make that commitment, that we have to finish the job, we owe it not only to the troops who sacrificed their lives, but also the Iraqi people. The question is, who can execute. Who has the credibility to gather its allies together and to make sure that they are willing to expand their political capital, domestically, to invest into Iraq, to send their own troops into Iraq, to pressure countries, like Iran, to deal with issues of proliferation?
"And I think that there is a strong impression that the Bush administration has squandered its will on the international stage, and that John Kerry would come in with a broader vision and the possibility of bringing people onboard in a way that is necessary for our long-term success," Obama said.
Koppel said, "Presidents often talk about the importance of their personal relations with other leaders, but essentially that is a lot of hooey. You know, nations do things because of national interest."
"Absolutely," agreed Obama.
"And so," Koppel continued, "whether John Kerry is in the White House or George Bush is in the White House, that is not going to cause the French, or the Germans, or the Russians, or others who do not see it in their national interest to be engaged in Iraq right now, to suddenly say, 'Well, John, I like you a lot better than I liked George!'"
Obama said, "I do not think that it is a function of like or dislike. I think that what our allies look at is a consistent disdain for world opinion that culminated in Iraq, but that did not start in Iraq. Unilateral rejection of the Kyoto protocol, or the unilateral rejection of the International Criminal Court. Unilateral rejection of the land mines treaty.
"All of this culminating in Iraq, leading up to Iraq, but a pattern established that 'the United States is not interested in our national interest, that they do not want to sit down at our table and how to figure out how this is good for us as well as the United States, they’re willing to make their own decisions,'" Obama said. "It is that pattern on the part of the Bush administration that I think has made it so difficult for us to craft the kind of strategies that we need in hot areas like the Middle East."
Koppel asked, "But do you think that most the delegates on the floor really understand that President Kerry is not going to pursue a policy in Iraq that is essentially different from the one that George Bush is pursuing?"
"Oh, I think that they understand that," Obama said. "I think that they recognize that we cannot afford to simply cut and run in Iraq, and that we are in a difficult situation right now. And I think that what they are hoping for is somebody who is going to bring a thoughtfulness and a base of experience to decision-making in the White House, which John Kerry possesses, and I think that George Bush does not."
Koppel asked Obama, "Why can we not cut and run? When you freeze it that way, you determine the outcome. Why is it inappropriate to say, 'We’ll stay for another six months so that Iraq can take over their own affairs and their own defence and their own security, but in six months, we are pulling our troops out of there.'"
"Well, Ted, you have been there and I have not," said Obama. "I do not know whether or not we can accomplish that in six months. If we can, then I think John Kerry will bring our troops home. ...
"My assumption would be that if we could actually stabilize Iraq in such a way that you do not have warfare between the Sunnis the Shii’as and the Kurds, some semblance of law and order in that country, then I think that there is no doubt that the Kerry administration is going to be interested in bringing back the reservists and the National Guardsmen who are currently there, but --"
"If all of those things were true, Mr. Obama," Koppel interrupted, "I think it is also true that the Bush administration would bring the troops back."
"Absolutely," Obama said.
"Again, no difference between the two," Koppel said.
"Well, but as I said before, part of what we are struggling with here, part of what is at stake, is not simply the decision-making in Iraq," Obama said. "What is at stake is an overall approach to foreign policy that has been characterized in the Bush administration by unilateralism and a disdain for world opinion. That has concrete consequences over time. ...
"We got a driver who drove the bus into the ditch; now we can argue about how that happened, but we’ve got to get the bus out of the ditch. That does not mean you don’t fire the driver. And the question is: who do we trust over the long term to direct our foreign policy in a way that meets international interests, makes us strong here at home, creates the kind of, or restores us to kind of respect that we’ve had in the past, abroad, and I think that the estimation of those in the convention is that they trust John Kerry to make those decisions better than George Bush will make those decisions."
The interview will air on "Nightline" tonight. Four years late -- but quite relevant, in its way.
- jpt
August 27, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (91)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Just the facts please! Wow! They have obviously stopped teaching logic in our schools. There are only about five intelligent responses in this entire thread. What happened to the time when adults could argue the issues without resorting to name calling - debate the issues - not each others' politics.
Posted by: Frank | Aug 31, 2008 2:33:17 PM
I am not an Obama supporter in fact embracing the fact that he is just another calculating politician. However his thoughts on the subject are fine from my perspective except for the fact that his inability to realize that there are just plain bad regimes out there that will never like the US. He thought Kerry would be able to better negotiate with those bums and now he thinks he will be able to. I disagree that his supporters understand that there is little difference between Bush and at that time Kerry based on what they practically can really accomplish. Everybody thought that Reagan was able to strong arm the Russia into behaving, but look now how wrong that really was. The Russian government is exactly the same bunch of thugs, just a lot richer and even more determined to kick America off of their top spot. It is one big war with many, many little battles. Russia lost a few of those battles, but they are still in the hunt. Peace is impossible and until both parties in this country accept that we will continue to see a divided America which long-term will bring us down.
Posted by: Susan | Aug 31, 2008 1:34:40 PM
This only demonstrates that Barack Obama has the intelligence to make decisions based on facts and has the courage to change course if necessary. He is no Yosemite Sam like John McThang.
Posted by: Give me a break | Aug 28, 2008 6:17:10 PM
Much has changed in the 4 years since this interview. Iraq now has a government of some sort in place and they have some measure of law enforcement and armed forces in place. It has been proven that Bush, Cheney, et al, manufactured evidence and for all practical purposes lied us into this war. We won't even address the amount of money made by private corporations due to their no-bid contracts. So, the climate in the US political game is VERY different for Obama in 2008 than it was for Kerry in 2004.
However, I think it shows the absolute lack of class, honor and integrity that this was aired on Nightline during the Democratic Convention, the night before Obama accepts the party's nomination, and on the night of the nomination McCain's camp is launching their newest barrage of attack ads supposedly "nothing like this has been done before".
Posted by: TakingBackTheUSA | Aug 28, 2008 5:28:06 PM
Obama has consistently said we should be as responsible getting out of Iraq as we were irresponsible getting in. No significant change from 2004 to 2008.
Posted by: m | Aug 28, 2008 4:03:56 PM
What in Sen. Obama's record should lead anyone to believe his "narrative" that he is a "post-partisan unifier"? What in Sen. Obama's record should lead anyone to believe that he will govern as anything other than a hard-left, partisan liberal?
The Obamperor has no clothes!
Posted by: doc | Aug 28, 2008 3:48:50 PM
Interesting interview.
I think it's important to note that Al Qaeda and America's enemies were plotting 9/11 attacks while Bill Clinton - a Democrat - was in office. Other American interests were also attacked while Clinton was President. And Bill Clinton was excellent at foreign relations and multi-lateralism. He did not have the "disdain for world opinion", as Obama puts it, that Bush supposedly has.
And yet America was attacked anyway.
There are nations in this world that will always hate America, no matter who is President. And there will always be European nations who don't want to get their hands dirty when confronted with a crisis, no matter who is President. The "unilateralism" that many Democrats dislike is sometimes necessary, because other nations simply won't step up.
You don't protect American interests by giving anti-American nations a hug and by making sure the Europeans like you. You protect American interests by actually protecting them - and yeah, that sometimes means fighting evil by yourself. Because the only nation that will ever really look out for America is America.
I'm Canadian. I wish I had a country that worried more about its citizens than it did about what the rest of the world thinks. A lot of the rest of the world has its collective head up its rear-end.
Posted by: Mike | Aug 28, 2008 2:42:47 PM
Tre, Not the race card!
It's about policy differences. Are you glad Clarence Thomas is a Supreme Justice? I am! Would you vote for Shelby Steele (A black author,if he ran) I WOULD!
So let's stop with the racism and believe what Martin Luther King believed, It's the content of a man's character that counts not his skin color!
And Obama was found lacking.
Posted by: Sandra | Aug 28, 2008 2:18:58 PM
"Fast-forward to the 2007-2008 Democratic primary seasons, when Obama said he'd withdraw American forces with sixteen months regardless of whether Iraq was stable."
because in 2004 there was NO iraq government - and in 2007 there was - and now it's THEIR responsibility. And he NEVER said that he'd leave regardless of the facts on the ground, he said JUST the opposite - though the 16 month time table was offered to put a fire under malaki's butt...
you don't get that?
Posted by: Fred | Aug 28, 2008 2:16:22 PM
O' pleease Tre!
Posted by: Sandra Lizausaba | Aug 28, 2008 2:13:56 PM
"You do realize that he sounded like an utter buffoon when talking about Georgia..."
Translation: I'm a Neo-Con wack job itching for a fresh war!
Obama sounded like a seasoned statesman when talking about Georgia - urging retraint from both sides and then increasing the pressure on Russia as the events unfolded. McCain - without knowing the full story, went right to belligerent - declaring - without the means to back it up, that we're all Georgians today - an outright lie... - the buffon is the one staring back at you in the mirror.
as to the Koppel interview - Obama proved himself precient and wise - of course we couldn't just leave in 2004, and he was right - he always said that we have to leave carefully with repsect to the facts on the ground. he offered up the timetable as an incentive to push the iraqis towards self government - in 2004 there was NO iraqi government. Anyone who claims that handing iraq to the maliki government is a defeat, is just offering lip service to the notion of Democracy...
Posted by: Fred | Aug 28, 2008 2:12:03 PM
obama's a career politician and a hypocrite, which makes him a typical politician.....his speaking ability is the only difference between a common politician, and a Presidential candidate..
Posted by: chris | Aug 28, 2008 1:51:43 PM
Sen. Barack Obama used the exact same tired analogy of "someone drove the bus into the ditch" to explain the mistakes going into Iraq in the debate in Philadelphia with Sen. Hillary Clinton. Man, these politicians sure have their "speak" and "talking points" down cold dont they! And I was stupid & naive enough to think that he just thought that up in Philly! Typical empty-suit politician, spewing the party line. Only this time, with Roman columns and Steve Wonder to back him up. McCain 2008/Hillary 2012!!!
Posted by: PhillyPaul | Aug 28, 2008 1:45:57 PM
The Obama supporters here aren't getting the point. In 2004, Obama was opposed to withdrawing until Iraq was stabilized. That was a good position for him to take. Fast-forward to the 2007-2008 Democratic primary seasons, when Obama said he'd withdraw American forces with sixteen months regardless of whether Iraq was stable.
What's his position now? It's anyone's guess. This interview is bad for Obama because it shows that he adopted a new position in the Democratic primaries just to win the nomination.
Posted by: AK | Aug 28, 2008 12:51:56 PM
Uh oh, he's just another politician. Let the games begin.
Posted by: Angry Democrat | Aug 28, 2008 12:32:16 PM
"We can't cut and run".
But we sure as hell SHOULD BRING OUR TROOPS HOME BY NOW!
Americans SHOULD NOT have been in Iraq in the first place.
If the wild bush-MCaint put Americans are in a hole, STOP DIGGING!
Posted by: Patriot | Aug 28, 2008 12:02:52 PM
I don't think this interview reveals anything we didn't already know.
Obama opposed the war, but was sort of toeing the Powell maxim, "if you break it, you own it" line.
The Iraqi government is asking for a timeline. Obama is going to give it to them.
In my view, this interview demonstrates the thoughtfulness that will make Obama a great President.
Posted by: ChrisNBama | Aug 28, 2008 12:02:38 PM
Obama is very clear in his thinking,articulate and practical.He accepts reality and would rather look to the future than what has happened in the past.It is clearly evident from the interview he has the intellectual ability to look at the larger picture of any issue and look for lasting solutions and not short cut fix.He is very careful in weighing long term consequences of any issue and advocates an approach that is best suited even when the situation is like in Iraq is a quagmire.It takes guts to voice a bold strategy in Iraq when the country was divided between extreme opposite strategies.Now after nealy four years the parties concerned including the Bush administration and the Iraqi government agree to do what he proposed then while more lives have been lost and billions spent and more goodwill squandered.McCain stands alone waging his own war,but can you blame him,that is all he knows:he shouted for war aginst Iraq 3 months after 9/11,a colossal and costly mistake that has diverted the center of war against terrorism which should have been won several years ago.He is still belligerant shouting for more war against more countries.The mark of civilization is moving away from combat to meanigful dialogue.In the stone age disputes were decided by might.We have evolved from those days.Not McCain,he stands alone for he does not subscibe to evolution nor to practical reality.
Posted by: Urojen | Aug 28, 2008 11:29:35 AM
Reading some of the anti-Obama comments on here reminds me that some of the most ignorant, bigoted human beings on the face of this planet live in America. They can lose their job, their house, their sons and daughters in Iraq, their health care because of Bush and McCain AND STILL NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA BECAUSE HE IS BLACK!
Posted by: Tre | Aug 28, 2008 11:26:58 AM
Obama's answer to every question is bla bla bla; he blabbers until you've forgotten what the actual question is. McCain will tear him to shreds in the debates.c
Posted by: free to speak | Aug 28, 2008 11:14:56 AM
Post a comment


