- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
U.S. Is 'Flashing Red' Light at Israel, Sen. Reed Says
July 06, 2008 12:39 PM
ABC News' Mary Bruce reports: Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said this morning that the U.S. military is "flashing red" at Israel not to attack Iran.
"From the military commanders I've spoken to, the yellow lights are blinking very, very quickly," Reed said in an exclusive "This Week" interview with George Stephanopoulos. "In fact, I think, even, it might be a flashing red, because the consequences in the region would be significant, and they would be region-wide."
Pentagon officials are reportedly increasingly concerned that Israel could attack Iran's nuclear facilities this year.
In the same interview, Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., agreed with Reed, but to a lesser degree. "I think there's a caution light. Look, the good news is that the American and Israeli militaries -- intelligence community, government -- work very closely together," Lieberman said. But he also noted that the "clock is ticking" and that "right now ... we have to pick up the strength of our sanctions against them."
Reed joined Lieberman in calling for non-violent negotiations. "I think we have to seize the time. As short as it might be, we have to seize the time for a diplomatic approach, sincerely." Both senators serve together on the Armed Services Committee.
Reed and Lieberman also debated presidential politics and whether Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has shifted his policy on Iraq. "There's been a significant change in Barack Obama's position on Iraq in the last week," Lieberman said. Obama said earlier in the week that he would be open to "refining" his policy, but later asserted he was not referring to his 16-month timeline for withdrawal.
Reed, however, strongly disagreed with Lieberman. "Sen. Obama is outlining a strategy to redeploy our forces out of Iraq. Sen. McCain has a strategy of staying there indefinitely. That is the key, significant strategic difference.”
Lieberman went on to say that Obama's policy on Iraq was falling in line with Sen. John McCain's, R-Ariz., war strategy. "Look, for a long time, Sen. Obama said, 'let's get those troops out as quickly as we can, regardless of what's happening on the ground.' Sen. Obama, I think, here on Iraq, is trying to deal with what the former vice president might call an inconvenient truth, which is that, on Iraq, John McCain has been right and consistent, and Sen. Obama has been wrong.”
July 6, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (56)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I missquoted. I meant to say IRAN will push Obama.
Posted by: DemocratNoMore2 | Jul 6, 2008 1:02:48 PM
An unsettled War in Irag, a delayed and pushed to the back burner war in Afghanistan and hostilities in Iran?
Caution light Joe says? Well Joe I guess we can start the draft then, by the way I am for that, but I do not think the public is; especially those in high places with sons and daughters of draft age.
Posted by: Thinking | Jul 6, 2008 1:26:25 PM
Obama has NOT changed his postion on Iraq. Do a search on the debates and read what he said.
Main stream media is too lazy to research stories for facts. Instead they let the Republican party feed them headline making stories. The big headlines make more money than the truth.
Besides being lazy, main stream media is owned by people that benefit by the Republican agenda that makes the wealthy richer while the rest of us are losing.
Until people realize what the media says is not often factual or complete, the wealthy will continue to make more money on our backs.
Posted by: Jim | Jul 6, 2008 1:31:30 PM
Jim -- read his 2002 speech before you make such a bold error in BHO's position.
Posted by: Aston | Jul 6, 2008 1:42:58 PM
Lieberman is right that the Israeli's and the U.S. have been working very closely together and we sent our top military brass to Israel and I'm sure the discussion was more than who's uniforms look spiffier. If we are currently giving Israel a 'yellow' light, it means that first of all we are cooperating with the Israeli's on when an attack happens and secondly - much like Hezbollah acts as Iran's proxy-army - the Israeli's will be doing our dirty work in taking out Ahmadinejad's nuke facilities.
As for Obama is there ANYONE out there that thinks he wouldn't be more sympathetic to muslim country's? He happened to spend a portion of his childhood in an Indonesian madrasa. BTW for those that didn't notice Indonesian poll numbers for what they think about the U.S. is about 90% unfavorable.
One more thing, isn't it funny that this 'change' candidate is doing exactly that - changing his positions by the hour? Doesn't his flag lapel pin look great on him after he spoke out against wearing one as 'not showing true patriotism' a year ago? Gee and what a coincidence he happened to start wearing it a week after locking up the democratic nomination...
Posted by: Mike in L.A. | Jul 6, 2008 1:53:42 PM
As DemocratNoMore2 pointed out, Obama may very well be tested, as was JFK. More to the point, W. was tested by the 9/11 attack, and he failed miserably, spending $3T invading the wrong country and not getting Bin Laden after 7 years. Obama, being smart, will do a lot better than that.
Posted by: James Fox | Jul 6, 2008 2:10:03 PM
The United States should LEAVE ISRAEL ALONE! We should neither condemn nor condone whatever Israel needs to do to assure their survival.
Israel has FAR more experience dealing with Muslims than we can even come CLOSE to.
Why do we always think we "understand the situation" better than anyone else?
Posted by: Rhys | Jul 6, 2008 2:29:39 PM
Obama's statements could mean he will remove the military from Iraq even sooner than 16 months. It is irresponsible for any Presidential candidate to state exactly what they plan to do because it provides information to the enemy.
-------------------------------------
Obama is a liar he will never "remove" all troops. Get a grip people we are there for forever, THAT IS WHERE THE OIL IS! That is what Saudi Arabia wants! We stay they rule!
Posted by: HP Boston | Jul 6, 2008 2:35:05 PM
HP Boston... the only thing wrong with your argument is that we were getting more oil from Iraq when Saddam Hussein was in power. The Muslims are not going to just SIT on their oil; they can't eat and drink it! They need to SELL it so they can build ostentatious high-rise buildings and bombs to blow up ours.
Bush's War was about ideology and revenge. Besides, it's the "wrong war", because seven years ago our REAL enemies were (and still are) in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Posted by: Rhys | Jul 6, 2008 2:45:47 PM
Stan:
Isn't the columnist for the New York Post (a Rupert Murdoch enterprise) and his column 'Page 6' currently embroiled in a 6 million dollar law suit for fabricating interviews?
Posted by: abram | Jul 6, 2008 2:52:23 PM
Thinking - The false implication you refer to is from the radical newspaper 'israelinsider'. This same outlet is widely known for spreading false claims about Obama, including his birth certificate. Jake Tapper of ABC News has been quoted stating "nowhere in there does Malik expressly say anything about Obama having a Muslim background."
Therefore, I agree with Stan, you are trying to spread false rumors by insinuation.
Posted by: Mack | Jul 6, 2008 3:00:48 PM
Finally some sense. An attack on Iran would bring decades of reprisals.
Posted by: antenian | Jul 6, 2008 3:07:15 PM
@ Mack
Look at the post by DemocratNoMore2 posted at 1:33:09 just above my post asking for who confirmed the post. What I was insuating was that the quote was inacurate.
Anyone who has been on these blogs long know that I am a Obama supporter. It is quite common to qoute the post when asking a question.
Posted by: Thinking | Jul 6, 2008 3:07:41 PM
JRE (7/6/08 2:48:03pm) is right on! These Republican "dust-ups" are merely distractions and too many give those efforts their energy. No one wins those word exchanges!
The adrift McCain campaign garbage scrawl has produced nothing from the beginning other than stench. What more could be expected from campaign run by, until most recently, lobbyists.
Posted by: Lou R | Jul 6, 2008 3:08:37 PM
Well, hello antenian! You may find that an intelligent debate is difficult on this forum. You and I have already proved that people with opposing views CAN debate without insults, but apparently we're in the minority here.
Posted by: Rhys | Jul 6, 2008 3:11:03 PM
DemocratNoMore2- Good thing not all of us Americans are white, so we still will have a country even if Obama does as you accuse him of planning
Posted by: jase | Jul 6, 2008 4:07:36 PM
Another group that has profited handsomely from the Iraq war is the crop of Washington lobbyist insiders who represent the defense contractors and have made millions securing contracts for their clients.
--------------------------------------
Obama knows them all too!
I think our best bet is Nader HE alone is not in BED WITH BIG BUSINESS!
Vote Nader!
Posted by: HP Boston | Jul 6, 2008 4:29:40 PM
Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I did a great job on speaking up for Obama on "This Week" interview with George Stephanopoulos. Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn sounded out of touch with the mood of the country. I would trust the Military Commanders who Sen. Jack Reed spoke to because of them we have the freedom to have debates on bloggs like this.
Posted by: Franklin | Jul 6, 2008 4:59:10 PM
HP Boston
What is your source for facts "Obama knows them all too!"
Posted by: Julie | Jul 6, 2008 5:05:31 PM
With obama's apparent reversal on Iraq, he has had his first lesson in Foreign Policy 101 - hasn't quite made the role of intern yet, but he's working on it, OOPS, here comes a complication; what to do about the Israeli/Iran question. No, that's for Foreign Policy 201 - that will b fiven next semester. Patience Obama!!
McCain/Romney 08
Posted by: Temagami | Jul 6, 2008 5:19:18 PM
Post a comment



