President Obama has been against the war in Iraq since it's inception. He referred to it as a "dumb war" and stated that we should be as "careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting into it". He states that his position was that an invasion would embolden extremism and distract from the war on terror. President Obama has noted several times that in his opinion there was no military solution to the war in Iraq. His view on victory in Iraq was to convince the Iraqis to stand up and take control of their own government.
During the election Senator Obama repeatedly called for a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Numerous times, President Obama stated that he would call the military leaders into his office on the first day of his Presidency and give them the order to withdraw from Iraq. He asserted that his plan would call for the withdrawal of 1-2 brigades per month and take approximately 16 months to complete. This would have removed the troops from Iraq in May of 2010. Senator Obama also stated once that time tables for withdrawal were too strict and that military leaders needed to fight the war as they saw fit.
On August 31, 2010 President Obama gave an address to claim that combat missions in Iraq were over. He stated that some troops were being left in Iraq to help the Iraqi soldiers and respond to threats as they emerge. The presence of these troops mirrors a pledge he made during the campaign that only troops necessary to help the Iraqis would remain. He also pledged during the campaign that there would be no permanent bases in Iraq. The level of troops remaining in Iraq after this speech is much higher (~50,000) than most people believe Senator Obama was alluding to when he promised to remove all troops and have no permanent bases.
Senator Obama initially opposed the surge on the grounds that it would not succeed in it's goal to quell the violence in Iraq and on the grounds that it would not move the Iraqis to stand on their own and take responsibility for the security of their country. Before, during, and just after the surge, Senator Obama asserted that he believed that it would fail, was failing, and had failed. As time passed, Senator Obama admitted that it was indeed successful in reducing the level of violence in Iraq. Senator Obama also claimed to have expressed views prior to the surge that it would be successful in diminishing the violence.
Senator Obama also stated during the campaign that he would not leave a permanent base in Iraq. The number of troops that would remain there would only be enough to secure the embassy and provide a small strike force to attack terrorists. Eventually, Senator Obama recanted on the small strike force.
Blueprint for Iraq
Senator Obama's campaign produced a series of videos on all subjects which outlined his position and plans for a number of areas. The "blueprint" for Iraq gave the following bullets which showed Senator Obama's position on the Iraq.
Judgement you can trustrn
opposed Iraq war from the beginning
warned that:rn
invasion would embolden extremism
distract from fight against terrorism
A responsible phased withdrawalrn
Push Iraqi leaders to political solutions
Rebuild our military
Refocus on Afghanistan and broader security threats
Safely redeploy forces in 16 months
Keep residual forces forrn
specific missions
target Al-Qaeda
protect diplomats
training Iraqi forces
Lasting stability in Iraqrn
True success is leaving Iraq to a government that rn
prevents sectarian conflict
blocks Al-Qaeda reemergence
Prevent humanitarian crisisrn
Commit $2B to support +4M displace Iraqis
Forge coalition to support Iraqi future
Make clear: no permanent bases in Iraq
The blueprint highlighted some of the statements that Senator Obama was making throughout the campaign and coalesced several of the talking points into a 2 minute video. The dialogue of that video gives Senator Obama's views not only of the war as a whole, but also of phased redeployment and number of troops to remain in Iraq.
I opposed going to war in Iraq. Senator McCain was one of Washington's biggest supporters for the war. I warned that the invasion of a country showing no imminent threat would fan the flames of extremism and distract us from the fight against al-qaeda and the Taliban. Senator McCain claimed that we would be greeted as liberators and that democracy would spread across the middle east. Those were the judgements that we made on the most important strategic question since the end of the cold war.
Now is the time for a responsible redeployment of our combat troops that pushes Iraq's leader towards a political solution, rebuild our military, and refocuses on Afghanistan and our broader security threats. We must as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months.
After this redeployment, we will keep a residual force to perform specific missions in Iraq, targeting any remnants of Al-Qaeda, protecting our service members and diplomats, and training and supporting Iraq's security forces so long as the Iraqis make political progress
True success will come when we leave Iraq to a government that is taking responsibility for its future. A government that prevents sectarian conflict, and ensures that the al-qaeda threat that has been beaten back by our troops does not reemerge.
We will commit 2 billion dollars to a meaningful international effort to support the more than 4 million displaced Iraqis. We will form a new coalition to support Iraq's future, one that includes all of Iraq's neighbors and also the United Nations, the World Bank, and the European Union because we all have a stack in stability, and we will make it clear that the United States seeks no permanent bases in Iraq
Opposition to the War in Iraq
In addition to Senator Obama's declared positions on Iraq, there are a number of speeches and debate questions which show his initial opposition to the war. On October 26, 2002 at an anti-war rally in Chicago Illinois, State Senator Barack Obama made the following statements:
I don't oppose war in all circumstances and when I look out over this crowd today, I know that there is no shortage of patriots or patriotism. What I do oppose is a dumb war.
On November 15, 2002 State Senator Obama appeared on the Jeff Berkowitz show where he made the following remarks:
Us rushing headlong into a war unilaterally was a mistake and may still be a mistake. ... If it has happened, then at that point what the debate is really going to be about is what's our long term commitment there, how mush is it gonna cost, what does it mean for us to rebuild Iraq, how do we stabilize and make sure that this country doesn't splinter into factions between the Shiites and the Kurds and the Sunnis.
In an interview on the Charlie Rose show on November 24, 2004 Senator-elect Barack Obama re-affirmed his opposition to the war.
Obama: I've looked at the evidence, i'm a hawk when it comes to defeating terrorism, I was strongly supportive of Afghanistan, I would have picked up arms myself to prevent 9-11 again. I don't think the President has made the case on Iraq because I don't see weapons of mass destruction ...
Rose: You said this before (the war)
Obama: I said this in October of 2002, six months before the war was launched
Rose: If you were a member of the Senate, you would have voted against the resolution (giving the president the authority to go to war in Iraq)
Obama: Yes, and I also... This raises a broader issue of the Democratic party. I think it is important for us to stand our ground and take our licks rather than what sometimes is our habit which is to cave, and then whine about it afterwards; which makes look not only weak, but also petty.
Rose: It sure does
At a campaign rally in 2007, Senator Obama made the following statements which re-iterated his position on Iraq. He used the term "tragic mistake" to describe the war, and made the claim that he had a plan that would have all "combat" troops home by March of 2008. This claim caused controversy later as most people took the remarks to apply to all troops.
Most of you know that I opposed this war from the start, I thought it was a tragic mistake. Today, we grieve for the families who have lost loved ones, the hearts that have been broken and the lives that could have been. America, it is time to start bringing our troops home. It's time to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreements that lies at the heart of someone else's civil war. That's why I have a plan that will bring our combat troops home by March of 2008. Letting the Iraqis know that we will not be there forever is our last best hope to pressure the Sunnis and Shiite to come to the table and find peace. There's one other thing that it's not too late to get right about this war, and that is the homecoming, the men and women, our veterans. Who have sacrificed the most. Let us honor their courage by providing the care they need and rebuilding the military they love. Let us be the generation that begins that work.
On July 3, 2008 in a press conference in Fargo, North Dakota, Senator Obama gave more details about his Iraqi withdrawal plan. He also firmly reiterated his desire to end the war in Iraq, and he described the timetable for withdrawal from Iraq as 1-2 brigades per month and being accomplished in 16 months. This timeline agreed with the blueprint.
I have said throughout this campaign that this war was ill-conceived, that it was a strategic blunder, and that it needs to come to an end. I have also said that I would be deliberate and careful in how we got out. That I would bring out troops home at a pace of 1-2 brigades per month, and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuver room with respect to that position. What I said this morning and what I will repeat, because it is consistent with what I have said over the last two years is that in putting this plan together, I will always listen to the advice of commanders on the ground, but that ultimately I am the person making the strategic decisions. And it is my view that strategically for us to perpetuate this war in the way that John McCain has proposed, and neglect the extraordinary problems that we are seeing in Afghanistan ... to continue to spend 10-12 billion dollars a month, to continue to put an enormous burden on our military and on our military families is not the best way to make the American people safe.
We are going to go visit Iraq, I want to have conversations with commanders on the ground, Iraqi officials. When I come back, that information will obviously inform how we shape our plans moving forward. For example, does it... what is the current training situation and how many residual troops might be needed in order to bring the Iraqis to stand up. Both the Army and the police. What is the current posture in terms of the negotiations between the various Iraqi factions on critical issues like how oil is distribute, how oil revenues are distributed.
Let me be as clear as I can be. I intend to end this war. My first day in office, i will bring the joint chiefs of staff in, and I will give them a new mission. And that is to end this war; responsibly, deliberately, but decisively. I have seen to information that contradicts the notion that we can bring our troops out safely at a pace of 1-2 brigades per month. And again, that pace translates to having our combat troops out in 16 months time. The last point that I would just make is that this is the same position that I had 4 months ago, it's the same position that I had 8 months ago, it's the same position that I had 12 months ago.
Statements supportive of a timetable for withdrawal
Throughout most of the campaign in 2008, Senator Obama strongly advocated for a withdrawal from Iraq based on a timetable of 1 to 2 brigades per month, as seen in the blueprint and the video above. He estimated that this pace would have all "combat troops" out of Iraq in 16 months, and he stated that he would give this order on his first day in office. On July 15, 2008, only days after the previous statements indicating that he would end the war on his first day in office, Senator Obama again reinforced this view on Iraq. He also noted that a victory in Iraq cannot be defined by a large surrender of enemy arms, but by the turning over of the Iraqi government to it's people.
... That is why I strongly stand by my plan to end this war. Now, Prime Minister Malaki's call for a timetable for the removal of US forces presents a genuine opportunity. It comes at a time when the American General in charge of training Iraq's security forces has testified that Iraq's army and police will be ready to assume responsibility for Iraq's security in 2009. Now is the time for a responsible redeployment of our combat troops that pushes Iraq's leaders towards a political solution, rebuilds our military and refocuses on Afghanistan and our broader security threats. George Bush and John McCain don't have a strategy for success in Iraq, they have a strategy for staying in Iraq. They say we couldn't leave when violence was up, and they now say that we can leave when violence is down. They refuse to press the Iraqi's to make tough choices, and they label any timetable to redeploy our troops surrender, even though we would be turning Iraq over to a sovereign Iraqi government, not to a terrorist enemy. Theirs is an endless focus on tactics inside Iraq, with no consideration of our strategy to face threats beyond Iraq's borders, and a some point a judgement must be made.
Iraq is not going to be a perfect place, and we do not have unlimited resources to try and make it one. We are not gonna kill every Al-Queda sympathizer, eliminate every trace of Iranian influence, or stand up a flawless democracy before we leave. General Petreaus and Ambassador Crocker acknowledged this to me when they testified last April. That's why the accusation of surrender is a false rhetoric used to justify a failed policy. In fact, true success in Iraq, victory in Iraq, will not take place in a surrender ceremony where an enemy lays down their arms. True success will take place when we leave Iraq to a government that is taking responsibility for its future, a government that prevents sectarian conflict, and insures that the Al-Queda threat that has been beaten back by our troops does not reemerge. That is an achievable goal, if we assume a comprehensive plan to press the Iraqis to stand up.
As stated, Senator Obama's opposition to the war in Iraq was a result of the inability to define goals for the war and a belief that long term occupation of Iraq would be harmful to US interests. He stressed in his campaign literature (seen at the bottom of the page) and in speeches that there is no military solution to the war in Iraq and that the only solution was to force the Iraqis to take control of their own security. In a campaign speech in September of 2007, Senator Obama made the following statements:
Let me be clear, there is no miltary solution in Iraq, there never was. the best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in 6 months or 6 years, but now.
The timetable of 1 to 2 brigades per month was one that was promoted heavily throughout the 2008 presidential campaign. Earlier in the campaign (Dec 2007), Senator Obama promoted this view and again stated that on the first day he will call in the joint chiefs of staff and tell them to end the war in Iraq. He also stated that we would not have permanent bases in Iraq and the only military missions he would allow were to protect the embassy and to perform targeted strikes to counter any terrorist threats.
Q: On the assumption that you are elected President, on day 1, you'll walk in ... ... what are you going to do?
Obama: I will call in the joint chiefs of staff, my secretary of state nominee, my national security advisor nominee, and they will have a new mission, which is to end this war. It appears, based on the advice that I've gotten from the military commanders that we can safely bring out 1-2 brigades per month. At that pace we will have our combat troops out in 16 months.
The only mission ... We will not have permanent bases in Iraq and we will not have combat operations in Iraq. The only mission that I will allow will be to protect our embassy and our civilian personnel, diplomats, humanitarian workers, and we will have a narrowly targeted mission of if there are terrorist camps that are amassing in Iraq, that we have a strike capability.
At a campaign event on March 19, 2008 Senator Obama again re-iterated both his promise to immediately begin withdrawing troops and his promise to withdraw them at a rate of 1-2 brigades per month.
In order to end this war responsibly, I will immediately begin to withdraw our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove 1-2 combat brigades from Iraq each month. If we start with the number of brigades that we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them in 16 months.
At another campaign event on May 2, 2008 Senator Obama again re-iterated his promises of immediate withdrawal:
When I promise that we are gonna bring this war in Iraq to a close in 2009, I want the American people to understand that I opposed this war in 2002, 2003, 4, 5, 6, and 7. So you can have confidence that I will be serious about ending this war.
On his campaign website, Senator Obama stated that the pace of withdraw would be the stated 1-2 brigades per month and that this would give a completion date of summer 2010.
A Responsible, Phased Withdrawal
Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month -- which would remove all of them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 -- more than 7 years after the war began.
Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism.
Statements against the timetable for withdrawal
On April 5, 2004 State Senator Obama was campaigning for the US Senate position and made the following statements on a local chicago morning television show.
Q: You've said that you thought troops should be withdrawn?
Obama: No, no, I've never said that troops should be withdrawn. What i've said is that we've got to make sure that we secure and execute the rebuilding and reconstruction process effectively and properly, and I don't think that we should have an artificial deadline of when to do that.
On June 21, 2006 on the Senate floor, Senator Obama made the following statements against a timetable.
A hard and fast arbitrary deadline for withdraw offers our commanders in the field and our diplomats in the region insufficient flexibility to implement that strategy.
Congressional Limitation of Troops
In December of 2007, Senator Obama was interviewed by the Boston Globe and asked about the ability of a President to disregard troop limitations put in place by Congress.
3. Does the Constitution empower the president to disregard a congressional statute limiting the deployment of troops -- either by capping the number of troops that may be deployed to a particular country or by setting minimum home-stays between deployments? In other words, is that level of deployment management beyond the constitutional power of Congress to regulate?
No, the President does not have that power. To date, several Congresses have imposed limitations on the number of US troops deployed in a given situation. As President, I will not assert a constitutional authority to deploy troops in a manner contrary to an express limit imposed by Congress and adopted into law.
Failure to apply timeline
Despite moving some troops from Iraq to Afghanistan, the immediate order to withdraw and the pace of 1-2 brigades per month was not enforced after President Obama assumed office. The chart below shows the number of troops in Iraq since 2005 and the blue are indicates the surge.
The Surge
The surge was a strategy put in place by the Bush administration which temporarily sent a large contingent of forces to Iraq in an effort to both quell the violence in the region, and convince the Iraqis that the Americans were in the was for the long haul. A timeline for the surge is shown below.
January 10, 2007 - President Bush announces the surge strategy stating: "I’ve committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.”
February 16, 2007 - The House of Representatives passes a resolution opposing Bush’s troop surge by a vote of 246-182
February 17, 2007 - The government of Iraq and coalition forces announce operation Fardh Al Qanoon (Enforcing the Law). This is the first of the operations that peak in the summer and constituted the bulk to the surge strategy.
March 2, 2007 - The Pentagon states that 7,000 more troops will be sent to Iraq.
April 26, 2007 - Senate approves Iraq withdrawal bill
June 15, 2007 - The troop surge operations with US troops begin. The U.S. military reports that 28,000 troops required for the surge have arrived in Iraq
September 11, 2007 - US troops surge hits peak of 168,000
November 24, 2007 - US troop surge is officially declared over
Statements opposing the surge
President Obama's view of the surge can be seen from two aspects: would it accomplish its objective to quell violence and would it aid in accomplishing victory. President Obama's made a number of statements on the surge strategy and was initially very clear that he felt it would not quell violence in Iraq and may even increase violence. He also stated number times that it would not contribute to the larger goal of getting the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own security.
On January 10, 2007 (the day that the surge was officially announced) in an interview on MSNBC, Senator Obama said the following:
I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is gonna solve the sectarian violence there, if fact I think it will do the reverse. It takes pressure off the Iraqis to arrive at the sort of political accommodation that every observer believes is the ultimate solution to the problems we face there. So I am going to actively oppose the President's proposal, I don't doubt his sincerity when he says he thinks that this is the best approach, but I think he is wrong and I think the American people believe he is wrong.
Days later, on January 14, 2007 in an interview on CBS, Senator Obama reiterated his belief that the surge strategy would not work.
We can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops, I don't know any expert on the region or any military officer that I have spoken to privately that beliefs that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.
In July of 2008, as troop numbers increased in Iraq major operations were at their height, Senator Obama appeared on the Today show and asserted that the surge was failing and the report on progress in Iraq would show that.
My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report 8 weeks from now.
In July of 2008, Senator Obama appeared on "Meet the Press" and again stated that the surge was not working. He reiterated that not only was the situation not improving, but there the possibility that it could worsen.
Finally, in 2006 and 2007, we started to see that even after an election, George Bush continued to want to pursue a course that didn't withdraw troops from Iraq, but actually doubled down and initiated the surge. And at that stage, I said very clearly, not only had we not seen improvements but we were actually worsening, potentially, a situation there.
Statements supportive of the surge
In the months following the conclusion of the surge, Senator Obama backed away from his position that it was not working and given the evidence at hand, noted that the surge had indeed accomplished it's goal of reducing violence. In an CNN debate on February 21, 2008 Senator Obama noted this reduction of violence:
I think that it is indisputable that we've seen violence reduced in Iraq
On April 8, 2008 in testimony on the Senate floor, Senator Obama again noted that the surge had reduced violence
... I also that the surge has reduced violence and provided breathing room
While these statements noting the reduction in violence in Iraq due to the surge were a result of the data presented in the months after the surge, on January 5, 2008 Senator Obama took his support for the surge a little farther and seemed to contradict his previous statements when he made the following statements on ABC:
(Speaking about the surge) I said at the time, when I opposed the surge, that given how wonderfully our troops perform, if we placed 30,000 more troops in there, then we would see an improvement in the security situation and we would see a reduction in the violence.
Months later, Senator Obama gave a number of interviews and admitted that the surge had indeed accomplished its goal of reducing violence. On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Senator Obama was asked about the success of the surge and had the following conversation with Mr. Stephanopoulos.
Stephanopoulos: You brought up Iraq before, let me ask you about that. One of the phrases we heard from GOvernor Palin and others at the convention, the Republican convention, was that in Iraq, victory is in sight. Do you believe that?
Obama: You know. They have yet to define victory, or it's a very slippery definition
Stephanopoulos: What's your definition of victory?
My view is that, number 1, it was a poorly conceived mission. So, to talk about victory...
Stephanopoulos: So there will never be victory?
Obama: Well, i think ... We ... George Bush, with the help of John McCain, and Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney made a big strategic blunder. There are enormous costs to that blunder. It's the equivalent to them driving the car off the ditch. I think its possible for us to get the car back on the road.
Stephanopoulos: But that's not gonna be victory?
Obama: That doesn't signify that we are better off than had we not gone. So, I do think that there has been enormous reductions in violence because of the extraordinary service of our troops. And there is no doubt that the improvements in terms of violence has to do with the surge and the Sunni awakening, the Shiite militia standing down, and we have to take advantage of that opportunity. The strange question is why John McCain insists on continuing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Stephanopoulos: How So?
Obama: Prime Minister Malaki has said that we are ready to take control and responsibility for what's happening in Iraq and John McCain seems resistant, even at a time when George Bush was prepared to say that we need to have some sort of time frame or time table.
Stephanopoulos: Given all you've just said, how do you escape the logic... You said we've succeeded with the surge beyond our wildest dreams. How do you escape the logic that that means that John McCain was right about the surge.
Obama: You know, it's interesting to me why people are so focused on what's happened in the last year and a half and not on the previous 5.
Stephanopoulos: Granted that you think that you made the right decision on going in, but what about the surge
Obama: They're connected George, and here's why. My whole premise has always been that it was a distraction for us to go into Iraq. Once we were there, we had to make the best of a bad situation.
Stephanopoulos: And didn't the surge do that?
Obama: What I have said is that at the time that we made the decision to go in with the surge that it did not address the underlying problem which is the willingness of the Iraqis to overcome their political difference and reconcile.
Stephanopoulos: But the state department says that 15 out of 18 political benchmarks have been met.
Obama: ... and to provide the kind of strategy that would allow us to move forward. That wasn't part of the package in the surge. So if the question is "Has the surge done much better than we expected in combination with these other factors in reducing violence," then the answer is yes and i've said this repeatedly. If the question is "What was the judgement to be made at the time the surge was put forward by the Bush administration?", my choice and John McCain's choice was "Are we gonna continue to give an open-ended blank check to George Bush without any strategy for political reconciliation or are we gonna try to pressure this administration to come up with a more coherent, cohesive plan for how we are gonna wind this war down."
In September of 2008, Senator Obama gave and interview to Bill O'Reilly and made the following statements:
O'Reilly: Allright, let's go to Iraq. I think that history will show that it was the wrong battlefield, and I think that you were perspicacious in your assessment of the battlefield.
Obama: I appreciate that
O'Reilly: I think that you were desperately wrong on the surge, and I think that you should admit it to the nation, that now we have defeated the terrorists in Iraq, and Al-Queda came there after we invaded as you know, we've defeated them. I f we didn't, they would have used it as a staging ground. We've also inhibited Iran from controlling the southern portion of Iraq, by the surge, which you did not support. So why won't you say that "I was right in the beginning, I was wrong about that."
Obama: If you listen to what I've said, and I'll repeat it right here on this show. I think that there is no doubt that the violence is down. I believe that that is a testimony to the troops that were sent, to General Petraus, and Ambassador Crocker. I think that surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated, by the way including George Bush and the other supporters. It has gone very well. Partly because of the Anhbar situation and the Sunni awakening, and partly because...
O'Reilly: but it worked
(Talking over each other)
O'Reilly: If it were up to you, there wouldn't have been a surge ... you and Joe Biden ...
Obama: Hold on a second Bill, if you look at the debate that was taking place. We had gone through 5 years of mismanagement of this war that I thought was disastrous, and the President wanted to double down and continue on an open-ended policy that did no create the kinds of pressure on the Iraqi's to take responsibility and reconcile ...
O'Reilly: but it worked
Obama: Bill, what I've said is that; I've already said that it's succeeded beyond our wildest dreams ...
O'Reilly: Why can't you just say that i was right in the beginning and was wrong about the surge
Obama: Because there is an underlying problem with what we've done. We have reduced the violence, but the Iraqis still haven't taken responsibility, and we still don't have the kind of political reconciliation ... We are still spending Bill $10-$12 Billion dollars a month
O'Reilly: and I hope that is you are President that you can get them to kick in and pay us back
The video below shows a compilation of some of the statements made by Senator Obama concerning the surge and the timeline for withdrawal. It was an anti-Obama ad using the conflicting statements described above.
Number of troops to remain in Iraq
Senator Obama has stated in multiple speeches (seen above) and in campaign literature that there will not be a permanent military base in Iraq. he has stated that there will only be enough troops to guard the embassy and to perform strikes on terrorist targets. When pressed for how many this would be and what the criteria would be to pull them out, Senator Obama recanted and stated that there would be only embassy personnel. From a video shown above, Senator Obama made the following statement in December of 2007.
The only mission ... We will not have permanent bases in Iraq and we will not have combat operations in Iraq. The only mission that I will allow will be to protect our embassy and our civilian personnel, diplomats, humanitarian workers, and we will have a narrowly targeted mission of if there are terrorist camps that are amassing in Iraq, that we have a strike capability.
On March 19, 2008, Senator Obama re-affirmed this plan:
After this redeployment, we will leave enough troops in Iraq to guard our embassy, and our diplomats, and a counter-terrorism force to strike al-quada.
In a press conference later that month (3-31-08), Senator Obama recanted on the strike force:
Q; You said you'd leave a small force there to deal with terrorist attacks. How long would you leave them there are what's your criteria for pulling them out?
Obama: Naa, No, that's not what I've said. What I've said is that we will have troops looking after our embassy there, which we do everywhere. We do it in France, we do it in Great Britain, we have some military personnel that ensure that our diplomatic forces are taken care of.
End of Combat Operations
On August 31, 2010 President Obama gave an address from the Oval office to state that combat operations were over in Iraq.
2008 Campaign Website Statements
This is a direct capture of Senator Obama's campaign website representing the section on the war in Iraq. It is shown here to provide context.
The Obama-Biden Plan
Barack Obama and Joe Biden will responsibly end the war in Iraq so that we can renew our military strength, dedicate more resources to the fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, and invest in our economy at home. The Obama-Biden plan will help us succeed in Iraq by transitioning to Iraqi control of their country.
Judgment You Can Trust
In 2002, Obama had the judgment and courage to speak out against going to war, and to warn of "an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences." He and Joe Biden are fully committed to ending the war in Iraq.
A Responsible, Phased Withdrawal
Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month -- which would remove all of them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 -- more than 7 years after the war began.
Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism.
Encouraging Political Accommodation
Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that the U.S. must apply pressure on the Iraqi government to work toward real political accommodation. There is no military solution to Iraq’s political differences. Now is the time to press Iraq’s leaders to take responsibility for their future and to invest their oil revenues in their own reconstruction.
Obama and Biden's plan will help create lasting stability in Iraq. A phased withdrawal will encourage Iraqis to take the lead in securing their own country and making political compromises, while the responsible pace of redeployment called for by the Obama-Biden plan offers more than enough time for Iraqi leaders to get their own house in order. As our forces redeploy, Obama and Biden will make sure we engage representatives from all levels of Iraqi society -- in and out of government -- to forge compromises on oil revenue sharing, the equitable provision of services, federalism, the status of disputed territories, new elections, aid to displaced Iraqis, and the reform of Iraqi security forces.
Surging Diplomacy
Barack Obama and Joe Biden will launch an aggressive diplomatic effort to reach a comprehensive compact on the stability of Iraq and the region. This effort will include all of Iraq’s neighbors -- including Iran and Syria, as suggested by the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group Report. This compact will aim to secure Iraq’s borders; keep neighboring countries from meddling inside Iraq; isolate al Qaeda; support reconciliation among Iraq’s sectarian groups; and provide financial support for Iraq’s reconstruction and development.
Preventing Humanitarian Crisis
Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that America has both a moral obligation and a responsibility for security that demands we confront Iraq’s humanitarian crisis -- more than five million Iraqis are refugees or are displaced inside their own country. Obama and Biden will form an international working group to address this crisis. They will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries, and ensure that Iraqis inside their own country can find sanctuary. Obama and Biden will also work with Iraqi authorities and the international community to hold accountable the perpetrators of potential war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. They will reserve the right to intervene militarily, with our international partners, to suppress potential genocidal violence within Iraq.
The Status-of-Forces Agreement
Obama and Biden believe it is vital that a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) be reached so our troops have the legal protections and immunities they need. Any SOFA should be subject to Congressional review to ensure it has bipartisan support here at home.
White House.gov Statements
Under the defense portion of the issues section of WhiteHouse.gov, the following remarks are made on the war in Iraq.
Iraq: Because of the skilled efforts of our troops and commitment of the Iraqi people to building a better life through a peaceful political process, violence in Iraq has reduced substantially. Because of this, we are moving forward with a responsible drawdown of our combat forces, transferring security to Iraq's forces. Under the Strategic Framework Agreement and Security Agreement, Iraqi personnel have taken the lead in security operations and will continue to assume greater responsibility.
Voting Record
Phased Redeployment
On March 15, 2007, S J Res 9 was put forth in an attempt to convince President Bush to commit to timetable for withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The bill was titled "United States Policy in Iraq Resolution of 2007 - Phased Redeployment" and called upon the President to begin the withdrawal of troops from Iraq within 120 days of the enactment of the legislation, and to have all troops out of Iraq by March 31, 2008. The bill was defeated on roll call 75, which was largely among partisan lines with 1 Republican joining the Democrats and 3 Democrats joining the rest of the Republicans. Barack Obama voted in favor of the phased redeployment plan.
Barack Obama voted in favor of the phased redeployment plan.
Approval of the Surge Strategy
The second piece of legislation was S 574, and it came up for a vote on February 17 and had two main points of emphasis : the Senate continued to support the troops already on the ground in Iraq; and the Senate disapproved of the President\'s surge strategy. The bill only got 56 of the 60 votes required for cloture. 7 Republicans voted in favor of the legislation while only 1 Democrat sided with the Republicans. 10 Senators cast a "No Vote" (9 R and 1 D). (roll call) Barack Obama voted in favor of the legislation by voting for cloture. This was a vote against the surge strategy in Iraq
Barack Obama voted in favor of the legislation by voting for cloture. This was a vote against the surge strategy in Iraq
Approval of the Surge Strategy
On January 10, 2007, President Bush announced a "surge" strategy in which 20,000 additional troops would be sent to Iraq to bolster the troops already there. In February of 2007, the US Senate voted on two bills with the purposes of expressing the Senate\'s disapproval of this strategy. S 470 was the first such piece of legislation, and it came up for a vote on the Senate floor on February 5, 2007. Along with expressing the disapproval of the Senate towards the President\'s recently announced strategy, the bill also outlined a series of strategy suggestions for the President. These suggestions included the transfer of equipment to Iraqi officials, the continuing of operations in the Anbar province, and numerous other items. The bill only got 49 of the 60 votes required for cloture. Only 2 members of each party voted with the opposing party with almost all Democrats voting to disapprove the surge and almost all Republicans voting to approve of the strategy by refusing to allow the legislation a cloture vote. (roll call 44). Barack Obama voted in favor of S470 (disapproved of the surge) by voting for cloture.
Barack Obama voted in favor of S470 (disapproved of the surge) by voting for cloture.
To provide for a reduction and transition of United States forces in Iraq
In September of 2007, the Senate voted on an amendment by Senator Levin to require that all troops begin to be withdrawn within 90 days. The amendment also stated that the troops remaining in Iraq would only be there for the purposes of protecting US personnel and infrastructure. Barack Obama voted in favor of withdrawing the troops from Iraq.
Barack Obama voted in favor of withdrawing the troops from Iraq.
Dwell Time
In September of 2007, the Senate voted on a measure to require US servicemen be stationed at home for an amount of time equal to their deployment time. The measure received a majority of votes, but not the number required to pass. Barack Obama voted in favor of the measure to require equal dwell time.
Barack Obama voted in favor of the measure to require equal dwell time.
Contract Award Overview
Later in the year, the same amendment was introduced into the Senate by Senator Dorgan. This amendment has the same purpose and failed to achieve the needed votes by a simlar margin. Barack Obama voted to support the amendment to create the special committee.
Barack Obama voted to support the amendment to create the special committee.
Contract Award Overview
In 2005, a series of accidents at military bases in Iraq which were built by US contractors such as Halliburton, prompted Congress to call for investigations into the awarding of contracts. There were two ammendments introduced to separate pieces of legislation to attempt to accomplish the goal of investigating the contract awards process. roll call 228 concerned the Dorgan amendment, and was the first attempt to establish a special committee on the awarding of contracts in Iraq. The amendment failed by a narrow margin in a 53-44 vote. Barack Obama voted to support the amendment to create the special committee.
Barack Obama voted to support the amendment to create the special committee.
Directs the President to begin the phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq within 120 days of enactment of this joint resolution with the goal of redeploying by March 31, 2008, all U.S. combat forces from Iraq, except for a limited number essential for protecting U.S. and coalition personnel and infrastructure, training and equipping Iraqi forces, and conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations. Requires the President to transition the U.S. forces' mission in Iraq promptly to such purposes. States that such redeployment shall be implemented as part of a diplomatic, political, and economic strategy that includes sustained engagement with Iraq's neighbors and the international community in order to bring stability to Iraq. Directs the President, not later than 60 days after enactment of this Act and every 90 days thereafter, to report to Congress on the progress made in such mission transition and force redeployment.
A bill to provide for the study and investigation of wartime contracts and contracting processes in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, and for other purposes.
