The Story Behind Maliki’s ‘Endorsement’

There is some irony in the fact that Democrats, after years of deriding Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as a hopeless bungler and conniving Shiite sectarian, are now treating as sacrosanct his suggestion that Iraq will be ready to assume responsibility for its own security by 2010. Naturally this is because his position seems to support that of Barack Obama.

In May 2006, shortly after becoming prime minister, he claimed, “Our forces are capable of taking over the security in all Iraqi provinces within a year and a half.”

In October 2006, when violence was spinning out of control, Maliki declared that it would be “only a matter of months” before his security forces could “take over the security portfolio entirely and keep some multinational forces only in a supporting role.”

On Dec. 15, 2006, the Wall Street Journal reported, “Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has flatly told Gen. George Casey, the top American military commander in Iraq, that he doesn’t want more U.S. personnel deployed to the country, according to U.S. military officials.”

In January 2007, with the surge just starting, Maliki predicted “that within three to six months our need for the American troops will dramatically go down.”

In April 2007, when most of Baghdad was still out of control, the prime minister said that Iraqi forces would assume control of security in every province by the end of the year.

The Post recently quoted Brig. Gen. Bilal al-Dayni, commander of Iraqi troops in Basra, as saying of the Americans, “We hope they will stay until 2020.” That is similar to the expectation of Iraq’s defense minister, Abdul Qadir, who says his forces cannot assume full responsibility for internal security until 2012 and for external security until 2018.

Interesting. It seems Obama and Maliki share much in common, complete inexperience when it comes to military matters and ignoring the advice of top military commanders.

Oh? Democrats (including He Whose Middle Name Must Not Be Mentioned) have been saying for years that the war in Iraq is lost and that we need to pull out yesterday regardless of the consequences. Have Democrats flip-flopped on this? Even the Washington Post – hardly a redoubt of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy(TM) – is now no longer willing to voluntarily plunge off the “out of Iraq no matter what” cliff anymore.

Or will Democrats claim that in hotly opposing the Iraq War (and demonizing Bush and Republicans) they were really supporting victory in Iraq? The Messiah has always been committed to winning in Iraq in the same way Oceana has always been committed to winning in Eurasia (or Eastasia).

Have you ever heard of such a thing?? A man so stubborn that he won’t admit when he was wrong. Especially on such a major issue. McCain is spot on with his assessment of BO. I couldn’t agree more. I keep hoping that BO might actually try only talking out of 1 side of his mouth. My wait continues…..

Another thing that is really getting to me is the constant qualification of BO’s every statement. If you aren’t on the wrong side of an issue, you wouldn’t have to do this constantly Barak. – Lorica

Re: “Usual Suspects” What happened with the last ones? Did the conspriacy thing ever play out?

The first half of that statement is something McCain has said all along. The second half is the obvious rewording of it since Obama made the statement he did before he left for Iraq….