In a recent comment by his representative, Ayatollah Sistani told Iraqi officials not worry about the politicians who are running on a cut and run platform (Obama)...
They are just saying that because it's election time.
Aswat Aliraq reported:
A representative of top Shiite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani on Friday called Iraqi officials to show patience during the U.S.-Iraq long-term deal negotiations, terming pledges of withdrawing foreign troops from Iraq as transitory and elections-oriented.Funny, former Obama advisor, Samantha Power, said the same thing to the BBC before she was let go by the Obama campaign:
"The pledges to withdraw from Iraq given by (officials) from occupation forces countries are only for elections sake ", Ahmed al-Safi, a representative of Shiite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, said at Friday prayer speech in Karbala.
The cleric noted "the reality of their pledges is that they desire their troops to stay in (Iraq)".
He pointed out "it accounted for their desire to draft an agreement to keep the presence of the troops in Iraq".
The cleric called on Iraqi negotiator to be patient "in drafting the issues of such decisive agreement".
He stressed the importance of "announcing the agreement details to Iraqi intellectuals and people".
Iraq and U.S. are negotiating a long-term agreement to govern the presence of the U.S. troops in Iraq. The proposed agreement is based on a declaration of principles signed between U.S. President George W. Bush and Iraqi Premier Maliki upon the latter's visit to Washington in last November.
You can’t make a commitment in whatever month we’re in now, in March of 2008 about what circumstances are gonna be like in Jan. 2009. We can’t even tell what Bush is up to in terms of troop pauses and so forth. He will of course not rely upon some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or as a US senator.Obviously, the good ayatollah is not fazed by all of the "change" rhetoric.
He will rely upon a plan, an operational plan that he pulls together, in consultation with people who are on the ground, to whom he doesn’t have daily access now as a result of not being the president.
"Obviously, the good ayatollah is not fazed by all of the "change" rhetoric."
ReplyDeleteAmazing how politically savvy he has become though I think he may be slightly off base (pardon the pun) with:
"The cleric noted "the reality of their pledges is that they desire their troops to stay in (Iraq)".
Right now, the American people overwhelmingly do not want to keep US troops in Iraq. Obama is playing to the populace. He is doing it for an election. He is not doing it to gain leverage. I think, no matter the reality on the ground, Obama will take those troops out of Iraq to fulfill his main campaign promise. What Sistani does not understand is the willingness of Obama to act against the United State's interests in order to win an election.
He should understand it though. Some of the Iraqi politicians are doing the same thing.
I love the rebuke of Obama
ReplyDeleteHowever, does the article mention Sistani's position on long-term agreements? Is he disapointed that Obama is simply playing to the populace, and actually does not want any long-term presence of American troops?
"He stressed the importance of "announcing the agreement details to Iraqi intellectuals and people".
ReplyDeletejimmy,
I think that says it all.
He hasn't endorsed or condemned any plan but simply made a case for transparency, conversation and involvement of the population in the decision.
++
ReplyDeletere: [to whom he doesn’t have daily access now as a result of not being the president]
that's pure BS.. when is Obama going to "talk" to our allies, seems to me he is only interested in "talking" to our self declared enemies..
McCain has "invited" Obama to take a trip to Iraq which would enlighten him as to the "facts on the ground"..
Michael Yon's "open invitation" has also been available to Obama (whom i'm certain was one of the select few who received a personal invite)..
excerpt:
I hereby offer to accompany any Senator to Iraq, whether they are pro- or anti- war, Democrat or Republican. I will make this offer personally to a few select Senators as well. Our conversations during the visit would be on- or off- record, as they wish. Touring Iraq with me, as well as briefings by U.S. officers and meetings with Iraqis, would provide an accurate and nuanced account of the progress and challenges ahead, so that the Senators might have a highly informed perspective on this most critical issue. Our civilian leaders need to make decisions based on the best information available. The only way to learn what is really going on in Iraq is to go there and listen to our ground commanders, who know what they are doing. Generals Petraeus and Odierno have years of experience in Iraq, and vast knowledge of our efforts there. But the young soldiers who have done multiple tours in Iraq also have unique and invaluable perspectives as well. These young soldiers have personally witnessed the trajectory of the war shift dramatically, and can articulate those changes in concrete and specific terms. It doesn’t matter if a soldier is only twenty- something. If he or she spent two or three years in the war, that person is likely to have valuable insights. The best way to understand what is really going on is to listen closely to a wide range of service members who have done multiple tours in Iraq. Some will be negative, some will be positive, but overall I am certain that the vast majority of multi- tour Iraq veterans will testify that there has been great progress, and now there is hope. Combat veterans don’t tolerate happy talk or wishful thinking. They’ll tell you the raw truth as they see it.]
what say Obama??
crickets..
==
++
ReplyDeletere: bg @ 11:11 AM..
forgot to add..
not to mention the fact that if Obama really wanted to be enlightened as to the truth of what is happening "on the ground" in Iraq.. he could have "visited", and still can, "visit" Iraq at any time of his own volition..
==
++
ReplyDeleteoh yeah, add this to the "on the ground" facts being ignored by the O'man because he's not the president..
seriously, if he supposedly knows so little, and doesn't care to find out the truth as to what's going on "on the ground" in Iraq.. then what kind of twisted logic are they using to assume he'd know more as president?? that's not logic, it's a lame "excuse".. period!!
fact is Obama does know what is going on "on the ground" in Iraq.. even us gun & God clinging bigots know.. hence, there is no way in this world he couldn't..
denial has nothing to do with it.. the reason Obama refuses to "visit" Iraq is because it would only confirm the fact that the man doesn't know his arse from his elbow..
==
The Obomanation will never willingly put himself in the path of a problematic fact.
ReplyDelete