Shocker: Hillary's not going to pull us out of Iraq

Sorry libs...I know that's a disappoinment to you, but if Hillary is elected, and I still think it's a big IF, sounds like she's going to "stay the course".

I know that's got to be a big disappointment to those who think she's going to undo all of Bush's decisions.

You better watch her very closely, because what you see may not be what you get.

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

British troops will start a major withdrawal from Iraq next May under detailed plans on military disengagement to be published next month, The Observer can reveal.

The document being drawn up by the British government and the US will be presented to the Iraqi parliament in October and will spark fresh controversy over how long British troops will stay in the country. Tony Blair hopes that, despite continuing and widespread violence in Iraq, the move will show that there is progress following the conflict of 2003.

Britain has already privately informed Japan - which also has troops in Iraq - of its plans to begin withdrawing from southern Iraq in May, a move that officials in Tokyo say would make it impossible for their own 550 soldiers to remain.

The increasingly rapid pace of planning for British military disengagement has been revealed on the eve of the Labour Party conference, which will see renewed demands for a deadline for withdrawal. It is hoped that a clearer strategy on Iraq will quieten critics who say that the government will not be able to 'move on' until Blair quits. Yesterday, about 10,000 people demonstrated against the army's continued presence in the country.

Speaking to The Observer this weekend, the Defence Secretary, John Reid, insisted that the agreement being drawn up with Iraqi officials was contingent on the continuing political process, although he said he was still optimistic British troops would begin returning home by early summer.

'The two things I want to insist about the timetable is that it is not an event but a process, and that it will be a process that takes place at different speeds in different parts of the country. I have said before that I believe that it could begin in some parts of the country as early as next July. It is not a deadline, but it is where we might be and I honestly still believe we could have the conditions to begin handover. I don't see any reason to change my view.

'But if circumstances change I have no shame in revising my estimates.'

The disclosures follow rising demands for the government to establish a clearer strategy for bringing troops home following the kidnapping of two British SAS troopers in Basra and the scenes of violence that surrounded their rescue. Last week Blair's own envoy to Iraq, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, warned that Britain could be forced out if Iraq descends so far into chaos that 'we don't have any reasonable prospect of holding it together'.

Continued tension between the Iraqi police force, the Iraqi administration and British troops was revealed again yesterday when an Iraqi magistrate called for the arrest of the two British special forces soldiers. who were on a surveillance mission when they were taken into custody by Iraqi police and allegedly handed on to a militia.

For Blair, the question of withdrawal is one of the most difficult he is facing. The Prime Minister has abandoned plans, announced last February, to publish his own exit strategy setting out the milestones which would have to be met before quitting: instead, the plans are now being negotiated between a commission representing the Shia-dominated Iraqi government, and senior US and UK diplomats and military commanders in Baghdad.

Senior military sources have told The Observer that the document will lay out a point-by-point 'road map' for military disengagement by multinational forces, the first steps of which could be put in place soon after December's nationwide elections.

Each stage of the withdrawal would be locally judged on regional improvements in stability, with units being withdrawn as Iraqi units are deemed capable of taking over. Officials familiar with the negotiations said that conditions for withdrawal would not demand a complete cessation of insurgent violence, or the end of al-Qaeda atrocities.

According to the agreement under negotiation, each phase would be triggered when key security, stability and political targets have been reached. The phased withdrawal strategy - the British side of which is expected to take at least 12 months to complete - would see UK troops hand over command responsibility for security to senior Iraqi officers, while remaining in support as a reserve force.

In the second phase British Warriors and other armoured vehicles would be removed from daily patrols, before a complete withdrawal of British forces to barracks.

The final phase - departure of units - would follow a period of months where Iraqi units had demonstrated their ability to deal with violence in their areas of operation.

Blair will tackle his critics over Iraq in his conference speech, aides said this weekend, but would decline to give a public deadline for withdrawing troops. He is expected to make several major interventions on the war in the coming weeks, before a vote on the new constitution in mid-October, explaining how Iraq could be steered towards a sufficiently stable situation to allow troops to come home.

'What we are not going to set out is a timetable: what we are going to set out is a process of developing that security capability,' said a Downing Street source. 'We don't want to be there any longer than we have to be, the Iraqis don't want us to be there any longer than we have to be, but the Iraqi Prime Minister has made it very clear that our presence there is one that is necessary.'

It was revealed yesterday that an Iraqi judge issued the warrants for the arrest of the two rescued soldiers, accusing them of killing one policeman and wounding another, carrying unlicensed weapons and holding false identification.

The continuing preparations for a military withdrawal come, however, as officials are bracing themselves for a new political crisis in Iraq next month, with what many regard as the inevitable rejection of a new constitution by a two-thirds majority in three provinces, sufficient to kill the document and trigger new elections.

The same officials believe that a failure of the controversial constitution - which Sunnis say favours the Shia majority - would require at least another year of political negotiations, threatening any plans to disengage.

Well I guess he saw how well it worked with the HC supporters (most giving their opinion that we need a woman in there, we are voting cos its time for a woman, etc, etc and some only voting for her only because she's a woman). Guess he's so concerned with losing he'll stoop to anything. Talk about calling the kettle black. He proclaims Obama doesn't have the experience and he's young and new, and then he picks her? She's not ready to step in as President, she doesn't have any experience whatsoever. He's going to have a hard time explaining that one.

Again it goes to show McCain is not in touch with the American people. He picks a woman thinking that what all the women want, but luckily the women who supported Hillary are coming out saying we supported Hillary because of her position and viewpoints, not just because she was a women. I just believe he has just lost any chance to win.

She has no international experience, been governer less than 2 years and has no experience at anything. Guess he's making it perfectly clear he wants a running mate who will never question him. His ego is taking over and its going to sink him. He'll need the Swift Boat Veterans to fish him out of the water. Never mind her radical christian viewpoints. Everything he's been attacking Obama for being, he has just picked a running mate who is all that. How could he have gotten it so wrong? Any chance I had of electing him flew out the window with that pick.

Brother...he would have been better to choose Hillary as a running mate. Hello President Obama.

It looks like they are getting very serious about doing this. They aren't alone in this kind of talk. I think Texas and North or South Carolina have been talking this way, too.

I've actually been thinking of voting for her if she runs. A year ago, I couldn't stand her. I don't know if she's changed or if I've changed, but what I mostly think it is, is that the further right the neocons go, the further toward center she seems to wind up.

As far as respect, let's see... She has the ability to articulately and intelligent form SENTENCES using the English language. That in and of itself is worthy of much more respect than what we've currently got.

She seems to have enormous strength without being a bully. I can't recall her telling the rest of the world to "Bring it on."

I'm somewhere between being a Democrat and Republican. I tend to vote for someone because of issues, not because of party affiliation. I've registered as an Independent because of that, and I'm glad I did because these days of Republicans and skyrocketing deficits, increasing intrusion of government into the personal lives of American citizens, etc. leaves me wondering just what Republican and Democrat means any more.

Republican seems to now mean a particular, narrow brand of Christianity (rather than a brand of politics), lying as a regular and customary part of doing business with the American people and the world, destroying the lives of people who disagree with them, completely stalling and bringing science to a screeching halt, forcing regime change on weaker countries through war, while showing weakness and backing down from true threats, such as North Korea.

Again, as far as Hillary is concerned, she left a bad taste in my mouth when she seemed to put down stay-at-home moms with her comment about choosing her career over staying home and "having teas." I feel being a mother is probably the most important job there is, and I didn't appreciate that comment. However, recently she's looking a lot better to me.

I also would like to see more from Giuliani. I think he demonstrated excellent leadership during the 9/11 tragedy, and he seems to be more moderate when it comes to the personal lives of people.

My DREAM President would have been Colin Powell. I can't recall seeing such grace, dignity and intelligence in a politician. He also has firsthand combat experience in foreign lands and might not be so hasty to jeopardize soldiers' lives as someone who didn't have the guts to put his own life on the line yet seems to find the lives of our young people readily disposable for nation building, rather than defending America.

I truly don't think we can do any WORSE than what we have now. If we can just all hold our breath and tread lightly, we just might be able to survive the next three years, not because of this president but IN SPITE of him.

Hillary just might be someone who would actually put Americans' safety and America, in general, FIRST. Wouldn't that be a nice change?

Personally, I don't care what Laura did when she was 17, even if she was driving drunk. But, republicans are relentless and we can't let this go without mentioning the certain media frenzy if this had been Hillary who killed her first fiance.

Barbara Olson would have a best seller on it.
Ann Coulter would have a best seller on it.
Peggy Noonan would have a best seller on it.
Laura Ingraham would have a best seller on it.
Laura Schlessinger would have a best seller on it.
David Limbaugh would have a best seller on it.
Christopher Hitchens would have a best seller on it.
Dick Morris would have a best seller on it.
Bob Woodward would have a best seller on it.
Christopher Ruddy would have a best seller on it.
Ben Stein would have a best seller on it.
Gail Sheehy would have a best seller on it
Neal Boortz would have a best seller on it.
David P. Schippers would have a best seller on it.
David Maraniss would have a best seller on it.
Mike Barnacle would claim he was in the car with Hillary.
Joe Klein would write a best seller on it, but swear he didn't
Judas Stephanopolous Maximus would have a best seller on it.
Joe Eszterhas would fabricate quotes from Hillary's vagina.
Michael Isikoff would swear the conversation was "off the record"
but then turn around and print every word (plus some he made up.)
Kenneth Starr would write an impeachment referral over it.
Susan McDougal would still have to do time in prison,
and Julie Hiatt Steele would still lose her house.

The vulgar Pigboy would pound on her 15 hours a week until 2009.
O'Reilly would pound on Hillary for months and years.
Hannity would pound on Hillary for months and years.
(and Colmes would remain silent while he did...)
Paula Zahn would pound on Hillary for months and years.
Brit Hume would have weekly "Special reports" called "Accident? You Decide!"
Juan Willaims and Mara Liason would agree Hillary belongs in prison.

CNN would create a spin off network to cover it 24/7.
Tim would mention it every Sunday until he died.
Chris would pound on Hillary for months and years,
but no guest would ever get to answer any questions about it.
Cokie Roberts would mention it every week, then giggle.
Henry Hyde would scream, "The flag is falling."

Richard Mellon Scaife would pay David Brock $80,000 to talk to the cops who were paid $80,000 to say "We thought we smelled liquor, but everyone in Arkansas knows there'd be hell to pay if we wrote this up as a drunk driving accident."
The American Spectator would then run a front page story on it, and somehow Paula Jones would run into the spotlight screaming, "Hillary was trying to kill me - and missed," then the
mainstream media would've made Paula a star on this story instead of the other one.
Then every night, Larry King and his "panel of experts" would search for the connection between Hillary's accident and Clinton's penis - as he always does.

GOP Challenger to Sen. Clinton Quits Race

Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro (R) ended her campaign against New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday, bringing to a close a brief and decidedly rocky attempt to unseat perhaps the country's most famous Democratic officeholder.

Even as she announced she would shutter her campaign against Clinton, Pirro jumped into the state attorney general's contest. A recent independent poll showed her trailing the two Democrats seeking that office.

In a statement released by her campaign, Pirro said her law enforcement background better qualifies me for a race for New York State Attorney General than a race for the United States Senate.

Pirro's exit leaves the Republicans adrift for now, with only two obscure candidates vying for the nomination: former Yonkers mayor John Spencer and tax lawyer William Brenner.

From the start of Pirro's Senate campaign in mid-August, she was beset by questions about her fundraising ability and readiness for such a high-profile contest.

Pirro is the second Republican to drop a bid against Clinton, who is seeking a second Senate term next November. New York City lawyer Ed Cox, the son-in-law of President Richard M. Nixon, left the contest Oct. 16 when New York Gov. George E. Pataki (R) announced his support for Pirro.

We know at some point the Republicans will sort out this process and choose a nominee, Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said.

Cillizza is a washingtonpost.com staff writer.

I remember several years ago hearing some pundits speculate about political royalty and how the Bushes and Clintons would be basically the only *families* in the White House from here on out.

Given Bill's sudden closeness to and *adoption* by Bush, Sr. and Hillary's refusal to take a stand, as you said, it kind of makes me wonder if maybe they didn't hit the nail on the head.

Hillary is wonderful so is every other democrat running..ANYONE is better than the tired old men running as republicans. I would vote for my dog before I would vote for a republican. We need four years of peace and prosperity and building our reputation in the world and healing this country and fixing all the destructive things this administration has done here and abroad. Hillary, when she worked as a lawyer, was one of the top five lawyers in America. Her IQ is higher than Bill and that has to be quite high as Bill is quite an intelligent man. Contrast that to the person in the WH now. I think his IQ must be around 75 to 90.

I took the time to watch the trailer of Peter Paul's Hillary Exposed trailer again this morning, took a few notes, and did a little internet research. It is my conclusion that this is mostly fabrication with a stab at Hillary because he is angry that his investment/ideas didn't go as he had planned.

The 2000 Hollywood Gala was a farewell for Bill to garner his favor in supporting him on a business venture, with the added benefit as a fundraiser for Hillary. Paul also gave fundraisers for others. For whatever reason, this didn't go as he had planned. Paul specifically stated that he only gave the fundraiser for Hillary to get to Bill. There is no evidence suggesting that Clinton told Levin to seduce Oto to oust Paul to destroy him and SLM.

The phone call to SLM from Hillary says nothing other than that she is pleased with what they are doing for her and thanking them. I do not believe that she helped plan the gala whatsoever nor knew the full details.

Is being a fundraiser the same as campaign contributor? If you are shelling out money for the affair, is that considered a campaign contribution? I didn't have time to dig into that this morning.

As David Rosen was Hillary's finance director, if he falsified documents, whether on his own or told by someone else to do it, he is the one culpable.

Digging into Peter F. Paul's past doesn't lend much to his credibility. I am loath to believe anything from such a person. I think he is just trying to save his own butt and trying to get back at Bill through Hillary. His stint in Brazil and being put in jail was of his own doing.

In essence, there is just not much substance here when you start digging. This is the first of many attacks that are just beginning for Hillary as well as the other presidential candidates and should not be taken at face value.

Oh the poor baby. Wasn't she the one who said "If you can't stand the heat....."

Whether I like her or not is besides the point. This is an election and Bill & Hillary need to realize if you want to win you have to work towards it. It's not going to be handed to you.

Yes, I realize she is working hard, but so is Barack Obama. Do you hear him crying when she makes a racial statement about him about how nobody "white" is going to vote for him?