I thought it was in a phone call with the Iraqi Foreign Minister that Obama demanded delays, not in the face-to-face meeting with the Prime Minister.

If he did it, it obviously wouldn't have been in a meeting with everyone present. The Obama campaign's original denial was sort of a non-denial, so it makes one wonder if something didn't go on there.

Maybe not. But, in any case, thank heaven for little girls.

"It's a smear! McCain lies! Obama wins! Yaaaaaay!"

Ummmmm Drew? First, as  Haven't you seen this article?

With the quote

In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office

Isn't that sorta saying, "Yeah, we did it"?

"Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades," Morigi said.

Well how about this, he admitted saying this:

"In the face of resistance from Bush, the Democrat has long said that any such agreement must be reviewed by the US Congress as it would tie a future administration's hands on Iraq."

Thats bullshit, if I understand correctly as Taheri assumes in his article, the Senate radifies Treaties. Not Agreements like the SAF. So no, Congress has no business reviewing the administrations agreement.

This is the quote, I just cut out the middle part:

But Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Taheri's article bore "as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial."

In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.

So Obama!'s National Security Spokestool said it.

It's a hell of choice, you either believe an Obama staffer or an AFP reporter. I'd prefer neither but that's the choice.

Or an Arab politician or a Republican DINO. It's like Rashomon except they're all probably lying.

No, no, no Drew.  Obama's spokesman has already confirmed the story (even as he called it a lie). 

It doesn't matter who was there, there's no question he still interfered with U.S. negotiations.  The Bush admin is just weirdly obsessed with being nice to the same Democrats who are promising to put him on trial in three months.

But Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Taheri's article bore "as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial."

In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.

In the face of resistance from Bush, the Democrat has long said that any such agreement must be reviewed by the US Congress as it would tie a future administration's hands on Iraq.

"Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades," Morigi said.

but others say is tantamount to a treaty and must be ratified by the Senate.
Yes, I absolutely agree, it is to be ratified by the Senate.

Unless my dictionary is messed up, Ratified is not equivalent to negotiated.

So the President negotiates it and the Senate ratifies it.

Separation of powers and all that.

Cross posting, you say that she denied it, she didn't. It's typical double-talk that's almost Homeresque in its deliver.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

Well, yes.

It's a hell of choice, you either believe an Obama staffer or an AFP reporter. I'd prefer neither but that's the choice.

Or an Arab politician or a Republican DINO. It's like Rashomon except they're all probably lying.

Clearly, the only safe option is to take off and nuke the site from orbit.  It is the only way to be sure.

Post number one had it righ, they are just obfuscating. Fucking liars.

Obama spoke briefly (about 10 minutes) with reporters about his telephone conversation with Zebari. He said he was encouraged by the progress made in reducing the violence in Iraq, but believed troops should be withdrawn, and they should do so carefully.

Obama also told Zebari, he said, that Congress should be involved in any negotiations regarding a Status of Forces agreement with Iraq. He suggested it may be better to wait until the next administration to negotiate such an agreement

From MSNBC:http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/16/1146192.aspx

Drew? Didn't you read my post?

No, no, no, no,no,no.

Well yes.

I implicitly said that she had denied it before admitting it was true.

Heres a little more:

Obama also told NBC: “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made, but I think the only way to assure that is to make sure that there is strong bipartisan support, that Congress is involved, that the American people know the outlines of this agreement.

“And my concern is that if the Bush administration negotiates, as it currently has, and given that we’re entering into the heat of political season, that we’re probably better off not trying to complete a hard-and-fast agreement before the next administration takes office, but I think obviously these conversations have to continue.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/30911

I think that is blatant interference, those are his words to NBC

I also believe they are attempting to parse the two agreements saying that he had confused the 2 agreements when they are actual connected at the hip. You cannot have one without the other.

Sorry for the multi posts but here is the kicker about the 2 agreements:

"As to the Strategic Framework Agreement, Sen. Obama has consistently said that any security arrangements that outlast this administration should have the backing of the US Congress - especially given the fact that the Iraqi parliament will have the opportunity to vote on it."

If there is any confusion, it's in Obama's position - for the two agreements are interlinked: You can't have any US military presence under one agreement without having settled the other accord. (Thus, in US-Iraqi talks, the aim is a comprehensive agreement that covers both SOFA and SFA.)

And the claim that Obama only wanted the Strategic Framework Agreement delayed until a new administration takes office, and had no objection to a speedy conclusion of a Status of Forces Agreement, is simply untrue.


Here is how NBC reported Obama's position on June 16, after his conversation in the US with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari: "Obama also told Zebari, he said, that Congress should be involved in any negotiations regarding a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq. He suggested it may be better to wait until the next administration to negotiate such an agreement."

In other words, Obama wanted a delay on the Status of Forces Agreement, not on the Strategic Framework Agreement - as his rebuttal now claims.

The NBC report continues: "Asked by NBC's Lee Cowan if a timetable for the Status of Forces Agreement was discussed, Obama said, 'Well he, the foreign minister, had presented a letter requesting an extension of the UN resolution until the end of this year. So that' s a six-month extension.'"

That Obama was aware that the two accords couldn' t be separated is clear in his words to NBC:

So basically he knew that putting one off would ineveitably put off the other. Thats like me calling my mechanic and asking him to put off taking out the heads from the motor but go ahead and replace the pistons.

It looks like he did cross lines, Drew, as there was more than one meeting:

http://tinyurl.com/4y5epx

With the development of technology, traditional cutting methods find many difficulties in satisfying users' needs. Smart competitors try to seek for new technology to change this situation. Luckily, laser cutting machines bring them hope and benefits. Compared with traditional cutting methods, laser cuttershave many advantages. It is easy to operate, convenient to maintain, and has high precision, great efficiency, and high degree of automation.

CNC routers are applied into many industries, such as tombstone processing, stone carving art, advertisement, decoration, arts and crafts industry, etc. CNC routers for stone has characters for long-time continuous carving, long equipment life and high accuracy, it is especially suitable for precise engraving and quantity production. It can be used for linear carving, planar carving, 3D embossment, cutting and so on.