ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Obama: troops out in two to three years

Posted: Saturday, December 15, 2007 2:41 PM by Domenico Montanaro




From NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan
Guttenberg, Iowa -- Obama said the withdrawal of all troops from Iraq could take two and half to three years.

"WhenI say we are going to pull out," Obama said, "we can take one to two brigades out every month responsibly and safely. At that pace, it would take 16 months to get our combat troops back home."

The remarks are a more optimistic estimate than what he and the two other leading candidates for the Democratic nomination, Clinton and Edwards provided at the Democratic debate at Dartmouth in late September. At that debate, none of the three candidates would commit to having troops withdrawn from Iraq by the end of their first term.

The answer at that debate led voters to pepper Obama with questions about his commitment to immediately bringing the war to an end, and Obama responded by criticizing the media for misconstruing his answer.  In the weeks following the debate, he qualified his stance on troop withdrawal assaying that he would keep troops in Iraq for diplomatic, humanitarian and counter-terrorism purposes.

"So this isn't  like we're going to be home tomorrow. So let's say that George Bush still has a 100,000 troops or more there when I take office in January 2009. You take on another sixteen months off of that, that's two and a half three years away before we have all our troops out."

The question Obama received on the war and troop withdrawal was just one of two questions he received on Iraq and foreign policy over the course of five campaign events across Iowa. The issue appears to have taken a backseat to immigration and the economy, topics that in the past four to six weeks have dominated town halls in Iowa.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Since when is 16 months 3 years?
You guys need to redo your math. 16 months is 1 and 1/3 years.

Did your headline mean to read 1-2 years?
exactly.
Troops out now-------talking to my neighbor and she is upset---her son in Korea when done he is being sent to Iraq---despite what the recruiters promised.If no presidential candidate will not pledge to get out in January they will not get my vote---Ron Paul here I come
1 year before general election plus 16 months after swearing in makes 2 and a half years. Politics seems easy unlike mathematics.

Hillary 08
Obama explained that 3 years includes the time Bush has left in office.
16 months from his inauguration on Jan 2009, or 2 and a half or 3 years from now, Dec 2007.
I don't get this either.  If he says 16 months, doesn't that mean 16 months?  
 The Democants flubbed it again.Bad at math and spineless.Good Grief!!!Politicians are now so important that we need to know their private lives.Move over Hollywood,here comes,HRC,BO,RG,andMH!!And you just thought elections were boring!Tune in next week for the latest polls!!!Don't try to think for yourself,We're here to handle that burden.Watch that tube,and let US handle everything.Trust Me.
Oh, I get it, you guys are trying to make it sound like he's saying 2 to 3 years, but what he's really saying is that FROM WHEN HE MADE THAT COMMENT IN SEPT. 07, it would be 2 1/2 years to get the troops out, but from the day he TAKES OFFICE IN JAN. 09, it will be 16 months.

Very Slick, First Read, what do you take us all for, idiots?(although I have to admit, the wording is so poor, it took me 3 times reading it to understand)

HEY FIRST READ  - go back to journalism school!!!
Obama is flip flopping or pandering now. He said in the debate that he wont pull out before 2013!

Why not stick to what he said earlier?

Are we voters so gullible to fall for pandering of hope? May be some are!
Domenico,

I hope you will listen and change this misleading headline. Obama never said it will take him 3 years to bring the troops out. He has always said it will take 16 months. It will become to 2 to 3 years if you add the current remaining months from George Bush's term. So please do the right thing. In the past you guys have listened to our comments and made changes when due and we admire that. It is time to change this misleading headline.(BTW please don't censor this message because it is better to keep a high standard than you yoursleves becoming the story in how you write out of context or stifle free speech. In this day of electronic media we can quickly discuss this on the blogs)
Domenico - Please pay attention.  You are compounding bad reporting here.

The question Russert asked at that debate was about guaranteeing ALL US troops out by 2013, as in every last single soldier.  That is the only reason the Democratic frontrunners could not answer affirmatively without any hesistation.  

What Obama has maintained consistently (since the bill he proposed in January 2007) is that withdrawal of all COMBAT troops will take 10-16 months; that's how long the military says is necessary.  

This is one of the most poorly reported issues of the 2008 primary cycle; please, firstread, do better than to compound the misinformation.  Obama and Edwards want to withraw all combat troops.  Hillary has refused to say that she will remove all combat troops; that's the difference between five thousand soldiers in Iraq (like we have in dozens of other countries) and a hundred thousand soldiers there, the difference between a minor presence and a full scale occupation in the midst of a civil war.  This is the major fault line between the viable Democratic frontrunners on Iraq.
Is that why he said he couldn't gurantee to have them out by 2013?

What does he plan to with them send them to Pakistan? Iran too?

Why did he vote YES to reauthorize the Patriot Act?

Why did he take money from lobbyists?

Why did he support Bush's sanctions against Iran?

Why has he missed 80% of senate votes?

Why did he sponsor a bill labeling the Iranian National Guard a teorrists organization?

So much for being an anti-war candidate.. the audacity of deception
I have heard him say 16 months like 2,000 times.  Where did you learn to count?
I see CNN and MSnb are slowly trying to carry water for Hillary again. They have started, Shame for a major news network.
you can't pull troops out in one month. it is logistically impossible. to move that many soldiers and equipment in one month. no one can promise that.

also, anyone serving in iraq or elsewhere will become a part of the afghanistan rotation if the iraq war ahs ended. afgahnistan is where we should have rightfully been and not in iraq.
I believe that any time we invade another country (forgive me, my protocol on this is pretty weak, since we usually don't just randomly invade), we leave some residual troops there to assist in rebuilding. The 2-3 years as this title suggests, while grossly misleading, means the rest of GWB term and then 16 months into Obama's first term, and THE RESIDUAL troops to assist in rebuilding, protect our embassy, etc.

Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, et ald allowed Bush to make a horrible mistake. We have some responsibility to be sure to help make it right.

Got it?
one year before the election of a president is not a part of the tabulation of time for withdrawal from iraq. you can't equate time of withdrawal prior to the time any candidate takes office. that equation will not calculate no matter how you try to sum it up.
HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY READ THROUGH HIS PLAN IT TAKES 24 MONTHS TO GET COMBAT TROOPS OUT AND THEN LEAVE RESIDUAL TROOPS THERE

OBAMA IS NOT GOING TO BRING THIS WAR TO AN END
barack is saying 16 months from the time he would take office.
simon-he never said that. you can check every archive of every debate. that statement was never attributed to obama. however, hillary did say that it would possibly 2013 before the troops woud be home. this is truth. view every debate, every interview and every town hall meeting and you will find out for yourself that he never made such a statement as you have posted. it was hillary.
this post with the questions is so misinformed.
Domenico,

The math is clearly laid out in the story: months left from current Bush term plus the 16 months once Obama takes office.

Please Domenico do the right thing. Change the headline.


an alternaive headline will be:

Obama: Troops out in 16 months from oath of office.
FIRST READ---It would be MORE COMPREHENSIBLE if you add two words to your title: FROM TODAY!  (It also would be the truth---as stated nearly 8 months now)
Bush signed a strategic alliance agreement with Iraqi government in Nov. 2007 that will keep 50,000 troops and 50,000 security/contractors in Iraq long past 2008.  Bush is now pushing al-Maliki to sign the oil contracts for Iraqi oil reserves which would by-pass the Iraqi Parliament (now viewed as too corrupt and weak to prevent it). Don't you think it just might may be lots harder to extricate the US from Iraq regardless of who is elected? If you read history, Bush/Cheney are playing this based on the US-Shah of Iran play book. It won't matter who gets in, they are going to be stuck with the Bush back door dealings and duplicity.

under than plann that barack has laid out it is possible to bring the troops home in 16 months. here is why. he has stated that he would leave a residual force to protect the embassy and a emergency reaction force in the region. possibly saudi arabia or some other friendly arab state. this is a very responsible move. we don't want to pullout every single miltary asset because if we must intervene in the region it will be necessary to have no delay in reaction. it is a smart move.
If a train leaves from Chicago in September, and another leaves from Iraq 16 months later...

This higher math is making my head hurt.

But back to reality, the big question is the degree to which equipment is left behind. If we plan to take out everything we brought in, its going to take a while.

Another question is what we'll do with all those mine-resistant vehicles that will be coming off the assembly lines just as our troops are leaving county. Well, that's a dumb comment, because I'm sure the next war will be just like the last one. Isn't that the usual assumption?
pjw- this agreement is a written promise only. it is not binding to any incoming administration. for it to be binding it would have to be passed by the house, senate and the president. it is basically superflous for politcal imaging and posturing.
Domenico,

you have to change the headline because it`s very misleading.Obama has made it very clear that it will take 16 months to withdraw the troops.This is what Obama said in Guttenberg, Iowa which was YESTERDAY:

"So let's say that George Bush still has a 100,000 troops or more there when I take office in January 2009. You take on another sixteen months off of that, that's two and a half three years AWAY before we have all our troops out."

Two and a half three years AWAY before we have all our troops out.What Obama meant was from the speech  he made yesterday in Guttenberg, Iowa until Obama takes office January 2009 and add 16 months and it will be approximately 2 and half years(12+16) before all the troops will be withdrawn.

Domenico, can`t you see that the headline is very misleading?

Please change it.
First Read,

Please make the correction now. Not tonight, not tomorrow. By then the damage and the misinformation is done and it will be too late. It will be like the Hillary campaign spreading smear for 24 hrs then apologizing and resigning. That is a bad practice.

Please stop being stubborn; change the headline now!!
I think that your headline is misleading.  Senator Obama has committed to get combat troops out within 16 months.  This is the only way to do it safely and not jeopardize those waiting for their turn to come home.

This is an important issue with all American citizens and I think you owe it to your readership to be careful with the headline.
simon-he never said that. you can check every archive of every debate. that statement was never attributed to obama. however, hillary did say that it would possibly 2013 before the troops woud be home. this is truth. view every debate, every interview and every town hall meeting and you will find out for yourself that he never made such a statement as you have posted. it was hillary.
ace p washington, d.c (Sent Saturday, December 15, 2007 4:37 PM)

Ace, I went thru debates and the question was there for all and Hillary, Edwards, Obama all affirmed that they cannot promise to bring troops back by 2013. Only Richardson and Kucinich said troops will be back now and immediately.

If you want to play the game that media is twisting words, then that is a different thing now.
Please correct this information so Savior Obama can continue to walk on water for his groupies.





maybe i missed something. i thought it was being said that he stated that he wasn't going to bring the troops home until 2013. i'm not twisting anything. i just misunderstood. i wasn't trying to offend you sir.
Hmm...good plan...wonder what that last lone brigade waiting air lift out of Iraq would say?
Do any of you people really believe that a President from either party will bring the troops home?
How many billions are we spending on the largest and most fortified US Embassy on the planet?
How many billions are we spending on how many permanent bases? How much blood money is being lapped up by the corporate swine herd at the offal trough that we have turned Iraq into? I am voting for the Democratic nominee because it is the only thing left to do. Funny thing though. They get contributions from the same corporations as the Republicans.
Don't tell me to vote for Ron Paul. He may pull the troops out right away but then he will dismantle social security, eliminate taxes and let the least of us fall through the cracks an die like the weakest of us in his view, should. Some of you should look up libertarianism and try to figure out what it means to some of the people you may know and love.
As for the war, it will go on and on and on and on and on because the rich get richer and fewer and the poor get poorer and more numerous. "Come on kid..nice signing bonus and your country needs you"
Ah Mary.
Shocking! The misleading headline and reporting that is.
FACT<FACT<FACT, No matter your dislike to this war, The Washington self serving paper hangers shall and ""DO"" discard any opinion as to end this war! Again more billions will be approved and the body bags come home with another fallen soldier!! This war was over the day they hanger Saddam!!! For what ever has transpired is needless and hundreds of thousands died for nothing, mass butchering, insane radical murders, Road planted mines and bombs, Church warlords inciting more butchers to wheel the wrath of hell upon those who are so called disbelievers.

One has said ""The gates of Hell and pandora's box has been opened""!!!

And your ""Washington self serving paper hangers marches to the drum of flip and flop!!!
The headline says he said the troops will be out in two to three years.  That is EXACTLY what Obama said:  "So this isn't  like we're going to be home tomorrow. So let's say that George Bush still has a 100,000 troops or more there when I take office in January 2009. You take on another sixteen months off of that, that's two and a half three years away before we have all our troops out."

Where's the contradiction?  The headline does not say "Obama will have troops out 2-3 years after he takes office."  That would be misleading.  As it is, it is a true characterization of what he said.

So picky when it comes to Obama headlines.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=519023

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google