HOME | BIO | MUSIC | JOURNEYS BY DJ | STUDIO BLOG | POLITICAL BLOG | BOOKING INFO | CONTACT

Big news from Sen. Obama today. Via Election Central, his plan for Iraq:

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) today introduced binding and comprehensive legislation that not only reverses the President’s dangerous and ill-conceived escalation of the Iraq war, but also sets a new course for U.S. policy that can bring a responsible end to the war and bring our troops home.

“Our troops have preformed brilliantly in Iraq, but no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else’s civil war,” Obama said. “That’s why I have introduced a plan to not only stop the escalation of this war, but begin a phased redeployment that can pressure the Iraqis to finally reach a political settlement and reduce the violence.”

The Obama plan offers a responsible yet effective alternative to the President's failed policy of escalation. Realizing there can be no military solution in Iraq, it focuses instead on reaching a political solution in Iraq, protecting our interests in the region, and bringing this war to a responsible end. The legislation commences redeployment of U.S. forces no later than May 1, 2007 with the goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008, a date that is consistent with the expectation of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

Survey after survey show that a solid majority of Americans already approve of precisely this sort of plan. Under normal circumstances, following the people to such a conclusion wouldn't necessarily be a sign of leadership, but in our current broken political climate, I think it is.

As Atrios explained today, it seems the Wise Men Of Washington have completely lost the plot. They simply do not understand the way this president governs. Change will only come if it is forced. It will not come through reasoned discussion and bipartisan comity.

Obama has now put a date-certain on the table. It will be interesting to see how the House, the Senate, and the candidates for 2008 respond.

UPDATE: For those of you not on his email list, here is the text of the email he has sent to his supporters:

Today, we sadly find ourselves at the very point in Iraq I feared most when I opposed giving the President the open-ended authority to wage this war in 2002 – an occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences in the midst of a country torn by civil war.

We have waited and we have been patient. We have given chance after chance for a resolution that has not come, and, more importantly, watched with horror and grief the tragic loss of thousands of brave young Americans.

The time for waiting in Iraq is over. The days of our open-ended commitment must come to a close. And the need to bring this war to an end is here.

That is why today, I’m introducing the Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007. This plan would not only place a cap on the number of troops in Iraq and stop the escalation, it would begin a phased redeployment of U.S. forces with the goal of removing of all U.S. combat forces from Iraq by March 31st, 2008 – consistent with the recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group that the President ignored.

The redeployment of troops to the United States , Afghanistan , and elsewhere in the region would begin no later than May 1st of this year, toward the end of the timeframe I first proposed in a speech more than two months ago. In a civil war where no military solution exists, this redeployment remains our best leverage to pressure the Iraqi government to achieve the political settlement between its warring factions that can slow the bloodshed and promote stability.

The U.S. military has performed valiantly and brilliantly in Iraq . Our troops have done all we have asked them to do and more. But no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else’s civil war, nor settle the grievances in the hearts of the combatants.

When it comes to the war in Iraq, the time for promises and assurances, for waiting and patience, is over. Too many lives have been lost and too many billions have been spent for us to trust the President on another tried and failed policy opposed by generals and experts, Democrats and Republicans, Americans and even the Iraqis themselves.

It is time to change our policy.

It is time to give Iraqis their country back.

And it is time to refocus America ’s efforts on the challenges we face at home and the wider struggle against terror yet to be won.

And here is the video:

In case you think that his characterization of the war as "an occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences" is an exaggeration, I offer you this excerpt of John McCain today on CNN:

COOPER: Is there any scenario in which withdrawing troops would be acceptable to you, or redeploying them?

MCCAIN: Not until we have the situation under control, to the degree that the Iraqi government can exert its influence through most of the country, that you start with the — that you move forward with a political and economic process.

COOPER: So, success is crucial before the U.S. can pull out in any meaningful way?

MCCAIN: That’s my view. And that view, by the way, is held by the majority of experts that I know about the region.

ThinkProgress has the video for those so inclined.

I honestly doubt if there are many people left in this country who think that elections don't have consequences, and that there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats. But if there are, 2008 should prove an interesting test of their theory. On one side, you have people lining up to argue for an unthinking commitment to an unending war. On the other, you have people arguing that it is in our nation's best interest to chart a very different course.

UPDATE II: I've found myself reading DailyKos less and less these days (things just ain't what they used to be!), but when the posts are from the man himself I tend to pay attention. Here, for the record, is his reaction to Obama's plan:

This isn't a wussy "stop the escalation" measure, nor some half-measure like "withdraw some troops but not all" (which appears to be the Edwards position). And forget Clinton. Who the heck knows what her position is? She's too busy trying to look "responsible" to give us an unambiguous position on Iraq. Of course, it helps that Obama is the only top-tier candidate to have opposed the war from the beginning...

But Obama's move will force the rest of the candidates to take a harder line on Iraq or risk being left behind. It seems like such an obvious move, but it's an indictment of DC that Obama's obvious stance is actually a sign of "leadership". With the Joe Kleins of the city castigating Democrats who don't fall in line behind Bush's latest lame-brained gambit, taking a position shared by over 60 percent of the American people and probably the entire Democratic primary electorate is tougher than you'd think.

Obviously, we won't be out of Iraq by March 2008. Bush has already said he's too much a coward to end the war. He'd rather force his successor to do it so he can rest easy at night, having blamed someone else for his fuckups. But it won't be long before the "responsible" position, no matter what McCain, Lieberman, and the DLC crowd might think, will be a one-year phased exit from Iraq.

I can't say that I share his confidence in the way the definition of "responsible" will change, but you never know. If the results of national polls somehow grow even more disconnected from the debate in DC, eventually some of them will have to come to their senses, won't they? This is after all still a republic, isn't it?