Bush Administration Strong-Arms Maliki To Withdraw His Endorsement Of Obama’s Redeployment Plan
Bush Administration Strong-Arms Maliki To Withdraw His Endorsement Of Obama’s Redeployment Plan
In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki made international headlines when he endorsed Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-IL) plan to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.
On Sunday, however, the U.S. military distributed a vague statement from Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh, saying that Maliki’s words had been “misunderstood and mistranslated.” The clarification, however, failed to cite specific examples of errors.
In reality, Iraqi government officials may not have been worried about an error in translation. Instead, it appears that they were pressured by the Bush administration to walk back Maliki’s statements :
But after the Spiegel interview was published and began generating headlines Saturday, officials at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad contacted Maliki’s office to express concern and seek clarification on the remarks, according to White House spokesman Scott Stanzel.
Later in the day, a Maliki aide released a statement saying the remarks had been misinterpreted, though without citing specific comments.
Today, the New York Times casts further doubt on al-Dabbagh’s excuse. The interpreter for the interview worked for Maliki’s office, not Der Spiegel. The Times also double-checked the translation by obtaining an audio recording of Maliki’s interview, which was conducted in Arabic. Directly translated, it reads:
Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq. … Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.
In the past, the Bush administration has also tried to cite clerical errors to undermine the Iraqi desire for a U.S. withdrawal. Earlier this month when Maliki suggested a timetable for the withdrawal of coalition troops, the State Department dismissed the comments, saying they were likely the result of an inaccurate transcription.
But as Matt Yglesias notes, “Because in fantasytown, the fact that Maliki repeatedly endorses a timetable and keeps being forced by the Bush administration to walk it back undermines the authenticity of his support for withdrawal. Back in realityville, Maliki keeps saying this because he wants us to set a timeline, viewing this as the only politically feasible way forward.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well it is a “kiss up/kick down world” isn’t it? Saudi Kings kick Bush. He in turn kicks Maliki. Everyone wins.
July 21st, 2008 at 9:51 amWell, I guess Malaki does owe GDumbya something for funneling a couple billion dollars into his Swiss bank accounts.
July 21st, 2008 at 9:53 amWatch your back Mr. Maliki. Strong arm can translate into bullet in back with just one word from Dickster.
July 21st, 2008 at 9:57 amMaybe Maliki and Cheney can go “hunting”…
July 21st, 2008 at 10:00 amBush’s Republican Iraq mess just gets worse and worse. What a stunningly sorry legacy for such an international failure–war, death, debt, and $5.00/gallon gas.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:00 amI would love to see the chimpy-in-chief be strong-armed to the gallows.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:00 amMaliki’s chief spokesman is now quoted as saying they want our troops out by 2010 ………….
July 21st, 2008 at 10:01 amBTW; check out this story at http://www.atlargely.com.
It will make you want to puke. Who says we are not on the verge of full-fledged fascism?
July 21st, 2008 at 10:02 amoops, see the topic: Bush dictator for life.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:03 amDoes Bush really think that the next president is going to follow his lead? (I know, McCain will) Puhleeese I don’t think Obama will take his marching orders from W.! Maliki is covering his behind for the future, and that sounds like a good idea to me.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:04 amAhhh I see what’s happening. We just misheard Bush when he said that “as the Iraqis stand up, we’ll stand down.” What he actually said was “as the Iraqis stand up, we’ll tell them to sit down.”
Look for this misuderestimation error to be corrected in White House transcripts very soon.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:10 amI guess Maliki and Iraq pulled “time horizons” rug right out from underneath Bush and McCain.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:10 amThe interpreter for the interview worked for Maliki’s office, not Der Spiegel.
That is the key sentence. There was no “misinterpretation” or “mistranslation” (didn’t we hear that in another case about a month ago?).
This is what Maliki said and it was a hit on the head for Bush&Co. The retraction is pure damage control and rewriting history.
Did you guys hear Howard Fineman yesterday — he said the Repugs are extremely desperate to get a Repug in office because a Democrat might just uncover too much evidence of the Bush crime family.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:15 amThe good thing is that this is too late to fool anyone but the 23%ers.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:17 amI wonder if the CIA water boarded Maliki to “convince” him to withdraw his endorsement of Senator Obama’s plan?
July 21st, 2008 at 10:17 amMcCain is going to need more than war and death to get himself elected in 2008. Clearly, the man has cast his lot with Bush’s Iraqi failure and it is only getting worse for him.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:20 amMarie Says: Did you guys hear Howard Fineman yesterday — he said the Repugs are extremely desperate to get a Repug in office because a Democrat might just uncover too much evidence of the Bush crime family.
And John Edwards will go after them when he uncovers thair many crimes. Unfortunately, there are other countries who would extradite them or arrest them for war crimes should they try to hide anywhere else. The Bush Regime has cooked their own goose.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:20 amTo help substantiate their story, the WH added that today…
Dick Cheney won the annual ’smile of the year’ contest…
July 21st, 2008 at 10:20 amMarie Says:
Did you guys hear Howard Fineman yesterday — he said the Repugs are extremely desperate to get a Repug in office because a Democrat might just uncover too much evidence of the Bush crime family.
Really? Did he use the expression, “the Bush crime family”?
July 21st, 2008 at 10:20 amMcCain is so fried !! More fried than a bag of McCain frozen french (or should I say freedom) fries on a gallon of supersaturated fat !!!
July 21st, 2008 at 10:25 amInaccurate transcription. As bogus as “time horizon.”
The NYT has the audio:
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2008/ 07/ 21/ us/ politics/ 21obama.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Maliki’s comments by The NY Times: “Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq.”
He continued: “Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.”
Inaccurate transcription?
July 21st, 2008 at 10:25 amSo why is CENTCOM issuing statements from Ali ad-Dabbagh, exactly? One would think that the spokesman for the government of a sovereign nation would issue statements theough his own government, not his country’s military occupiers.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:33 amNice try Bush, Cheney, and McBlunder. Too bad some of out here can read and think. We knew the “Mistranslation” statement was bs. Nice try.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:40 amThe retraction stunk from the start because it supposedly refuted something that Maliki apparently didn’t say!
Maliki was reported speaking about timelines and withdrawals and that 16 months seemed a reasonable time-frame.
This was re-reported by quite a few news outlets as ‘Maliki endorses Obama’s plan, which is a reasonable characterization of Maliki’s reported words.
Then the ‘mistranslation’ story appears where the spokesman then says that Maliki didn’t endorse Obama.
This is then re-reported as a ‘refutation’ of Obama’s plan.
Given the quotes of Maliki and later from the ‘re-translation’ the difference and disconnection is clear:
Maliki’s remarks were a reflection of Obama’s plans for the US in Iraq.
Maliki did not say “I endorse Obama for President”, nor was it reported as that.
The subsequent ‘refutation’ was “Maliki didn’t say he endorsed Obama for President”.
Right!
July 21st, 2008 at 10:42 amSo how can do you ‘refute’ something that someone didn’t say in the first place and that wasn’t misreported?
#17 unbelievable,
July 21st, 2008 at 10:43 amExcept that the Bush Family Plan B is the 93,000 acres in Paraguay - no extradition.
Uncle Ho - I read your post at #8, then followed through on the link http://www.atlargely.com. It is enough to make you puke.
George W. and his band of fellow egomaniacs and retards think they’re going to save the world. They should all be locked up in one big padded cell.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:43 amThey were even laughing about this on Morning Joe today.
Timetables = aid to the “enemy”
Time Horizons, though = different story altogether!
It’d be funny if the stakes weren’t so high.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:43 am#19, Mary
FINEMAN: If you’re in this White House, you want another Republican administration to follow. You don’t want a Democratic administration coming in there while the evidence is still fresh, so to speak. To look at it the way…
MATTHEWS: With the subpoena power…
FINEMAN: With the subpoena power and looking through all the records and looking at all the decisions that were made. You want to cover over your two terms with a third term the way Ronald Reagan did with George HW Bush.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:45 amBTW Diane Sawyer gave McCain some attention whilst Obama was getting all the headlines, and McCain, asked about AFGHANISTAN expressed concern about the situation on the IRAQ/Pakistan border!
Huffpo has it
July 21st, 2008 at 10:49 amTime horizons–
July 21st, 2008 at 10:50 amSo we can get the troops into the tardises and relocate them to Gallifrey?
In today’s ThinkFast thread, I remarked about how the Bush mouthpieces spoke about global warming without first running it through King Dick. Rapid backpedaling occurred soon after.
Now it seems the same thing is happening with Maliki. Geez — can’t anybody control their puppets anymore?
July 21st, 2008 at 10:52 amThanks Marie. “while the evidence is still fresh, so to speak”…
July 21st, 2008 at 10:57 amhuh? mccain says 100 years. Bush is strongarming maliki to back off the 2010 figure……
Are you high or are you just spreading disinformation?
July 21st, 2008 at 11:00 amtruther21: Both sides of the U.S. political spectrum are hopeful that we can be out of Iraq by sometime in 2010. Where we differ is on the folly of setting too exact a timetable, i.e. 16 months.
truther21 should try his comedy routine on a USO tour.
July 21st, 2008 at 11:01 amIt would seem that the US Central Command in the “Green Zone” of Baghdad is currently trying to exercise sovereignty in what Bush purports to be the Republic of Iraq’s domain, its foreign policy regarding allowing foreign troops within its borders… Heck of a “sovereignty” Mr. Bush…
July 21st, 2008 at 11:02 am5th Estate Says
July 21st, 2008 at 10:49 am
BTW Diane Sawyer gave McCain some attention whilst Obama was getting all the headlines, and McCain, asked about AFGHANISTAN expressed concern about the situation on the IRAQ/Pakistan border!
________________________________________________________
Thanks — this just gave my my biggest laugh so far today.
I can see that all the maps and flashcards in the world aren’t going to help Johnny — he’s just irrevocably geography impaired.
On the other hand, he may have been talking about Iran. His idea of bombing Iran is so unpopular that he may have just started to refer to Iran as the “Iraq/Pakistan border” — a border that just happens to be very very very very very wide.
July 21st, 2008 at 11:02 amceltic; I know, when I read it, I told myself “these people really ARE batshit crazy”
Hitler & the Nazis still live(reincarnated).
July 21st, 2008 at 11:02 amtruther21 Says:
Both sides of the U.S. political spectrum are hopeful that we can be out of Iraq by sometime in 2010.
I see why you are confused. You obviously didn’t notice that the numbers used by McCain and Obama are slightly different.
Obama- out sometime in 2010
McCain- out sometime in 2110
I’m sure it was an honest mistake. No need to thank me for clearing it up for you.
July 21st, 2008 at 11:15 am5th Estate Says:
BTW Diane Sawyer gave McCain some attention whilst Obama was getting all the headlines, and McCain, asked about AFGHANISTAN expressed concern about the situation on the IRAQ/Pakistan border!
July 21st, 2008 at 10:49 am
_______
The sad thing is that the majority of American voters would not see anything wrong with this statement.
July 21st, 2008 at 11:18 amTrollshit everywhere here; TP????
July 21st, 2008 at 11:39 amTypical republiscum troll, a lying poster named truther21, trying to say McInsane never said 100 years, Haaaaa Haaa HA!
Well, to frame this correctly, McSame was misquoted, he was asked if he agreed with Bush’s projection of being in Iraq for 50 years. McNasty’s reply was “Maybe 100″
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk
July 21st, 2008 at 11:44 amtruther21 Says:
McCain does not want to set too exact a timetable for the enemy to plan around,
That’s true. McCain is crafty. He isn’t going to let the enemy know how long he wants our troops to stay in Iraq. That is why he has come up with three different dates for withdrawal.
2110
12,010
or
1,002,010
McCain: ‘I Dont Think Americans Are Concerned’ If We Stay In Iraq For ‘10,000 Years’
Last week, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said it “would be fine with” him if the U.S. military stayed in Iraq for “a hundred years” or even a “million years.”…
…on CBS’s Face the Nation, McCain claimed that Americans would not be “concerned” if the U.S. spends “10,000 years” in Iraq:
July 21st, 2008 at 11:56 am“if he repeats the…lie…often enough, stupid people will believe it.”
“It’s telling when you cannot debate with someone’s actual argument and instead have to set up strawmen.”
And we have the GOP trifecta conveniently spread over two posts folks!
July 21st, 2008 at 12:28 pm1-Repeat the lie (see: HERMANN GOERING)
2-use of strawmen
3-projection
Nice job, liar21. But you might get in trouble with the main office for telegraphing the GOP’s strategy so plainly!
Looks like the dumba$$ right-wingers can’t comprehend the big numbers John McCain has been throwing around for his desired occupation of Iraq.
Maybe I can help put it into perspective for them.
100 years is 28 years more than John McCain’a age.
10,000 years is approximately twice as long as recorded history.
1,000,000 years ago would be about the middle of the Pleistocene Epoch.
July 21st, 2008 at 12:29 pmNice democracy this GOP loves.
July 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pmI had a “time horizon” this weekend.. it was fantastic !!! I think I had a couple of them. DUMBASS BUSH !!!
July 21st, 2008 at 1:05 pmWhat? Did Bush threaten him with a little Anthrax Letter, just like he did here with reporters and congress members who disagreed with him?
July 21st, 2008 at 1:40 pmI just don’t understand these warmonging, bloodthirsty, right-wing extremists. They love the Iraq War so much. Yet, when I mention John McCain’s intention to continue the war for 100, 10,000, or 1,000,000 years, they get all bent out of shape.
July 21st, 2008 at 2:23 pmThe Iraqis along with Maliki are hedging as usual. The so-called “Iraqi government” has been one of the most corrupt U.S. backed regimes in quite some time with U.S. tax dollars flying out of the this country and into corrupt Iraqi government pockets. After the election - Obama or no Obama - there are going to be problems for Maliki. That is certain.
July 21st, 2008 at 4:52 pmTracy5 Says:
“Yet, when I mention John McCain’s intention to continue the war…”
That is not his intention…which is the point.
Tracist, why do you deny that McCain wants to keep your beloved Iraq War going for 100, 10,000, or 1,000,000 years? It is your favorite war. Remember, it helps the oil stocks in portfolio.
Of course, before 100 years is up Exxon and Chevron will have sucked out every drop of oil from Iraq. But there will still be lots more brown people there to kill. It probably will take 10,000 years to kill all the brown people in Iraq. And if the job still isn’t done, McCain is willing to take 1,000,000 years to finish the job!
July 21st, 2008 at 5:32 pmTracy5 Says:
“On this survey, most redneck Republicans demonstrate a limited understanding of the world beyond their trailer parks”
The redneck Republican voters….very telling. Wonder who they are going to vote for?
July 21st, 2008 at 6:25 pmInteresting that you cut down young people for lack of understanding about world affairs when your favorite presidential candidate doesn’t know that Iraq does not border Pakistan, and he does not know the difference between Sunni and Shia.
The Republican party is dead. Young people are taking over our electorate from the ignorant redneck trailer park Republicans who have propped up your heinous party for so long.
See ya chump.
July 21st, 2008 at 8:36 pmTracy5 Says:
“Tracist, why do you deny that McCain wants to keep your beloved Iraq War going for 100, 10,000, or 1,000,000 years?”
When are you going to quit reciting this lie? You know it isn’t true.
Oh, but it is true. I showed you exactly where John McCain said it. You are delirious, you poor deluded fool. Young people do not want your 100, 10,000 or 1,000,000 years of war.
You dinosaurs, and your party are becoming extinct.
Bye bye, you sick war profiteer.
July 21st, 2008 at 9:58 pmBush officials always translate Arabic the way they want to hear it.
I bet half the shit they say about the Iranians is bullshit as well.
Silly Corporate Fascists and their silly fake translations!
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:08 amFunny thing is, the original translation was done by Maliki’s own translator.
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:20 pmSo, knucklehead, when exactly is the killing of Americans in Iraq going to stop, so McCain’s 100 years of non-killing can begin? And, if Iraqis continue to kill Americans, then McCain’s war will continue for 100 years. Get it fool?
McCain makes no sense, and by uncritically buying into this insane idea, you have showed yourself to as non-sensical as he is.
BTW, McCain made the “honest mistake” about not knowing the difference between Sunni and Shia several times.
As far as the young people go, you are wrong. My children and their friends know the difference between Sunni and Shia, and they know that Iraq does not border Afghanistan. Too bad your presidential candidate doesn’t know as much about the Middle East as my children.
The young people will turn out this fall, simply because they are tired of seeing you Republicans steal their future with your greed and your wars. You are the past. Crawl under a rock and those of us who care about the future will leave your kind to dry up and blow away.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:51 pmTracy5 Says:
We will have to wait and see if the most ignorant among us, i.e. the “young voters” will actually sweep Obama into office. If history is any insight they won’t show up at the polls in November.
And I thought you were just a racist. Now we see that you also hate young people. What a pathetic wretch you are that your only hope is that the younger generation doesn’t vote and end the nightmare of rule by your bloodthirsty neocons and corrupt greedy corporatists.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:03 pmTracy5 Says:
“So, knucklehead, when exactly is the killing of Americans in Iraq going to stop, so McCain’s 100 years of non-killing can begin?”
Hard to say,
Yeah, it’s hard for McCain to say, as well. Good plan.
So, you are only 35 years old, yet the time for your heinous ideology is slipping past very quickly. How sad for you, and how good for those of us who will be moving forward without you.
Tracy5 Says:
No they just want to be taken care of by the government, i.e. they are lazy
No, they just want a future. They want the government to stop saddling them with massive debt by cutting taxes on the uber-wealthy, while fighting wars to steal the natural resources of other people.
You want to call the younger generation ignorant and lazy, go ahead. See how that works for you, you nasty, greedy, bloodthirsty little toad.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:01 pmTracy5 Says:
Obama has that SAME plan!
Oh, no wonder you think McCain has a good plan. You think 16 months is the same as 100, 10,000, or 1,000,000 years!
Tracy5 Says:
——————————————————————————–
Conservativism isn’t going anywhere
Yes, I know. You Republicans have screwed up the country so badly that you have stained the name of conservativism. Your ideaology isn’t going anywhere in the forseeable future. It’s over. Get out of the way chump. We have a huge mess to clean up.
July 23rd, 2008 at 1:19 pmWow, you just did a bunch of typing without saying anything. But, for you, saying nothing is an improvement.
July 23rd, 2008 at 6:23 pmYou are either a liar, or just very stupid. How else do you explain your weird contention that Obama’s plan to remove US troops from Iraq in 16 months is the same as McCain’s plan to keep them there for up to 1,000,000 years. I’m thinking it is a combination of dishonesty and stupidity. What a lying moron.
And, as an extremist, right-wing, immature, Reagan brat, your opinion about liberalism is meaningless, since your greedy, corrupt, bloodthirsty ideaology has failed miserably.
You are finished. You Reagan brats had your chance for 25 years and you wasted it in corruption, war profiteering, destruction of the middle class, imperialism, and sheer incompetence. Reagan told you government couldn’t work, and his disciples got into office and proved that they couldn’t govern. Most people were already coming to this realization, but Hurricane Katrina made everyone(except you 25% deadenders) wake up and see the nightmare of right-wing rule.
Crawl away Reagan brat. You and your fellow right-wing extremists have disgraced yourselves, and all you can do is shut up and hope everyone forgets what you have done to our country.
It will take a long time.
July 24th, 2008 at 10:04 am