Friedman Wants Obama To Add A Friedman Unit To His Iraq Withdrawal Timeline
Friedman Wants Obama To Add A Friedman Unit To His Iraq Withdrawal Timeline
If he is elected president, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has said on numerous occasions that he plans to begin a phased withdrawal to remove all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the summer of 2010.
But today on ABC’s This Week, New York Times columnist Tom Friedman said that as president, Obama would abandon the hunt for Osama bin Ladan and decide that the U.S. could “win the war” in Iraq by staying another six months:
FRIEDMAN: I think everything we believe could be wrong. That is Iraq could turn out — that Osama — sorry, not searching for Osama bin Laden could be not the biggest issue for Obama. I think you could actually find out that Obama can win the Iraq war and he will want to actually continue our presence in Iraq for — until 2011.
When host George Stephanopoulos noted that even Gen. David Petraeus refuses to use the terms “victory” or “winning” for Iraq, Friedman walked back his comments slightly, saying Obama would bring Iraq to a “decent ending” but ultimately, “they will conclude that Afghanistan is a loser.” Watch it:
Friedman has gained notoriety since the start of the Iraq war (which he supported) for continually boiling down “the intricacies of the Iraq situation into a make-or-break deadline” lasting “six months” — otherwise known as the “Friedman Unit.”
But it seems Friedman may have broken a promise he made in September 2007 when he announced that he would no longer be calling for six more months in Iraq to get things right. “I’m afraid we’ve run out of six months. It’s really time to set a deadline,” he said.
Transcript:
STEPHANOPOULOS: We just learned this week that General Petraeus leaving Iraq going to head the central command announced a hundred-day review of all policy across the Middle East, across his command and, Tom, let me begin here with you. Because we’re now facing a situation where it looks like we’re in the final stages of negotiating a status forces agreement with Iraq where there’s going to be a deadline for the troops to leave in 2011 — combat troops in 2009 so you see a convergence on Iraq. Given that, what is most likely going to be the first crisis the foreign policy national security crisis the next president will have to address?
FRIEDMAN: I think everything that we believe — there was a great piece in The Washington Post today by Bill Emmott, former editor of The Economist who was basically sort of examining all the sort of conventional wisdom about what will happen next, you know that America will become weaker, not stronger and what not. And I think he was on to something. I think everything we believe could be wrong. That is Iraq could turn out — that Osama — sorry, not searching for Osama bin Laden could be not the biggest issue for Obama. I think you could actually find out that Obama can win the Iraq war and he will want to actually continue our presence in Iraq for — until 2011.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Even Petraeus doesn’t use the word “victory.”
FRIEDMAN: Well I don’t mean win — he could bring it to a decent ending. That’s what I mean. Nobody is going to win the Iraq war. That’s off the agenda. And actually get out of Afghanistan. That they will conclude that Afghanistan is a loser and if you listen to what Petraeus has been saying lately, he’s not been for the surge in Afghanistan. He has been looking for a much more flexible, low footprint approach. I think they understand that maybe you can bring – maybe — Iraq in for a decent end and Afghanistan is probably a loser.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I use my “Friedman Unit” for urinating.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:40 pmFriedman seems to have lost his ‘ Six More Months’ instinct .
October 19th, 2008 at 12:42 pmFriedman and his unit have had their day. I’ll be happy if I don’t hear the term for the rest of my Schneider unit.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:44 pmThis guy is so superficial, so wrong about so much so often, what credibility does he have with anyone?
October 19th, 2008 at 12:45 pmTom lost his brain unit several Friedman Units ago. Note how he speaks gibberish.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:49 pmLittle Tommy probably needs an additional Friedman unit to coincide with his publisher’s deadline for his next book (or, as some of us refer to his books, “his next edition of bound toilet paper”).
Little Tommy can be left to twist in the wind with the likes of Limpballs, Little Seanie Insanity, FoxSnooze and the rest of the opportunists who have been so roundly discredited and banned from any serious political discourse for the foreseeable future.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:49 pmI’m pretty certain that the Republicans are so obssessed with the notion of ‘winning’ because, as it turns out, they are all losers…
October 19th, 2008 at 12:51 pmFor a smart guy, Friedman is really dumb.
Time to fade away, hun…
October 19th, 2008 at 12:58 pmOne of the difficulties we on the left face over the Iraq War is one of framing. The right-wing has been allowed to frame the debate from the beginning (when they created the false scenario that drove people to support the invasion of Iraq.) Ever since then, the question the right-wing wants us to answer is “Well, how would you win in Iraq?” The very question itself is meaningless. [Let's set aside, for now, the fact that no one on the right seems to be able to define what "winning" means, at least not consistent with each other. Since the definition of the words in the question are not clear, no answer could be wither.]
Instead, let’s look at the framing of the question itself. First, it assumes that invading Iraq and toppling its government was the right thing to do in the first place. Since we now know that virtually every reason the Bush Administration gave that was a justification for war turned out to be untrue, and every reason they gave that turned out to be true was not a justification for war, to talk about even continuing this war another day is to deny reality. We do not belong there. Period. To just say, “Well, we’re there now, so what should we do?” is just trying to hold on to the idea that we should be there at all. We shouldn’t. Once the discussion is framed in the proper way, the solutions will present themselves as very plain to see. We can’t be talking about withdrawing troops from Iraq under the framework the right-wing has set up, because that frame implies that we were doing the right thing all along, and that we should continue with this policy!
So, given that we illegally invaded a country, deposed its ruler, de-stabilized an entire region of the world, and sent more than four thousand of our brave men and women needlessly to their deaths, how long do you think we should stay in Iraq? Even six more months seems like too long.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:04 pmThese folk seem blithely ignorant of facts.
The Iraqi government has given the Awakening a Nov. 1, deadline for disarmament, or to face arrest. It’s a given that the deadline will pass, but will that be used as an excuse to solidify the current power structure into place?
There has been no progress in bringing the Sunnis into the game, and with a precarious oil-delivery system in the Gulf in desperate need of repair, this could all go critical in the days right before the election.
If so, it would happen in the weekend before the election, insuring a game-changing narrative emerging on the talk shows.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:06 pmFriedman: “I’m afraid we’ve run out of six months. It’s really time to set a deadline,ummm….every six months”.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:09 pmMrs Friedman:”When are you going to take out the garbage and put up that shelf, and clean out the garage?”
Friedman: “In about six months…say, how about nasty nookie, honey”
Mrs Friedman:“In about six months, dear”
Friedman: “But you said that six months ago!”
Mrs Friedman:“So?”
THERE WILL BE A DAY WHEN WE NO LONGER HAVE TO LISTEN TO THE RANTINGS OF IDIOT CRANKS WHO TALK JUST TO SATIATE THEIR NEED TO SOUND IMPORTANT AND ARE ENRAPTURED WITH THEIR OWN VOICE…..
THAT “DAY” STARTS ON NOVEMBER 5th
October 19th, 2008 at 1:42 pmThe longer I am on this planet, the more certain I am that fools like Friedman do not understand history or geography. By geography I mean the people of a certain land as well as the cartography. We’ve pissed away our chance to bring change to Afghanistan, we’ve destroyed the country of Iraq, and destabilized Pakistan.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:46 pmIt is time to get out in the fastest way that does the least harm.
Over a year ago writer Seymour Hersh said it best: “The best time for us to get out of Iraq is today. The second best time is tomorrow”.
“…they will conclude that Afghanistan is a loser…”
I guess that’s what happens when funding and troops for Afghanistan were illegally diverted to the preparation for the invasion that BushCo really wanted in Iraq.
Frickin’ Friedman, I conclude that you’re the loser.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:46 pmI’m with those who have shut this six-more-months guy off. I’m also surprised that his books still sell.
Anyway, I feel that his comments today with asking Obama to extend the Iraq war by one more crazy-six-month unit is the most viciously disingenuous. Its like magic, you see; past six years have not helped but six more months with Obama will do the magic. Their trick is that once Obama has dirtied his hands, they suspect that he will be tied into their game and his options will be diminished.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:51 pmStephanopoulos is no better than Tommie. Has every DC cocktail weenie forgotten the cost? Where’s the question, “How many shall die for your vanity, Tom?”
October 19th, 2008 at 1:54 pmWayne A. says…One of the difficulties we on the left face over the Iraq War is one of framing.
I totally agree. How America’s Eventual Exit from Iraq is Framed is crucial, and the Republicans will do their best to turn the Events to their political Advantage.
Nixon’s “Secret Plan” to end the War in Viet Nam was just More Futile Carnage, and America’s Exit From Viet Nam was a far cry from “Victory”
BUT….The Very Same Republicans who were in charge, cleverly convinced Most Americans that it was the weak willed Democrats who Lost the Viet Nam War. That we really could have WON, if only the Democrats hadn’t tied one hand behind our backs…that Democrats were against the Military and Against the Troops. That Democrats could NOT be Trusted with National Security.
Democrats, glad that the War was finally over, didn’t fight back against this propaganda , and the Image Stuck…even though probably half those on the “Wall” were democrats.
If Obama Wins election, he will need to take this Cautionary Tale into Carefull consideration…because the Republicans will be After him from Day 1.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:55 pmOops, as the traditional cartoon character, Elmer Fudd, says, “No more buwwets.” We are out of money; we are broke; we can no longer afford stupid, hostile imperial occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.
And by the way,
William Ayers was no “domestic terrorist.” This is just another lie perpetrated by McCain and Palin and their right-wing sound machine. William Ayers had been a peaceful anti-Vietnam war protestor in the late 1960s until he got so frustrated in his inability to stop the American terrorism against the Vietnamese people that he and others resorted to vandalism and property destruction as a form of protest. In Chicago, they blew up a statue (twice!). This was a statue dedicated to the policemen that had been active in the ongoing brutal suppression of union organizers in the Chicago area in 1866. This was vandalism and property destruction. No one, to my knowledge, was “terrorized.” Not the right-wingers who supported the war on Vietnam, nor the Congressmen who voted to fund the war. The U. S. war on the Vietnamese people continued on, unabated. I was an anti-Vietnam war protestor myself in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Anyone with a conscience was an anti-Vietnam war protestor back then.
However, John McCain was a terrorist in Vietnam. He bombed Vietnamese peasants in the northern part of Vietnam from 25,000 feet in the sky. It was a cowardly and vicious act. These bombings were war crimes and acts of terror.
Bush is the biggest terrorist in the 21st century, with his many acts of terror and aggression against the Afghani and Iraqi people. Bush has terrorized over one million Iraqis into their graves. Bush is a war criminal. McCain has been cheerleading and supporting Bush terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq. McCain has even advocated using military terror against Iran, which his infamous “Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.”
Today William Ayers is respected education professor in the Chicago area. He was appointed to serve on the board of directors of the Woods Fund of Chicago, the same educational foundation board as Senator Barak Obama by William Annenberg, the former U. S. Ambassador to England, appointed by President Ronald Reagan.
Mr. Annenberg created the Annenberg Foundation, which sponsored the brilliant and innovative “French in Action” language learning series which has appeared on PBS television for many years. This is the same Annenberg Foundation also sponsors the current PBS television show, Washington Week in Review.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:02 pmAccording to Friedman : “Obama would abandon the hunt for Osama Bin Laden” Hunt, what hunt? There has never been a hunt for Osama Bin Laden to begin with. Osama carried out the STAGED TERRORIST ATTACK Bush and his cronies desperately needed on 9/11! Time has proven the idiot Bush an absolute liar about 9/11 and his reasons for invading Iraq.
I’m so sick of that ‘neocon trick’ which links Obama to Osama. It’s not working! The real terrorist has always been and still is George W Bush.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:23 pmthat’s kinda funny
Friedman still thinks anyone gives a damn what he thinks.
tee-hee, snicker, snort, eyeroll
October 19th, 2008 at 2:27 pmFriedman has been as wrong, as many times, as Bill Kristol has on a variety of issues. To waste time listening, or even discussing the ideas of either one is simply that…a waste of time.
There never was an exit strategy out of Iraq. The entire strategy was about placing as many military outposts as possible in the area to protect the oil resources. Iran stands in their way, and they have huge resources as well. So guess what the whole reason for attacking Iran, either with propaganda or eventually real convention or nuclear war. Domination over the area, domination over the oil and gas resources and all avenues of shipping and transport of that energy. PERIOD. Control of the resources in the middle east equals domination and control of most of the world. The neocons are serious people, and they are seriously interested in the status of “empire” for this nation. I believe they are capable of doing anything to make that happen. And I do mean, anything.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:36 pmI’m in for an “Obama unit,” which I would define as “eight years.”
October 19th, 2008 at 2:50 pmWhy do these discredited neocon hacks like “6 months” Friedman keep getting air time anyway?
Sorry, forgot that I was assuming the “Liberal” MSM “news” still relies on facts. Bad assumption.
Carry on.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pmI, for one, don’t care what Friedman thinks.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pmBadger,
They also don’t talk about Nixon’s secret meetings in Paris to prolong the war until after he was elected.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:14 pmBy the way, is McCain going to dig up the body of Osama bin Laden, who has been buried in the mountainous region of eastern Afghanistan since December, 2001. Visit http://www.whatreallyhappend.com to read about the many faked BL audio tapes and video tapes Made in USA since then…
October 19th, 2008 at 3:36 pmTom Friedman may be a very intelligent man, but I don’t think he any “smarts.”
October 19th, 2008 at 3:37 pmTom Friedman may be a very intelligent man, but I don’t think he has any “smarts.”
October 19th, 2008 at 3:38 pmAnother F.U.?
It’s already been Friedman Unit’ed Beyond All Recognition.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:41 pmProof positive that Tom Friedman’s head is flat.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:46 pmROFL. Why would anyone take advice about Iraq strategy from Friedman?
October 19th, 2008 at 3:52 pmI remember reading Tom Friedman’s column on the eve of the Iraq War. He posed the question…
Would our Invasion of Iraq be like in Germany, after they surrendered in WW II, or would it be like Yugoslavia?
Well he got his answer a short time later when Iraq Exploded into Sectarian Warfare and an Invisible Insurgency.
So Mr. Friedman has a track record of being Wrong about Iraq.
I do think he is right about Energy Policy. He is pushing for ET (Energy Technology ) as the economic Engine for America’s future…much like America led the way (mostly) in IT (Information Technology) . This led to the Economic Boom during Clinton’s presidency, resulting in the Computer/Internet Revolution.
He has correctly (IMHO) Chastised the Drill Baby Drill Republicans for their lack of Foresight.
And, like him or Not, Friedman is very Influential. Not only is he a Best Selling Author, be he was a keynote Speaker at the National Governor’s Conference.
I admit to reading his Columns in the NY Times, but with a Grain of Salt.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:06 pmHey Friedman, SUCK ON THIS! I mean it.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:30 pm.
I’ve concluded that Freidman IS the loser!
“I think everything Freidman believes could be wrong!”
.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:49 pmQ: How does a man keep his job after he’s become America’s most disrespected columnist?
A: Work for the New York Times.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:14 pmFriedman can take his unit elsewhere. I say bring ‘em home, and bring ‘em home NOW.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:37 pmUntil Friedman gets SOMETHING right at least ONCE about Iraq I am using him as a reverse barometer. Doing EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of anything he says. This tactic would have worked out exceedingly well from Day One of Iraq
October 19th, 2008 at 7:40 pmI ask again, after every time I hear TF espouse his Freidman Units… how many more armed-services people have to die in order to test out his theory? How many service men and women have died in order for him to have come to the conclusion that 6 months change nothing? And last of all, is he willing to put a loved one’s lfe on the line to prove it?
October 20th, 2008 at 1:22 amBedava Porno izle
Liseli Bakire
April 1st, 2009 at 5:21 am