His distinction of "combat troops" is murky at best. What about non-combat troops? How many would he leave and for how long?
According to his own website, Senator Obama is planning to leave residual troops.
The plan allows for a limited number of U.S. troops to remain in Iraq as basic force protection, to engage in counter-terrorism and to continue the training of Iraqi security forces.
So, Senator Obama, will you please answer Governor Bill Richardson's question?
You're referring to his website, which is explicitly describing his January 2007 proposal on Iraq. I'm talking about comments he made today that hedge on residual forces (aka the non-combat troops you're talking about.) My whole point is that his position is changing:
Previously, Obama has argued (like Clinton) that troops would be needed to (1) continue to train Iraqi troops; (2) protect the embassy and US personnel in Iraq; (3) continue to launch raids against terrorist camps ---- only today he is adding a series of preconditions and is backing away from these roles.
Troops can continue to launch raids, but they can do so from outside Iraq. Troops might continue to train government forces but only if the government can ensure that these forces wouldn't be used for sectarian ends --- a development that Obama is pessimistic about.
I think Edwards and Obama are moving in the direction of only maintaining troops in the country to protect embassy staff.
It's about time, but Bill Richardson was first.
