Obama Really Wants Troops To Wait In Iraq

By Jason Kenney

In a response to Monday’s NYPost article quoting an Iraqi official saying that Barack Obama asked for a delay in US troop drawdowns, the Obama campaign put out a press release more or less saying that’s exactly what he meant:

In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a “Strategic Framework Agreement” governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.

In the face of resistance from Bush, the Democrat has long said that any such agreement must be reviewed by the US Congress as it would tie a future administration’s hands on Iraq.

“Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades,” Morigi said.

Do he doesn’t want anyone to pass an agreement for drawdown yet, but go ahead and start initiating it anyway?

The double speak has led to a new ad from Moving America Forward that hammers Obama:

The ad doesn’t exactly help John McCain as it’s a call for withdrawl as Obama supposedly wanted.

Ed Morrisey at Hot Air points out where the real gall is in all of this:

First, Senator Obama has no authority to negotiate on behalf of the executive branch, which has sole authority to conduct foreign policy.   Second and most important, Obama attempted to interfere against the interests of the United States.  He can ask all the questions he wants, but when Obama started pressing Iraqi officials to stop negotiations with the executive branch — in other words, break one level of diplomatic contact and freeze a military alliance in time of war — that crossed a line and clearly violated the Logan Act.  It also makes clear that Obama would do anything to get elected, even harm diplomatic relations between the US and an ally.

And for every month that Obama wants to delay our troops coming home that’s $10 billion in arguments he loses.

So did Obama violate the Logan Act?