Obama's debate claim about troops in Iraq was bunk: Editorial

Monday night?s presidential debate had its share of misleading and inaccurate statements, as expected. And Republican candidate Mitt Romney had a greater number of them, from his bogus claim that President Obama conducted an ?apology tour? to his apparent belief that Syria borders Iran.

But the whopper goes to Obama and his attack on Romney for wanting to keep 10,000 U.S. troops in Iraq after the bulk of our forces were withdrawn.

The claim is true. The problem is that Obama wanted to keep 10,000 troops on the ground in Iraq as well. He later cut that number to 5,000, and wasn?t able to keep even that contingent in place only because his attempts to negotiate an agreement with the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ended in failure. Obama had insisted on a guarantee that the remaining U.S. troops would be immune from criminal prosecution in Iraq, a demand that Maliki refused.

So for Obama to paint Romney as a die-hard combatant in Iraq was beyond misleading. It was a stunt. And given the emotions that still surround the troubled U.S. occupation, and the fact that Obama clearly knew he was being dishonest, he wins the whopper.

Remember, too, that keeping a small contingent of troops in Iraq is a reasonable position. After the blood and treasure that America spilled in that country, and given its continued strategic importance, it is unnerving that our influence seems to be disappearing so quickly.

A recent sign of that: Iran has taken advantage of the absence of Americans to fly hundreds of tons of military equipment through Iraqi airspace to Syria.

Source: http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2012/10/obamas_debate_claim_about_troo.html

lou gehrig toby mac blue ivy carter photos purple squirrel blade runner close encounters of the third kind norovirus