Iraqi Foreign Minister: Obama Asked Iraqi Leaders to Delay U.S. Troop Withdrawal Agreement Until After the Election

If this turns out to be true, this could be the most damning scandal exposed of any of the candidates seeking to be the next president or vice president. According to an article in The New York Post, Sen. Barack Obama told Iraqi leaders to delay a U.S. troop withdrawal agreement until after the presidential election:

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.


Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Obama has made ending the war in Iraq a hallmark of his campaign. Is he more concerned about bringing the troops home sooner than later or does he really want the troops to remain in Iraq just long enough so he can take credit for fulfilling a campaign promise? The idea that a presidential candidate would try to keep the troops in harm’s way any longer than he believes necessary is truly disturbing.

Regardless of my political differences with Sen. Barack Obama, I sincerely hope this turns out to be untrue. Perhaps those in the MSM can get over their “tingly feelings” for a moment and actually do their jobs and follow up to find out if this is true.

  • Ace

    There isn’t any anonymous source. The piece puts Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari on record.

    Obama’s position on Iraq is he hopes to do anything to make it looks like he stopped the way (which is a defeated effort) instead of it successfully concluding with objectives obtained.

    Obama would rather lose the war and win the election.

  • Mark

    This is one of those “consider the source” articles. I put about as much faith in the journalistic integrity of the NY Post as I do in Newsmax. The author makes a couple of blatant misrepresentations about Obama’s positions (for instance, he fails to distinguish between an illegal invasion and a UN-approved presence – not that I personally think UN-approval means squat, but lots of people do), and there seems to be something lacking in the context of the quoted remarks.

    Also – given the Bush Administration’s history, it’s probably safe to assume that an agreement reached while Bush is still in office will have lots of strings attached and may well include some form of permanent base provision. Reading through this writer’s spin, it’s entirely possible – even likely – that a delay in an agreement until a possible Obama administration would actually result in a complete withdrawal.

  • Howard

    Obama would say or do anything to get elected. If elected, he would bring change all right … he would change everything that over 200 years of American history and tradition has achieved. He would have no allegiance to our country’s laws or customs. America would soon become a third world country with a totally weakened ability to defend itself. Since Obama talked his followers into believing and submitting to blind faith, instead of reason, Obama disciples are so emotionally invested in their messiah, that even if truth and facts are presented to them, they simply refuse to believe it. LIke lemmings, they would rather follow Obama off a cliff, than to accept the fact that he has been using them to achieve his personal ambitions. No Wright, no Farrakhan, no Pfleger, no Rezko, no Ayers, no mean Michelle, NOBAMA !!!

  • Christine the Soccer Mom

    Obama’s spokesman said flat out that this article was a lie. It’ll be interesting if we discover the truth in this mess at all. It might also be a miracle, considering the crush the MSM has on Obama.

  • Pingback: The Liberty Papers »Blog Archive » UPDATE: Campaign Denies that Obama Used Stall Tactics with Iraq on Troop Withdrawal()

  • Jim N.

    The latest Obama news story to sweep the internet is one that comes from that bastion of excellence in journalism, THE NEW YORK POST. Amir Taheri wrote that in July, Sen. Obama spoke with members of the Iraqi government and urged them to delay any agreement with the US to begin troop withdrawals. Every conservative blogger (and several major news sources, including Fox News) not only ran with the story but they all expressed similar outrage over the indignity of wanting to keep the troops there. “WHAT??? Sen. Obama is willing to keep our soldiers over there longer because it helps his political career? It only goes to prove he doesn’t “put country first”! He’ll do ANYTHING to win an election! And besides, he’s a Muslim too!”

    Taheri wrote a great article for the Post. Very in-depth, with quotes attributed to the Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari that claimed Sen. Obama made the delay a focal point of his talks with the Iraqi government.

    Being a supporter of Obama’s and knowing the less than sterling reputation of the Post for journalistic standards, I wondered about truthfulness of the story.

    So I googled the author of the article; Amir Taheri, and found some interesting facts about the man. He was a Senior Editor for a major Iranian newspaper under the Shaw of Iran’s government. He is now a political refugee from Iran who has advocated for the overthrow of the present government. He is also an advisor to Pres. George Bush. Here is a man who’s ONLY hope of returning to his homeland rests on the hopes that either the US or Israel will overthrow the government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (Now if that doesn’t raise an eyebrow and make you question the authenticity of this story I don’t know what will.)

    Unless of course it’s the number of times he has been caught fabricating sources, quotes and story lines before in his writing. What you ask? He lied? How could that be? I read in on the internet!

    Here are the real facts about the man accusing Sen. Barack Obama of meddling in George Bush’s foreign policy.

    1) Most famously, on May 19, 2006, Taheri wrote a story for Canada’s NATIONAL POST about a new Iranian law requiring Iranian Jews and other religious minorities to wear colored badges at all times while on the streets of Tehren. This caused an immediate sensation and was picked up by many mainstream media sources and ran as a legitimate story. The bloggers went crazy with this story. But the story was simply NOT TRUE! Within hours the NATIONAL POST was alerted to the problem and had pulled the story from their website, blaming Taheri for misleading them.

    2) In 1989, Taheri published a book about the rise and fall of the Shah of Iran entitled “NEST OF SPIES”. Larry Cohler-Esses wrote of the book in THE NATION, that it cited “nonexistent sources,” it fabricated “nonexistent substance in cases where the sources existed,” and distorted the facts “beyond recognition.” Other than that it was a really nice read.

    3) In 2005, he said that Iran’s Ambassador to the UN had taken an active part in the takeover of the US embassy in Tehren in 1979. This too went all over the internet. It was however disproven by the Ambassador’s teacher! “This allegation is false,” San Francisco State University professor Dwight Simpson wrote to the New York Post (which had published a Taheri column making the claim). “On November 4, 1979 [the day of the seizure], Javad Zarif was in San Francisco. He was then a graduate student in the Department of International Relations of San Francisco State University. He was my student, and he served also as my teaching assistant.” Somebody is obviously lying, and I know who I’m betting on.

    So we now have a highly provocative story written by a questionable source with no outside confirmation by any other news source. But that hasn’t stopped Fox News and other media outlets from running with it as if it were gospel. It hasn’t kept it from being the blog of the hour on numerous sites.

    It’s hard to decide who you want to blame more for this type of shoddy journalism: The media that doesn’t do it’s job in checking sources or the conservative bloggers who happily spread rumor without thought to truth. Or maybe as Pogo once said, “We have met the enemy and they is us.” You know; US, people like you and me who know better but don’t demand the standard of excellence from our media that we deserve both individually and as a nation.

    So if you see this story printed anywhere, let the person promoting it know that you know who Amir Taheri is…and you expect more from them than slander, innuendo and lies. You expect NEWS!

    reprinted from

  • craig anderson


  • Chris Hutcherson

    What happens in the case of a tied election result ?