<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Oops</title>
	<atom:link href="http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/04/14/42/oops-53/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/04/14/42/oops-53/</link>
	<description>Keeping a jaundiced eye on the corporate media.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 05:19:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: snuzy mandrake</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/04/14/42/oops-53/#comment-140177</link>
		<dc:creator>snuzy mandrake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 20:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/04/14/42/oops-53/#comment-140177</guid>
		<description>actually, both clinton and obama's plans include some kind of "overwatch" contingency plan. the reason why it's not inconsistent with what obama (and clinton) have promised is because it is contingent (dependent on "facts on the ground") and also because of the distinction between combat brigades and non-combat brigades (which can still fight if they have to). essentially both candidates are planning to move some of the forces currently in iraq to kuwait, with a contingency plan to move them back into iraq if necessary, whatever that means.

personally, i think "overwatch" is stupid. but it's also misleading to claim that obama secretly wants to keep troops in iraq. any withdrawal from iraq will require numerous contingency plans because so many things can go wrong. once we get a president in office who has promised to withdraw forces, it will be our job to keep the heat on him/her to make sure s/he doesn't use the wrong contingency plan.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>actually, both clinton and obama&#8217;s plans include some kind of &#8220;overwatch&#8221; contingency plan. the reason why it&#8217;s not inconsistent with what obama (and clinton) have promised is because it is contingent (dependent on &#8220;facts on the ground&#8221;) and also because of the distinction between combat brigades and non-combat brigades (which can still fight if they have to). essentially both candidates are planning to move some of the forces currently in iraq to kuwait, with a contingency plan to move them back into iraq if necessary, whatever that means.</p>
<p>personally, i think &#8220;overwatch&#8221; is stupid. but it&#8217;s also misleading to claim that obama secretly wants to keep troops in iraq. any withdrawal from iraq will require numerous contingency plans because so many things can go wrong. once we get a president in office who has promised to withdraw forces, it will be our job to keep the heat on him/her to make sure s/he doesn&#8217;t use the wrong contingency plan.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
