Meh.

It was like an executive report. Useful, but not helpful in setting direction.

Sahmuck! I didn't watch it. It's the first major speach by him I missed.
I'm glad we got combat troops out, but an still concerned about those who remain. Obama did the best that he could have out of a horrible legacy.
Had I known he would have talked about the economy I would have watched. I'm glad that he did. The WH should have mentioned that he would. More people might have watched.
And thanks, Steve, for letting me know.
As for the pundits, well, they get paid to pick any nit that they can find. I'm sure they'll find all sorts of crap to bitch about. They always do, don't they?

Steve, I like/agree with your analysis, and tone. The speech "worked for me" too. I also agree Andrew Bacevich's critique---but I've come to expect that presidents can't tell the truth about our military-industrial complex until after they've relinquished power (see Eisenhower, Dwight D.).

I also get the sense that Obama, both by making this speech and in what he said in the speech, was laying the groundwork for:

1) the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks,
2) Congress' return to business after Labor Day,
3) the campaign leading up to the November elections,
4) the continued withdrawal of troops on schedule from Iraq, and
5) the scheduled reduction of US troops in Afghanistan next summer.

(I hope I'm right on all counts.)

The speech was brilliant. It was a difficult speech to give but the way he tied the Iraq war to our deficits and economy worked in my opinion. The neocons must be seething. The bit about rebuilding US instead of Iraq must have resonated with people. The other big news was that the Afghan draw down will begin in August next year. It might be a small draw down but it will happen.

It looks like this is the foreign policy week for the White House. The rest of the week is going to consumed my Middle East peace talks. I think they are clearing the decks for full campaigning mode starting Labor Day. I expect Obama to appoint Elizabeth Warren for consumer protection agency and Austan Goolsbee to head council of economic advisers next week. Then he will be on full populist mode until November 2.

Words mean little in a climate of knee jerk partisanship. For the faithful, he had me at hello, and for the other side it matters not his words, for he is the antichrist.

Once, men ran for office to serve their fellow citizens. Now they do it to secure a lifetime sinecure.

If, as many pollsters and pundits predict, the GOP takes the House, I can only warn, "You ain't seen nothin' yet. . ."

I was interested in what our President had to say.
A Trillion dollars sure would have gone a long ways here in America for sure.

I personally would like to see some impromptu press conferences and let the reporters ask their questions. People need constant reassurance.

...since the war's proponents have been wrong on both counts.

They have indeed. Horribly, devastatingly wrong. Immeasurable death and destruction, all to serve the egos and insecurities of overfed, clueless Americans. And they sleep just fine, thank you. Monsters.

Missed the speech, but the morning after commentary was mostly negative from CNN (I don't get MSNBC). AC put the President's speech at number three on his list, preferring to start out with the Murfreesboro mosque flap. Isn't that the same mosque that was featured on John Stewart last week? Also, wonderful to see Fareed Zakaria bitch slap David Gergen, who is clearly becoming a get off my lawn old man. His position on the mosque controversy was indefensible. Then the huge take down by Begala on Fliescher. It was pure Paul, no mercy and straight to the throat. Fliescher could only whine about turning the page. How dare these fuckers try to white wash what was one of the great disasters in our foreign policy history. Bush doctrine indeed. I think massappeal makes a great point. It is painful to watch, but it does seem like Obama is constrained by some hidden menace or agenda, almost as if he is hostage to the Presidency. In the recap, I thought he looked more uncomfortable in his suit then he did several months ago. The military types came crawling out of the woodwork to rip and spin at the President. Maybe there is another war going on that we know much less about, and I am not talking Afganistan.

I didn't listen to the speech. But if Steve's excerpt is any indication, I missed something significant. It's been long contended that America's imperial overreach not only mires us in geopolitical briar patches but leads to growing impoverishment at home (except for protected professional classes and plutocrats). Who does this contending? Firebaggers and even a few people like us. And now the president?

This was just a speech, of course. But given everything that has transpired over the past 18 months, it was, at least faintly, reassuring.

He didn't really condemn the imperial overreach. He justified it in the modern jingoist tradition of helping others develop democracy. Kipling is still in vogue.

Do we want to improve our national security? Cut our defense budget to $100 billion and spend the difference on energy independence.

I didn't expect a great speech and didn't get one: because, really, how would that have been possible? He came into office with huge messes to clean up and wanted to check one off of the list. But of course he didn't want to raise a big fuss about what a disaster it's been: that can come later. It seemed like he just wanted to get this out of the way, which is completely understandable.

And of course the pundits will obsess about every minor detail, and is Obama moving right for the midterms?, and how will this play in the heartland? and blah blah blah. That's all meaningless. I think the speech itself will quickly be forgotten, but the reality will sink in that we're finally putting an end to Bush's fiasco. It's not black and white, it's not a stirring "victory", but it's a good thing. And Kevin Drum made a good point on Mother Jones, that the chances of our really getting out of Afghanistan now seem better. Obama's actually going to do what he said he would do.

I thought the speech was concise and adequate. It was political without being partisan. I mean what can you say about a pointless, disastrous war? The President disagreed with it back in 2003 and disagrees with it now. The right (Palin) is complaining he didn't give Bush credit for the surge. Well let's not stop at the surge let's give him credit for the lies that got us to war, the trillion dollars added to the debt, the over 4400 hundred soldiers killed, the hundreds of thousand of Iraqis killed, the destabilization the region, the rise of Iran, the lost of American credibility and clout, the lost decade of job growth due to all the war spending and unfunded tax cuts. And oh yeah the war crimes.

I didn't watch the speech either, because I expected it would be hemmed in by political expectations.

The public and press scream for the truth and then brutally punish anyone who speaks it. Pundits pick nits or find the most trivial aspect to focus on in their "august analysis".

I am glad we are pulling away, more or less. We still have troops and paid mercenaries there. We need to get those out too.

Yes, I still support Obama because he is at least pointed in the right direction. I would wish he and the Democrats would grow a pair, but battered domestic violence victims can be forgiven for not speaking up right away. It's enough for them to get out of the house. As for the batters, all Repubs, FOX News and talk radio idiots, there is a special place in Hell for you all.

The speech worked at the intellectual level. Would get rave reviews from the Harvard Law faculty---or that of the LBJ School of Public Affairs. At the emotional level: another missed opportunity.Obama may have an intellectual IQ of 180, but he is a political fool in terms of emotionmally connecting with voters and in the effectiveness of the compromise-with-the-devil policies he promotes and supports. He need be replaced ASAP. He will not change.

He is inordinately lucky in that that he is opposed by fools whose intellectual IQ's don't equal their body temperatures and who support even worse policies. Many of those fools, however, have a much higher emotional IQ.

"Obama's actually going to do what he said he would do."

He generally has done, except on Climate Change, which while a negative is not the whole record. We should all keep that in mind.

I didn't listen to the speech. But I did read the new Newsweek this AM and was reminded of an aspect of this disaster in Iraq that has gotten too little attention from the beginning to now.

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/27/how-ahmad-chalabi-keeps-shaping-iraq-s-future.html

We were conned into this "war" by an a-hole named Ahmad Chalabi. He took the U.S. for millions, if not billions, along the way, and he bobbed along like a turd in the surf the whole time.

And now he's floated right to the top and is basically an American installed crook at the top of Iraqi politics.

There were cargo plane loads of stupid that got hauled over to Iraq, but there is one man that folks should remember when trying to figure out what happened in Iraq. The United States of America got taken for a ride and was played for a patsy by Ahmad Chalabi so he could be exactly...perfectly, (for him), right where he is today. Mission accomplished.

I don't understand those who say they didn't watch the speech: All you have to do is go to whitehouse.gov; click on "photos and videos" and you can watch it( and for that matter every public speech he has made).

The obviously predetermined Republican meme that he was not "gracious" because he didn't give Bush credit for the surge was ridiculous. I too shared Begala's response on CNN. Republican amnesia is amazing to behold. I almost think they truly believe it is unfair to remind them of any past failure.

We have planted ourselves firmly in Iraqi soil.

Do not be fooled into thinking we're outta there.

Obama can do nothing to alter our long term presence.

To that end, our economy will continue to falter, as it is just not fiscally possible to spend the trillions we spend on warfare.

Question:

If Earl hits long island will it be a trillion dollar storm?

How on earth did invading Iraq help us prepare for Earl?

Earl has the potential to wreak havoc on beachfront properties, causing untold heartbreak to those who could afford to own them in the first place.

I think did a nice job of turning the beck/palin "honor" theme on its head. We can honor our troops by doing more and better at home - without getting sidetracked by issues of religiosity.

I didn't see the speech. In fact, I avoided it. Not because of Obama, but because the pulling out of combat troops is such a tiny drop in the bucket. We're there for an extremely long haul. Some days it'll be ugly. Other days we'll forget about it completely.

But the major corporate players who are firmly entrenched — KBR, Halliburton, Bechtel, Xe [Blackwater], etc. — will continue to siphon billions of tax dollars from you and me — and every Goddamned Republican out there, too — for decades to come.

Our involvement in Iraq is like having a little brother who is addicted to Oxycontin. No amount of money or caring or even rehab is going to change the fact that he got started abusing it in the first place and will likely die from it.

And the pull-out of combat troops is like when your brother says he's going to get his act together. He's going to apply for a job at the mall and join AA and stuff. It sounds nice, but you know better.

I don't think anything is going to change on the employment front unless we change the language used.

Substitute "working people" and "working class" for "middle class."

I have no idea what the pundits will complain about

I don't know if that's due to a paucity of imagination or a general disengagement with any reasoned criticism of the president. So, do all of those that liked the speech believe the standard narrative of the efficacy of The Surge (i.e. more troops 'won' the war), a narrative Obama reinforced, or is it the case that he 'has' to say that due to political considerations (i.e. he thinks something different, he just can't say it)? If it's the latter, man, how much longer can that refrain go on?

freelunch: Spot on! Not only improve our security, but our economy, world standing, etc. $100B/year could defend us just fine, and there'd still be plenty left over for clean energy, education, healthcare, infrastructure, you know -- programs that actually HELP people.

Oh, the ills we could cure if our evil military-industrial complex was ever dismantled.

To begin with, combat in Iraq is not over, and we should not uncritically repeat suggestions that it is, even if they come from senior officials. The situation on the ground in Iraq is no different today than it has been for some months. Iraqi security forces are still fighting Sunni and al-Qaida insurgents. Many Iraqis remain very concerned for their country's future despite a dramatic improvement in security, the economy and living conditions in many areas.