dem candidates and Iraq

[terryg11]

have any of the candidates said on record, wht they will do about Iraq once elected? Will they keep us there, pull the troops out, seek international assistance, wht? MAny people here have been very tough on Bush about IRaq and I agree with them, he's dealt with it poorly but since it's such an important issue shouldn't we be asking the candidates what they plan on doing in Iraq and for that matter, Afghanistan too?


Give it to me straight doctor, I can take it.

[molly]

1. Remarks of Senator John F. Kerry on Iraq

July 10, 2003
Washington, DC


“It’s been days since the President was flown to an aircraft carrier to announce that hostilities in Iraq had ended. Now, clearly, it’s time for the President to step forward and tell the truth that the war is continuing and so are the casualties.

To tell the truth that our forces face an ongoing challenge simply to protect themselves. We need to look at this from the perspective of those in the field—who are taking fire every day; who do not know friend from foe; who have no idea when they will come home. It is time for the President to tell the truth that we lack sufficient forces to do the job of reconstruction in Iraq and meet the President's goal of withdrawing in a reasonable period.

To tell the truth that America should not go it alone—that international support to share the burden is as critical now as it should have been in the months leading up to the war. We now know that the State of the Union message, well after the vote on the Iraq resolution, contained information that was wrong—and at least some in the Administration knew it.

But just because a mistake was made, does not mean we should compound it by making further mistakes. International support and alliances are not weakness, but strengths. Diplomacy, cooperation, multilateralism, making friends in the world is not weakness as this administration would have some believe.

America is now viewed widely as an occupying power. We face a resistance movement that is capable of gaining greater strength by the day. And our service men and women remain vulnerable because they are too few to succeed in a peacekeeping mission for which they are neither trained nor equipped.

I believe there are four urgent steps that we should take in order to win the peace.

Number one—We increase overall troop strength with more allied troops with the right skills and training. And that means particularly, that people with Arabic speaking skills, and even, hopefully, Muslims. Without adequate security, every other peacekeeping goal is at risk. That means you have to immediately offer NATO a role to give Allies a graceful way to participate. Without real allies in real numbers, especially Arab-speaking, we are asking our young men and women to bear a needless risk for an length of time that is undescribed. We also need greater United Nations involvement in the humanitarian and governance transformation. And the world needs to be invested in the outcome in Iraq

Second, we have to train Iraqis more rapidly to carry out what always was an obvious job—of restoring civil order in the aftermath of the victory. The police functions have to be provided in an adequate form, we need to protect the people, and guarantee the safety of our own troops in that process. Such an effort will require international police trainers and mentors as well as military trainers in an accelerated commitment.

Third, we have to lay out immediately and publicly a clear plan for the transfer of power to Iraqis as soon as possible. The sense of American occupation works against our peaceful goals, works against the transformation of democracy ultimately, works against our troops and their safety, and works against our greater goals in the Middle East. We promised the Iraqis democracy, but we’re sending mixed signals about really letting them run their own country.

Fourth, we must move more quickly to provide the basic services, such as electricity, and transportation. Without economic recovery, the gap between the expectations and the reality will be a major retardant on popular support for the United States activities in Iraq. Peacekeeping is linked to the humanitarian and to the governance transformation and the global investment in that is the fastest, most effective way to be able to strengthen our goals and provide safety to our troops.

We now know that the Administration went to war without a thorough plan to win the peace. It is time to face that truth and to change course—to share the post-war burden internationally—for the sake of our country, for our standing in the world, and most of all for the young Americans in uniform who cannot be protected from enemy attack by an announcement, no matter how well staged, that hostilities are over.”

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0710.html

[AWD]

9. Sounds like...

a decent plan.

I appreciate the words, Senator Kerry. I only wish you hadn't bowed down to Herr Bush when it mattered the most.

[blm]

15. When was that?

When he was negotiating to keep Bush from invading Iran and Syria? When he was negotiating to push Bush to the UN and present evidence? When he was negotiating to get inspectors back in to Iraq?

If you're going to be a lawmaker, you must step up to the plate and negotiate every now and then. It costs you your vote and support. Kerry would have been derelict of duty to ignore the opportunity to prevent Bush from having a REAL blank check that he wanted. He didn't have the luxury of just letting others do it, while he sits back and keeps his primary base intact.

Why do you think Gore's record in the Senate was so conservative? Because he BOTHERED to negotiate with the Reagan and Bush administrations, intent on getting the better bills through with his input. It cost him.

[polpilot]

18. Kerry & Bush's War is going very badly as Dean predicted. Now Prez

Dean will have to clean up their mess. Voting for the 'Iraqi Bombing resolution' was not very smart even though politically (votes) it seemed like a good move. Understanding the horror of war combined with principled decision making would have prevented the current carnage.

Dean '04...

[dajabr]

2. Dean - April 9, 2003

Wednesday April 9, 2003

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Governor Howard Dean, M.D. called for United Nations cooperation in helping rebuild Iraq.

"We knew from the outset we could win this war without much help from others. But we cannot win the peace by continuing to go it alone," Governor Dean said. "Our goal should be what the Administration has promised-an Iraq that is stable, self-sufficient, whole and free. Our strategy to achieve that goal should be based on a partnership with three sides-U.S., international and Iraqi-and a program that begins with seven basic points."

Those points are:

A NATO-led coalition should maintain order and guarantee disarmament.
Civilian authority in Iraq should be transferred to an international body approved by the U.N. Security Council.

The U.N.'s Oil for Food program should be transformed into an Oil for Recovery program, to pay part of the costs of reconstruction and transition.

The U.S. should convene an international donor's conference to help finance the financial burden of paying for Iraq's recovery.

Women should participate in every aspect of the decision-making process.

A means should be established to prosecute crimes committed against the Iraqi people by individuals associated with Saddam Hussein's regime.

A democratic transition will take between 18 to 24 months, although troops should expect to be in Iraq for a longer period.

"We must hold the Administration to its promises before the war, and create a world after the war that is safer, more democratic, and more united in winning the larger struggle against terrorism and the forces that breed it," Governor Dean said.

"That is, after all, now much more than a national security objective," he added. "It is a declaration of national purpose, written in the blood of our troops, and of the innocent on all sides who have perished."

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_foreign_iraq_7pointplan

More info available at Dean's "Iraq Truth Center": http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_foreign_iraq

[terryg11]

3. excellent responses

thanks for the items. I hope we get to see them carry out their message and ideas. I wonder wht the other candidates supporters will say.

[genius]

4. Dennis wants us out of Iraq

He's already called for an end to the occupation.

You can check his site for more information. Kucinich.us

[gully]

5. Problem is, we can't pull out altogether. I dont' see why DK

doesn't understand this as a Presidential nominee?

[AnAmerican]

6. He is not advocating just leaving......

He wants the UN to go in.

[killbotfactory]

7. Would the US be part of that UN effort?

Or is DK just demanding that the UN clean up our mess?

[ErasureAcer]

8. Let the Iraqi people rule themselves...

WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD
WE'RE NOT GOD

get that through your head, please!!!

[killbotfactory]

10. and watch it plunge into civil war

we broke it, we bought it.

[diamondsoul]

12. Kind of funny. I was thinking about an Iraq civil war

a long time ago. Like when Bush Sr. went mucking around over there. I honestly thought we were going to assist in a revolution. Until Bush backed out.

That's what should have happened. We should have assisted the Iraqi people in overthrowing their own government instead of strolling in there like some Knight on a white horse. Now we're conquerers instead of rescuers, and that's not going to change as long as our forces are running things.

"we broke it, we bought it."

What?? You think this is like a tea-cup in a china shop? This isn't property to be bought or sold, this is a country that thousands of people call HOME! There is no purchase of another sovreign nation for pity's sake. Sorry for the tone, but that remark just struck me as a really twisted testament to how caught up in marketing and money we are.

We can not continue to act as occupiers and expect the Iraqi people to just sit back and accept it. It won't happen. Number one we've got radicals in that area who aren't ever going to accept "infidels" occupying an Arab nation. They'll carry on killing as many of our people as they can as long as we're there. Number two, we've still got Hussein loyalists running around, and they'll do the same thing. Number three we've got some really pissed off average Iraqi citizens who just want their country back and see us as trying to control it instead of helping.

Basically we're surrounded by really pissed off people who are not going to like us at all until we get the fuck out of Dodge.

[killbotfactory]

14. My point was...

When we invaded the country and overthrow their gov't, the responsibility for repairing the country and establishing a new gov't is now on us. It would be totally irresponsible for our nation to abandon Iraq and watch it plunge into civil war or worse because Bush was an idiot by invading in the first place.

[DrFunkenstein]

16. I Agree With This Sentiment

If we are going to plunge Iraq into the chaos of a power vacuum, only to let it be filled by Talibanesque fundamentalist nutballs would be nothing more than trading tyrannies. For Iraq to truly be sovereign, it must have a certain level of stability where its citizens don't think that actions they take now will be harshly punished in a few months after the occupation ends.

The Bush administration would have saved itself a butt-load of money if they paid upfront for massive food and water supplies, and made rebuilding the infrastructure the top priority. Iraqis would be much more willing to tolerate a truly benevolent presence until the countries affairs were back in order.

Part of the US failure is on the shoulders of Rumsfeld, whose strategic doctrine failed to prepare to secure the major cities. The initial chaos set the tone for the occupation.

[diamondsoul]

11. I'm reasonably certain the US would have SOME part

in the effort. The objective from Kucinich's perspective is to A.)Get the US back in alignment with the members of the UN and rebuild our status within the UN and B.) End the perception of the US as an invading and occupying force.

Kucinich believes we need more input from surrounding Arab nations as far as how to rebuild Iraq and how the people there will want to be governed. He's right, we do. America is not an Arab nation, and we have basically NO CLUE about these peoples' culture and religion and how those things impact their governments. We had no business going in there to begin with, but now that we have, we have an obligation to allow the Arabs in the region to assist in the efforts to rebuild a stabel Iraq. If the majority of US occupying forces are pulled from the region it will be a sign of good faith and a renewed effort toward peace between America and the Arab nations in the Middle East.

Until we get UN assistance that can't happen, and DK knows that. His point is it's something we should be working toward. Even that won't happen with Bush* & Co. in charge.

[killbotfactory]

13. Then his position is the same as the rest of the democrats

Which is a good one.

[mandyky]

17. Dean's stance on Iraq

"Since last April, I have been calling on President Bush to internationalize the reconstruction effort in Iraq. I repeat that call today.

"Expert after expert has returned from Iraq stating that the window of opportunity is closing faster than anyone expected and that our chance to successfully stabilize and rebuild the country is quickly passing. Despite this, the Bush Administration refuses to seek a UN mandate so that our historic allies and friends can join us in this effort and speed up the reconstruction process.

"I call on the Bush Administration to take the following steps to encourage our proven allies and friends, including France, Germany, India, and Turkey to join us in Iraq and to accelerate the reconstruction process. We must: "

More at -
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/001116.html