http://www.johnkerry.com/iraq_vote.htmlI wanted to share with you my thoughts about a very important vote, or series of votes, in the US Senate. I believe we should support our troops in Iraq, and I believe very deeply that we cannot cut and run, and we need to do whatever is necessary to advance the war on terror and make certain that the lives lost in Iraq and in the Middle East are not in vain. BUT, and it’s an important but, I believe George Bush and this administration have pursued an arrogant, unilateral, blustering foreign policy that has alienated our friends, pushed allies away, and in fact overextended the troops of the United States. Placed them in greater danger, and has not advanced our goals as effectively as they might in order to advance the war on terror.
I intend to vote against the $87 billion the president has requested because he hasn’t put forward an adequate plan to be able to properly protect those troops, to be able to bring other nations to our side, to be able to guarantee that the US is proceeding from a shared position of burden and risk- and it’s wrong to ask the American people to pay $87 billion instead of investing in education, in the environment, in health care, and other urgent needs at home, simply because this president is unwilling to show a little bit of humility, to show a little bit of leadership and maturity, and instead spend the time to building the kind of coalition internationally that would make our troops stronger and safer, and advance the cause of this war.
We need to stand up to this president. They’ve already proven they can’t be trusted, they’ve already proven that they’re willing to mislead, and this particular plan for $87 Billion is top down, starting with Halliburton, and the other great friends of the President. It doesn’t do the job of building from the bottom- it doesn’t do the job of asking Iraqi companies, and other companies to be part of the rebuilding. It doesn’t share the responsibility for the civic rebuilding, the governance rebuilding, and the humanitarian and infrastructure parts of rebuilding Iraq. I believe we need to shift more of the burden to the UN, the President’s plan is inadequate – it leaves our troops inadequately protected, and I think it is the right thing to do to vote against the President’s plan; to force him to confront reality, and to force him to do what’s right for America.
On edit, be sure to read Kerry's answers to Frequently Asked Questions regarding Iraq.
WHY DO YOU DISAGREE WITH THE BUSH APPROACH?
Real: 56K | DSL
I disagree with the Bush approach because it simply doesn’t share the burden with other countries- it doesn’t show the humility necessary to build our friendships and bring people to us. It doesn’t do all that we can do to protect our troops. The question here is not whether or not the president MIGHT be able to succeed at all that he is doing, over a long period of time, the question is are we doing the most we can do, to MOST effectively protect our troops and most rapidly secure our goals. I believe that by having more countries share the burden and share our risks, by willing to move to get the international community more involved, we will fastest reduce the sense of American occupation, reduce the targeting of American troops, and advance our capacity to be successful.
HOW DO WE WIN PEACE IN IRAQ?
Real: 56K | DSL
I think we win the peace in Iraq by internationalizing this effort. We have to have the UN be responsible for the civil transformation, the governance, and the infrastructure and humanitarian. And we have to be prepared to transfer authority to the UN to bring other people to us and get them invested in this. I believe that it is critical to the US to end the sense of American occupation as fast as possible, and to transfer authority to the Iraqis as fast as possible, and that can only happen when we begin to bring the international community in to a greater degree.
HOW DO WE SUPPORT THE TROOPS?
Real: 56K | DSL
I believe the best way to support the troops is to make sure we take the target off them as fast as possible. The best way to support the troops, is get the international community in to help us, so we can have other troops on the ground share the burden and share the risks, and begin to bring them home as fast as we possibly can.
WHY IS YOUR PLAN BETTER THAN SPENDING $87 BILLION?
Real: 56K | DSL
I’m prepared to spend money; I’m prepared to spend whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq. But I want to spend the money smart. I don’t want to spend 87 billion when it comes from the average American, when it ought to come from the wealthiest Americans instead of President Bush’s tax cut, which is unfair and unaffordable. Senator Biden and I tried to reduce that tax cut from $690 billion over the next ten years; we wanted to reduce it to $600 billion over the ten years. That’s not bad, for the wealthiest people – 600 billion dollars. But the Republicans voted against even that. I think that’s wrong. Particularly when we need to be investing in education, in health care, in our communities at home, in housing and children. And instead this administration wants to put all of the money in the hands of the wealthiest people, and ask the American people to spend 87 billion dollars in Iraq.
WHAT IS YOUR PLAN?
Real: 56K | DSL
I know there’s a better plan for how we deal with Iraq, and here it is, very simply:
Number 1: You've got to go the UN completely, not in this phony way that the President’s getting them to sign off just because of the games they play, but in a real transfers of authority to the UN for the civil development, for the governance, and for the humanitarian programs. Then it’s possible to have a broader, multination force come onto the ground, relieve the pressure from the American force, reduce the sense of American occupation and take the target off of American soldiers. Once you do both of those things, you can train the Iraqi military and police faster, and you can set a date for the transfer of full authority for Iraq back to the Iraqis. If all of that were done simultaneously, you’d have a much faster transition of authority in Iraq and you’d make the ground much safer for American forces, and you begin to reduce the number of American forces who are overcommitted and overextended, and you could bring them back to the United States much more rapidly.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
