Maybe he is, but I can't find where he said that.
If someone can tell me, and put up a source of the information, I would appreciate it.
In another thread, there was reference to Feingold's call for a "pull-out" date, but I have problems with calling that "an immediate" pull out, as so much can happen in 1 year and 4.5 months!
Here's what I've culled on Feingold's position.....He wants the President to offer up a plan....and if he doesn't, than we should get out soon....like in about 1 1/2 years.
My resolution does not dictate deadlines or dates certain. And it does request flexible timeframes for achieving our goals in Iraq rather than imposing any, because drawing up timeframes is best and most appropriately left to the Administration, in consultation with military leaders. And, of course, any timeframe has to be flexible -- there are variables that will affect how quickly various missions can be accomplished. But it's hard to conceive of an effective strategic plan that isn't linked to some timeframes. That is what the Administration needs to share.
snip
Mr. President, it is also clear that we must not accept a false choice between supporting the status quo in Iraq and "cutting and running." The status quo -- staying a rudderless course without a clear destination -- would be a mistake. The course we are on is not leading to strength. In fact, Mr. President, I am concerned that it is making America weaker and our enemies stronger. --Russ Feingold
http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/releases/05/07/Iraqstatement.htm"Intense American diplomatic and political engagement in and support for Iraq will likely last long after the troops' mission is accomplished and they are withdrawn. I expect that we will continue some important degree of military and security cooperation with the Iraqis, as we work with them and with others around the world to combat terrorist networks, whether they are operating in Iraq or Afghanistan or England," said Feingold.
"But it's almost as if talking about completing the mission in Iraq has become 'taboo,'" said Feingold. "It's time for senators and Members of Congress, especially those from my own party, to be less timid whilethis Administration neglects urgent national security priorities in favor of staying a flawed policy course in Iraq.http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/releases/05/08/iraqwithdraw.html"We have to go on the offensive to show the American people that we're not afraid to disagree," Feingold said.
He said he believes that an immediate withdrawal does not make military sense but that the public needs reassurance that the Iraq operation is moving purposefully toward completion. "We need to talk in Congress about this more openly and freely," Feingold said. "There's a rudderless quality that is making people nervous."
(Emphasis added)http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/5579747.html ===========
Feingold is asking the administration to come up with a plan, and pressuring them to come with some dates of sorts, and providing his own suggestion. He does not however, profer up a plan.
Another voice in the Democratic Party, Wes Clark. is giving the administration a plan, and letting them know that if they don't change their course, that pretty soon, it won't much matter what they do; that Americans will demand that the troops be brought home, and that they would be justified.
It can be said that Feingold did exactly what Democrats are being criticized by the press. He offered a critique and very little in a way of a plan, beyond stating that rather than "staying on a rudderless course", the admin needs a plan and needs to provide it to the congress.
Far as I am concerned, if the Bush Admin stays with it present course, it may be in six months that Americans will be demanding a pull out. Seems like Feingold is allowing for quite a window! Or at least, it doesn't sound like "Out now"....as some want to suggest.
Personally, I don't see any real points of disagreement between the Wes Clark and the Russ Feingold position beyond one giving a date certain as part of a demand that is not included in any resolution that he has offered.
In fact, what I see what they are saying basically the same thing and are more in concert with each other than with the rest of the Democratic crew.
Are there others? and what are they saying specifically?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
