Kerry urges post-election troop reduction in Iraq

He is talking 20,000 troops home this Christmas - and the time frame is 12-15 months which is the same as Feingold.

http://daoureport.salon.com/synopsis.aspx?synopsisId=e7854e06-2248-4071-8dbc-246cb87f6323

The country and the Congress were misled into war. I regret that we were not given the truth; as I said more than a year ago, knowing what we know now, I would not have gone to war in Iraq. And knowing now the full measure of the Bush Administration’s duplicity and incompetence, I doubt there are many members of Congress who would give them the authority they abused so badly. I know I would

and:

At the first benchmark, the completion of the December elections, we can start the process of reducing our forces by withdrawing 20,000 troops over the course of the holidays. The Administration must immediately give Congress and the American people a detailed plan for the transfer of military and police responsibilities on a sector by sector basis to Iraqis so the majority of our combat forces can be withdrawn. No more shell games, no more false reports of progress, but specific and measurable goals."

and that the war was based on lies and deception. Welcome aboard John!

Now to the substance. I do not think this plan or Feingold's is workable. There is no security in Iraq. There is no stability in Iraq. Any plan that requires either of those as a precondition for our withdrawal is in effect a plan for the permanent occupation of Iraq.

out now.

And - if the war was based on lies and deception, should we not demand that the liars and deceivers be held to account?

I differ with your assessment of Iraq though. I'm more optimistic that the Iraqi's can protect themselves and begin to come to some political consensus on running their own country. It's obvious that America as an occupying force is doing more harm than good there now and inflaming the Sunni's that make up a large portion of the terrorists.

80+% of Iraqis think we're doing more harm than good by being there?
I think the tribe has spoken, and we need to withdraw. Screw Bush's legacy; it's doomed anyway.

IIrc, he said, a year ago, that if he knew then(2003)what he knows now(2004) he'd still vote for the IWR. Let me do some checking...


Turns out he covered all angles:


“We should not have gone to war knowing the information that we know today," Kerry said Wednesday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” "Knowing there was no imminent threat to America, knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, knowing there was no connection of Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda, I would not have gone to war. That's plain and simple." Shouldn't have!

But on Aug. 9, 2004, when asked if he would still have gone to war knowing Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction, Kerry said: “Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have.” Speaking to reporters at the edge of the Grand Canyon, he added: “ I would have done this very differently from the way President Bush has." Should have!

The Kerry campaign says voting to authorize the war in Iraq is different from deciding diplomacy has failed and waging war. But Kerry’s nuanced position has contradicted itself on whether it was right or wrong to wage the war.

In May 2003, at the first Democratic primary debate, John Kerry said his vote authorizing the president to use force was the “right decision” though he would have “preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity.” Should have!

But then in January 2004, Kerry began to run as anti-war candidate, saying, "I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have." Shouldn't have!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/29/politics/main646435.shtml

scenario. It brings some of our troops home for Christmas and projects hope that we can pull out and not leave the Iraqi's in despair and turmoil.It also confirms that we are doing more harm than good by not making our plans clear to the iraqi's and behaving like an occupying force. Some won't like it because it's not an immediate withdraw, but I think this is a very responsible approach that will benefit us and the Iraq's.
Also, very happy that he states he would not vote for IWR again and states he was mislead or lied to by the administration.

Before the "Not Good Enough!!" crowd marches in I just wanna say look it's far better than nothing and it is something it's a start at least. Sure it's not as good as bringing ALL the troops home and ordering the bush crime family to be tarred and feathered but it's something.


Therefore I refuse to bash Kerry for stepping up and doing SOMETHING even if it's not EVERYTHING we want to see and hear.

Sen. John Kerry says President Bush should bring home 20,000 troops from Iraq over the Christmas holidays if the December elections there are successful.

"It will be hard for this administration, but it is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down, starting immediately after successful elections in December," Kerry said in a speech prepared for delivery Wednesday at Georgetown University. Excerpts of the speech were obtained by the Associated Press.

The presence of 159,000 U.S. troops in Iraq is deterring peace efforts, said Kerry, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


link

During the election debates wasn't Kerry all for being in this war. Might need my memory jogged a bit.

and didn't stand up for what he really believed in I think...just to try to get votes. Pretty sad huh?

That given the information he was given at the time of the IWR he believed invasion was the right thing to do.

During the election he noted that it was the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and that we had taken out eye off of Osama, but that he believed that if drastic action was taken immediately we could win in Iraq, and fix what we broke.

Now that nothing has changed and it has simply been more of the same he recognizes there is no winning and we must withdraw before it becomes another Vietnam? Am I the only one this makes complete sense too?

Kerry Calls for Pulling 20,000 Troops
By ANDREW MIGA, Associated Press Writer
16 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Sen. John Kerry says President Bush should bring home 20,000 troops from Iraq over the Christmas holidays if the December parliamentary elections there are successful.

Defeated by Bush last year and a potential candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, Kerry called for a "reasonable time frame" for pulling back troops rather than a full-scale withdrawal advocated by some Democrats. He said it could be completed in 12 to 15 months.

"It will be hard for this administration, but it is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down ... starting immediately after successful elections in December," Kerry said in a speech Wednesday at Georgetown University.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/ap_on_go_co/iraq_kerry

to start talking about pulling out troops? This could be baby's first step. At 2 1/2 years old the kid has developmental problems, but there ya go.

ago he put out his plan.

he could have won last years election. Unless, of course, there was the election fraud going on. I dunno, but I always wonder how an idiot like Bush got elected...

including hilary.

Continued violence on the part of the invaders will not bring "stability," nor will elections run by a puppet government while the country is under military occupation.

Or was it the other way around.

I, for one, would feel disgusting if I went around spewing bile that came from the mouth of that pig-faced demonic hellspawn. Just saying.

These are the same people who posted this shit last year, asking for "strategy" and "rebuttals". Agendas, everybody's got one I guess.

I would put my work and money for John Kerry's behalf in 2004 up against your "contributions" any day of the week.

The only difference is that as much as I supported him in the general election, I don't worship him.

Agenda? What agenda?

Do yourself a favor and try to develop a sense of humor.

... any time people imply that they donated SO MUCH time and money that they are beyond reproach.

You don't know sandnsea AT ALL, so *maybe* you should refrain from intimating that you contributed more to the campaing than her.

And honestly, if you think latching onto one of Kerry's few misstatements, which - surprise, surprise! - was used INCESSANTLY by Karl Rove, is so fucking hilarious, then how valuable could your "support" have been? Bush didn't have campaign workers who weren't committed to him, but funny, all these people who claim to have committed so much time and energy to Kerry sure say some pretty nasty things after the fact. If I were a candidate, I'd prefer someone like you stay home than "help" volunteer for me.

You remember Howard Dean? The Chairman of the Democratic National Party? He had as much fun with Kerry's words as I have.

And when you are a candidate, I'll remember not to contribute to you in order to honor your wish.

n/t

contribute to it.

He is still in good physical shape, why doesn't he volunteer for a stint in Iraq?

We demand our troops to return now from this ill-conceived Bush/Kerry et.al. war

Is the WORST thing I've seen on DU in a long time.

If you could conceivably place as much blame on Kerry as Bush for lying about, engineering, and constructing the elaborate facade for the war in Iraq, you are not only ignorant of every fact about Iraq at your disposal, but I also have to question your agenda.

Black and white thinking like yours leads to totalitarianism, which is every bit as disgusting and undesirable coming from you as it is coming from right-wing Bushbots.

How stupid is that? Hundreds of Millions of people around the world demonstrated against this war before it began, and kerry, along with 76 others in the US Senate, voted to give Bush, who we all knew to be a complete idiot, the authority to go to war.

Millions of us knew Bush was lying from the start.
Kerry still voted for the war.

Millions of us knew that only Congress can declare war, did not stop Kerry from ceding that right to an idiot President, what should not be given ANY President.

Kerry did right when he gave up his medals in the Vietnam war, because that war of aggression had no honor.

He should apologize for his vote for the war authorization, and do all he can to bring the troops out of that nightmare now.

What will lead to? More like an end to a US policies of aggression and militarism abroad, so that we may make justice at home, and be at peace with our neighbors on this very small planet.

I think so! At least, Kerry do listen to real people!

He has hinted at this shift since he returned from Iraq - before seeing Cindy. There is nothing Cindy could have said that would have added anything to what he already knew. I'm sure he saw her both as a grieving mother (and he personally knew many far better as he lost several very close friends in Vietnam) and as a protester.

From the pictures of him at funerals for Massachusetts soldiers, he clearly understands what is lost. The first paragraph of his speech shows that - but he certainly didn't need Cindy to tell him.

I just posted this. but seems to me--bushco will draw down the troop artifically.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051027/pl_afp/usiraqforce... ;_ylt=Ajz6na2mCti0cY2l.LORZLKs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

US forces in Iraq reach 161,000, highest level of the war

Thu Oct 27, 4:33 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US forces in
Iraq have swelled to 161,000, their highest level since the US invasion in March 2003, a
Pentagon spokesman said.

The increase was due to overlapping troop rotations, said Lawrence DiRita, the chief Pentagon spokesman.

The previous high in US force levels was reached in January, when the number of US troops in the country rose to 159,000 during national elections......

democracy in Iraq. Blood brothers forever.

The Iraq's are on their way to making a new government. i can not understand how you could even think Kerry is on the same page as President Bush.