John Kerry on the Week of Phony Iraq Debate

John Kerry on the Week of Phony Iraq Debate
June 16th, 2006 @ 2:49 pm

It’s was Phony Iraq Debate Week in Congress this week. What a show the Republican’s put on — they had a quite a script to read from courtesy of the Pentagon. There were truly some Oscar nomination worthy performances, including Senator Mitch McConnell for “Best Borrowing of Resolution” and Senators Bill Frist and John Cornyn deserve nominations for “Best Supporting Phony Debaters” for recreating the role first played by Tom Delay, in the House last November. Below is a statement from Senator John Kerry on Phony Iraq Debate Week:



http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3334

And what I'd like to see even more is some coverage of things like this in the mainstream media. All I seem to hear day after day is the tired talking point that the Democrats don't have a plan or the Democrats aren't united. Yet, the Republican differences are papered over, as if every Republican voted for these lame resolutions.

Also, would it be asking too much to see a Democratic panel on one of the weekend talk shows like they have all-Republican panels? Of course, the answer is "Yes, it would be asking too much."

Gee that would be nice wouldn't it.

points of leverage that we still have.

But it's useless as leverage unless it's taken seriously.

Which, given the neocons' current politicking and pandering, it's rather unlikely to be... by anyone.

Backing yourself into a corner is bad enough; doing so while making it clear that you are unable and unwilling to get out of that corner is just stupid.

At least today. Sorry, Ted.

President Kerry is like a little cup of sunshine on a cold, cold day.

Not on his point that it was a phony debate, but his hypothetical Iraq policy.

Clark and Gore would also disagree, and Clark is my #1 choice for 08' and Gore my #2 if he decides to run. Let's look at what Kerry said closely:

“Every month we are in Iraq, we lose more American lives and over $8 billion dollars. It’s time for Iraqis to stand up for Iraq."

I don't think it is morally right to blame the Iraqis for the situation. Yes, Iraqis need to stand up for Iraq, but we created the situation, and we should help for as long as they want us there to help. If the government asks us to go, we go. We need to work with the Iraqi government and people to help, not give them ultimatums. Even with the window of opportunity rapidly closing, it does not make sense to issue ultimatums to a nascent, struggling government when it is our best interest that that government ultimately succeed.

“Since October, I have been pushing for a clear deadline in Iraq. We cannot take the heat off the Iraqi leaders to do their job and stand up for their own country, and we can’t take the heat off Washington to do the job of applying pressure in Iraq. There will be a real Iraq debate next week, and it will address the real needs of our troops, not the political needs of the Republican Party.”

Addressing the needs of the troops must be a #1 priority, but not our only priority. Kerry seems to have framed the Iraq debate as it's good for the troops to leave quickly, so that is what we must do. Most of the troops want the U.S. to leave Iraq in a better condition than it is now, so that goal serves the troops as well. Kerry misses this important point when he talks about what is best for the troops. Kerry seems to equate the Iraq government with the Republican party, saying "we need to keep the heat on" both. This is a blindly partisan approach, in my opinion, not a leadership position. His approach sets Democrats against the government in Iraq as if the government in Iraq were the opposing domestic political party!

While one can find parallels in Iraq with Vietnam, the differences are more significant than the similarities. Kerry did the country a service in Vietnam and upon his return, and I know his heart is in the right place. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean his policy of looking at Iraq through Vietnam colored glasses is the best approach now.

and in the Senate when he stated his entire plan. You completely ignore the entire second part of calling for intensive diplomacy to help the Iraqis solve their problems.

As to the morality - the Iraqi people want us to leave and have for some time. Kerry is not blaming them - he is blaming some of the Iraqi politicians who are not working together. There have been instances when some have held out thinking they could get a bigger role. I fail to see how this is partisan.

By most accounts, Iraq is in civil war. How does an outside force deal with a civil war? General Clark himself knows that diplomacy and negotiations are what worked in the Balkans, not having a huge military force sit in the middle of it. Would you be willing to go to Iraq, and possibly die, when the policy has little chance of working?

The Clark/Democratic plan is, to me, vague words that most Democrats can use whish mean different things to different people. What does year of significant transition mean? I am not mocking this - he was charged with getting something all could agree with and this is the only way to do it. Gore's comments were not intended to be a plan.

I'm not sure that you've been paying attention to Kerry's many speeches on this subject over the last few months. Iraq has degenerated into a civil war. It's no longer right for us to be involved in their civil war and and it's damn shame that some Democrats are playing politics over doing what is right for our troops - and if General Clark thinks our troops should stay then he's in leaque with the Dems who are still willing to sacrifice our troops for a war based on George W. Bush's lies.

Do me a favor Clarkie1, start a thread about how wonderful General Clark is and that you support him in 08 - this thread is about bringing our troops home and Kerry's plan about that and has absolutely nothing to do with 08.

:-)

Blame goes to the WH who won't LET the Iraqis do the job they want to do. Iraq's LEADERS have now said they WANT a timetable for withdrawal.

There is NOTHING partisan about drawing up a DOABLE withdrawal plan for Iraq - - and it's not cut and run - there are SPECIFIC steps, most important a DaytonAccord type summit with all the regional leaders and the heads of the insurgency.

Funny how many of you like to mischaracterize Kerry's plan.

If they cared about the troops half as much as they pretend to, they would have exercised oversight a long, long time ago.

What a low point in the history of Congress.

Oscar-worthy? Anyone can gnaw on the scenery. Desperate starving rats will do it, too.

again.

Kerry offers some funny commentary here.

You don't pull these types of stunts when serious discussion should be taking place.