Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Kerry Calls for New Strategy in Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 11:12 AM
Original message
Kerry Calls for New Strategy in Iraq
http://www.johnkerry.com WASHINGTON, April 17 /U.S. Newswire/ --

Saying that President Bush has yet to present a strategy for winning the peace in Iraq that reflects the reality on the ground, Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry Saturday called for a different approach during his Democratic Radio address to the nation. "All Americans are united in backing our troops and meeting our commitment to help the people of Iraq build a country that is stable, peaceful, tolerant and free," Kerry said in his address. "But staying the course does not mean stubbornly holding to the wrong course. In order to complete our mission, we must review our tactics. We need strategies that reflect realistic goals and the facts on the ground. The President had a chance on Tuesday night to present such a strategy, but chose not to. It is now more important than ever that we take a different approach, designed to maximize our chance for success by making full use of the assets we have." Kerry outlined four key points that America must take in order to win the peace.

First, he called on America's leaders to be honest with the American people about the difficulties we face in Iraq.

Second, he said we must supply our military commanders with the additional troops they have requested in order to provide the security the Iraqi people need to go about the business of daily life. Third, Kerry said we must remove the "Made in America" label from the Iraqi occupation. Saying that "the use of force must be combined with a diplomatic strategy that will work," Kerry called for the creation of an international mission authorized by the United Nations that will help the Iraqi people hold elections, restore government services and rebuild their economy. He said this action will send an important message to the Iraqi people and the nations of the world.

Finally, Kerry said we should transform the military force in Iraq into a NATO security force under the leadership of an American commander, so that the United States is not shouldering the burdens and risks alone. "The failure of the Administration to internationalize the conflict has lost us time, momentum, and credibility -- and made America less safe," Kerry closed his address. "Our stubborn, unilateral policy in Iraq has steadily drifted -- from tragedy to tragedy. Our troops deserve better. To succeed in Iraq, we must be tough enough to stick to our principles in the face of setbacks. But we must also be smart enough to fight the enemy with all the tools and all the help we can find. Our troops today are paying the price for a flawed policy. We need a new policy that puts our soldiers first."

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=102-04...
________________________________

Transcript of Remarks of Senator John Kerry in the Democratic Radio Address to the Nation
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=103-04...

Kerry Fact Sheet: A Strategy to Win the Peace in Iraq
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=104-04...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kalian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. So....essentially....
its "stay the course" but tweak it. :eyes:
Not good enough Kerry! Not good enough! We need to get the FUCK OUT
OF IRAQ!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. We need to get the FUCK OUT OF IRAQ!
Look. I totally agree that we should leave Iraq, but I am amazed at the lack of concern that some have for the aftermath of such a withdrawal. Of course there should be tweaking. We have to help repair the damage that Bush is causing with his mindless aggression and blind reprisals which have killed thousands of innocents and soldiers alike.

But the crap that Kerry wants to "stay the course" is itself a mindless blurring of the differences in Kerry's approach to make it seem akin to Bush's blundering.

We need to get the FUCK OUT OF IRAQ!

But we can't pretend that turning our backs on the chaos and destruction we have caused there and just coming home is morally superior to working with the international community to help Iraqi's establish a stable governing entity to replace the brutal regime we have deposed.
______________________________________________________________

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=104-04...

John Kerry: A Strategy to Win the Peace in Iraq Level with the American People. Kerry recognizes that the security situation is deteriorating and dangerous. He believes we should stop sugar-coating what's going on in Iraq. Our troops know how bad it is there. It doesn't help them for the White House to suggest we are making so much progress when we are not. Supply Our Military Commanders with the Additional Troops Requested. We have to succeed in Iraq. We simply can't allow it to become a failed state. That would mean a victory for extremism, new dangers in the Middle East and a breeding ground for anti-American terrorism. To succeed, we are going to need more forces on a temporary basis. Our commanders on the ground have requested it. We should provide it. Launch a Diplomatic Strategy that will Work. Kerry supports the plan outlined by UN Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi. The US should immediately seek a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a UN mission with responsibility for the transition and elections. Kerry believes that we need to get the Iraqi Governing Council to accept the Brahimi Plan. Establish An International Mission to Ensure Stability and Set up Elections. Kerry believes we need a plan for the period after June 30 when the interim government takes control. We should establish an international mission authorized by the UN to work with the interim government on governance issues, including elections and the reconstruction of Iraq and rebuilding the Iraqi economy. A respected non-American who has the confidence of the UN Security Council should then be asked to run the mission in order to decrease the perception of an American occupation.

Transform U.S. Force into a NATO Security Force Commanded by an American, and Bring in Other Countries. Kerry believes it is possible to transform the U.S. force into a NATO force, commanded by an American. We should send a high-level mission to consult with our NATO partners to encourage their participation and get other countries to participate so that American soldiers and the American people are not bearing nearly all the burden and all the risk. The whole world has an interest in a stable Iraq, but the White House hasn't demonstrated the ability to bring in our friends and allies in a substantial way. --- John Kerry: A Strategy to Win the Peace in Iraq; George Bush: Facing Reality KEY TASK: Transferring Sovereignty to Iraqis, Ensuring Stability and Setting up Elections The Kerry Plan: Support the Brahimi Plan, and immediately seek a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a UN mission with responsibility for transition and elections. Get the Iraqi Governing Council to accept the Brahimi Plan. Kerry believes we need a plan for the period after June 30 when the interim government takes control. We should establish an international mission authorized by the UN to work with the interim government on governance issues, including elections and the reconstruction of Iraq and rebuilding the Iraqi economy. A respected non- American who has the confidence of the UN Security Council should then be asked to run the mission in order to decrease the perception of an American occupation. Status of Bush's Approach: Working on it -- "We're working closely with the United Nations envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, and with Iraqis to determine the exact form of the government that will receive sovereignty on June 30th." (Bush, Press Conference, 4/13/04) The Kerry Record: -- 'We need another UN Security Council Resolution as soon as possible. It should have two major elements: Authorization for a military force under US command; and a transfer of political responsibility in Iraq to the UN ...The UN Resolution will open the door to greater sharing and a lower US profile, but effective US diplomacy will still be required to put the pieces together.' (Kerry campaign press release, September 9, 2003)

The Bush Record: Still hasn't obtained a resolution giving the UN an explicit role in political and reconstruction efforts. KEY TASK: Giving NATO a Formal Role The Kerry Plan: Transform the military force in Iraq into a NATO security force under the leadership of an American commander. To win NATO's cooperation, first commit to making the UN a full partner in the transition, then demonstrate diplomatic leadership and send a high level mission to consult with our NATO partners. Status of Bush's Approach: Exploring the possibility -- "Secretary of State Powell and Secretary of State (sic) Rumsfeld and a number of NATO defense and foreign ministers are exploring a more formal role for NATO, such as turning the Polish-led division into a NATO operation and giving NATO specific responsibilities for border control." (Bush, Press Conference, 4/13/04) The Kerry Record: -- "(T)he way you win the peace is by bringing other countries who have a stake in our winning the peace. They have a stake too. And we should bring NATO..." (CNN Late Edition, 7/13/03) The Bush Record: No formal role for NATO. KEY TASK: Establishing Security on the Ground The Kerry Plan: Supply our military commanders with the additional troops they have requested and supply our troops with the resources -- especially the protective gear -- they need to stay as safe as possible. The U.S. military must retain primary responsibility for security -- preferably with NATO's help -- until the Iraqi security force is fully prepared to take on that responsibility. Renew our efforts to attract international support in the form of more troops and people who can train Iraqi troops and assist Iraqi police. Status of Bush's Approach: Problems with Iraqi security forces -- 'Commanders say some former senior members of the disbanded army that served deposed president Saddam Hussein will soon be named to leadership posts in the new army.' (Washington Post, 4/13/04)

-- Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez has expressed concern that insurgents may have penetrated the ranks of new security forces.

-- The Mahdi militia has taken over Iraqi police force equipment, and reportedly taken equipment from Ukranian troops in Kut.

The Kerry Record: -- 'An accelerated effort to train and equip security forces, both military and police, and mentors group to monitor their initial deployment. Just recruiting untrained soldiers and police does not create effectiveness. ... It need not and should not be a US only effort....' (Kerry campaign press release, September 9, 2003)

-- "(W)e should bring NATO, we should bring the United Nations, we should bring other countries into the effort. We can still manage most of the security operation, even as we do that, but the humanitarian and the governance components of this must be broadened. We have to diffuse the perception and reality of American occupation. We have to get the target off of American troops." (Kerry on CNN Late Edition, 7/13/03)

The Bush Record: Rushed to stand up an Iraqi force without proper training or vetting -- 'The Iraqi forces, which include police, border patrolmen and building guards as well as army soldiers and paramilitary troops, now number about 200,000. But the rush to create these groups from scratch has proved a mammoth undertaking that has been marked by persistent reports of poor vetting, inadequate training, equipment shortages and command gaps.' (Graham, Washington Post, 4/13/04) KEY TASK: Paying for Iraq The Kerry Plan: Make key allies partners in the task of building a stable Iraq and do the difficult diplomacy to build support for far greater international financial contributions. Fairly share the burden at home, and level with the American people about the cost. Rising Price of Bush's Approach: $123 billion (appropriated for 2003 and 2004) The Kerry Record: -- Kerry co-sponsored an amendment in the Senate that would have rolled back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to pay for the President's $87 billion request.

-- The President needs to give the American people a fairer and fuller, clearer understanding of the magnitude and long-term financial cost of that effort. The international community's support will be critical because we will not be able to rebuild Iraq single-handedly. We will lack the credibility and the expertise and the capacity." (Kerry Senate Floor Statement, October 9, 2002)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kanary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. We need to "stay the course" just like we did in Viet Nam
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 12:32 PM by Kanary
This has been argued here many times, and more and more people are understanding that it's already FUBAR, and "staying the course", with "tweaking" isn't going to avert the chaos. That ship has sailed. The longer we stay, the worse that chaos is going to be, as more surrounding countries become involved. And they will. Have you read the thread about the geography of the region? Give it a read.

editing to add url:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Kanary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. The only way you can attack Kerry is to put words in his mouth
Bush's words in fact.

Your misrepresentations disgust me.

:puke:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kanary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Be "disgusted" all you want.
I don't recall putting words in *anyone's* mouth, but whatever...

How many more deaths will be acceptable?

Do we really have to repeat the whole Vietnam fiasco, and end up with almost 60,000 US troops dead, and countless Iraqis (and by that time, more Middle Eastern countries!) before we actually decide it's a lost cause?

How many will be enough?

And, speaking of Kerry's words.... didn't he have a quote about this?

Kanary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. OK, I'm disgusted with your misrepresentations.

I don't recall putting words in *anyone's* mouth, but whatever...

You don't remember posting this in your attack on Kerry?:

We need to "stay the course" just like we did in Viet Nam


That is a clear and blatant misrepresentation of Kerry's policy, and also falsely includes a quote from Bush that you imply is Kerry's policy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kanary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. those were *MY* words
With a bit of very sad irony.

I lived through this once, and had hoped that we'd learned a very hard and sad lesson.

Here we are again, saying the same things... 40 damned years later! BASTA!

Now, did you read that thread I posted? Didja?

As for your disgust... have at it. IT's affecting you more than it is me.

All of us who protested against the war (did you?) can now say "We told ya so"

All of us who are now saying it's time to get out don't want to have to say a year from now "We told ya so"

BASTA!

Kanary

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Your implication was as obvious as your disingenuous attempt to deny it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. If we did just leave
and the country plunged into a deep civil war, wouldn't we be culpable in the resulting bloodshed? How would it be more moral to sit back here in the states and watch the country further disinigrate?

I do think though that with Bush running this thing that our soldiers are being needlessly killed as a result of our search and destroy policy and the targeting of clerics and the like. We are at a desperate point in this where we aren't winning over the Iraqi's and are alienating even those who once took a favorable view of our intervention there. We may not make it to Kerry's scenario of international cooperation and transfer of power. We may, before our election, see a Nixonian assault to crush the 'opposition'. That will be a direct result of Bush's policy of aggression, not Kerry's plan to internationalize the conflict.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Sorry, I agree with the statement
'you break it, you own it', which is probably the first time I've ever agreed with Colin (Me Lai Massacre) Powell. We caused this mess and we have to fix it. Obviously chimp doesn't understand this and doesn't have a plan to fix it. Senator Kerry does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kanary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. It's really too bad we don't learn from history
We kept trying to "fix it" in Viet Nam.

We need to do the same thing in Iraq NOW that we did in Viet Nam... declare victory and go home.

The Iraqis can "fix it"...... we send them the money, they use their skills to put it all back together.

What we can't "fix" is all the deaths...... and there will be more the longer we stay.

How much more "unfixable" do we need to have?

Kanary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Nixon didn't try to fix Vietnam
He had the same mentality that Bush displays, that we can intimidate folks through the force of our military.

This notion that we can send money and that will fix Iraq is one that I can't fathom. Who will we send this money to? Chalabi? Give me a break!

This war was predicated on a threat from non-existent WMDs. What victory can we claim there? We destroyed lives and property needlessly. We have an obligation to help set that country right. Neither Kerry nor any of the detractors of this invasion and occupation have any illusions that Bush did anything right in this or can find any justification for the killing of innocents in his blundering assault. What remains is a moral, social, political disaster that must, and certainly can be put right.

No one can bring back those killed by our mindless aggression, but most don't have the temerity to claim that there is nothing we can do on the ground to put Iraq back on a safe prosperous road again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kanary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. No, there is NOTHING we can do "on the ground"
When a country doesn't want you there, you can't make 'em throw flowers.

They Don't Want Us There.

Did you read that thread I posted for ya?

Kanary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Sorry, I disagree
Clever with the "flowers". Who the hell asked for flowers?

We broke Iraq. We can help fix it. Ours is one of the most capable and compassionate nations of the world. I believe we can help undo the damage Bush's invasion and occupation has caused. I believe we are obligated by the mistakes we have made there. Walking away without trying will make it worse. That doesn't mean a continuation of the search and destroy tactics of late. It means turning over control and responsibility for the transition of government to an international body like the U.N. or NATO, and relinquishing our control of Iraq's resources by the imposed "Authority" to those international entities. We can and should help in that effort. Until then, we can't just turn our backs and do nothing to help repair the damage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
2. Passing the buck
Finally, Kerry said we should transform the military force in Iraq into a NATO security force UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF AN AMERICAN COMMANDER, so that the United States is not shouldering the burdens and risks alone.
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=102-04...

It is the common view of the international community that the United States made money from the 1991 Gulf War. US officials declared that the total expenditures on the Gulf War amounted to US$61 billion. The US-led multinational forces were composed of 34 countries, the combat troops sent out by countries other than the United States accounted for 24 percent of the total forces, but they paid 88 percent of the gross war expenses. The three countries, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Japan, alone, bore US$48.4 billion of the total sum Actually, the United States spent only US$7 billion in the Gulf War, less than 12 percent of the total war expenditure.
<snip>
There are two most profitable businesses in the world: first, transactions of drugs; second, the buying and selling of munitions. According to expert estimation, over 50 percent profits can be drawn from F-16 fighter sold at a cost of US$50 million. In recent years, the display of new-type weapons' performances through actual war has increasingly become a new method for promotion sales of new-type weapons. The 1991 Gulf War was a platform for displaying advanced weapons. US main battle tanks, airplanes, precision guided weapons, etc. which displayed their martial prowess in the war became the objects of pursuit by various countries after the war. In the possible second Gulf War, the United States will use the up-to-date arms adaptable to the era of informationization. Take the newest main tank MlA2 for example, the proportion of its digitized electronic equipment has reached 90 percent. These hi-tech new weapons often are unattainable by other countries in terms of their scientific research level, they have to buy from the United States if they want to take possession of these arms. So, once the war is ended, a large batch of orders for the weapons will be attracted, then what the United States needs is to prepare for collecting money, American arms dealers will again earn a big fortune.
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200303/13/eng20030313...

WAR IS GOOD FOR BUSINESS
-- # 34, Ferengi Rules of Acquisition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Better than turning our backs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. BTW, what's rule #35?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
8. so, the new strategy is....escalation?
"Second, he said we must supply our military commanders with the additional troops they have requested in order to provide the security the Iraqi people need to go about the business of daily life."

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Perhaps in some Bizzaro world
in which only the one sentence that you quoted was uttered.

It would be hard to come to that conclusion from an honest comparison of Bush and Kerry's policies however, especially if you were to judge Bush by his actions, not his lies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. New troops don't have to mean escalation of the conflict
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 01:09 PM by bigtree
Everything looks perverted under Bush. Everything is perverted under Bush. I trust Kerry's plan to get us out of this mess.

No one has a plan to get us out of there that doesn't involve providing for the post occupation security of the Iraqi's. Kerry differs with Bush in that he wants NATO to fill that gap. If NATO is not persuaded by Bush then U.S. soldiers will have to play that role.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 23rd 2014, 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC