Not out of Iraq by 2013? That is a DEALBREAKER, MOTHER$#*^ER!

[Bonobo]

I say we draw the line in the sand and send out the single, focused message of "We damand out of Iraq" or no vote.

Progressives have been kicked and kicked hard in the last 10 days. We need to hit back harder. Or we lose. For the foreseeable future.

We need to send the message to the Top 3 Candidates that they will NOT get the Progressive vote unless they promise troops out by end of 2009.

Edited to add little pissed off bomb icons and fire icons.



:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

:grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

[mike_c]

1. I made that pledge a long time ago and NOTHING will change it....

No candidate gets my vote unless I'm satisfied they will end the war against Iraq as quickly as possible-- AND that they reject the foreign policy that created it.

[ShortnFiery]

2. Well put. My sentiments/beliefs also.

:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

16. Ditto.

:grr:

[LSparkle]

3. I agree entirely

BIG disappointment last night.

[Elidor]

4. I wouldn't believe their promises anyway

Will their promises make you feel better? They'll still play us for chumps.

[Bonobo]

5. Some are more believable than others.

[Double T]

6. The US will be in Iraq for decades. Get used to IT!

This statement has been bought, paid for and approved by the military industrial complex.

[wildbilln864]

7. I'm with you! K&R #3! n/t

[Zywiec]

8. No vote? What will that accomplish?

My guess is in November 2008, everyone here will vote for the Democratic nominee no matter what's happened in the run-up to the election. The alternative would be disaster.

[Bonobo]

11. The threat of it is worth nothing? That is the essence of politics!

No threat, no power.

Take our vote for granted and we are without representation.

Fuck that noise. I owe no one my vote unless they represent me fairly.

Any alternative and you are really asking for it.

Getting fucked over by your enemies is one thing, you always have the hope of winning in the future.

But when your own and only side kicks you to the curb, you are well and truly fucked.

[robertpaulsen]

9. THE PEOPLE UNITED WILL NEVER BE DEFEATED!

The will of the Iraqi people and the will of the American people are united on this issue: Get US troops out of Iraq! Let use the power we have!

Let fury have the hour, anger can be power D'you know that you can use it? --The Clash, "Clampdown".

[DURHAM D]

10. Do you think we should keep an embassy there?

Do you think we should occupy any of the 14 permanent bases?

If either one is yes - we will need to keep some troops there.

[neweurope]

12. I for one do NOT think you should occupy any of those 14

permanent bases, no matter how much they cost you..

I want you the hell out of there.

:grr:


---------------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[DURHAM D]

20. What if occupying at least some of the bases

would allow the U.S. to function more independently in the region and reduce the influence of AIPAC on our congress critters and foreign policy?

[Bonobo]

23. What if they invented a cigarette with life-preserving qualities?

[DURHAM D]

27. I gather you don't have a real answer. n/t

[Bonobo]

29. Sorry if I was unclear. My opinion is that it was a preposterous question.

[DURHAM D]

31. By that do you mean it does not fall into

your need to think black and white only?

[Bonobo]

33. OK, please explain how us remaining in a country where we are hated

is going to make us more free and secure. We all want to know.

[DURHAM D]

36. Ok - now you are just being a jerk.

Your response is a non sequitur. :hi:

[Bonobo]

38. I gather you don't have a real answer. n/t

[Ignis]

69. HIS need to think "black and white only"?!?

YOU are the one who posed the question in an either/or fashion. Where's the middle/grey ground in either having US troops in Iraq or not?

[neweurope]

30. I think the US are functioning quite independently enough,

thank you. Not only in Iraq.


-----------------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[kenny blankenship]

22. I doubt we could maintain an embassy there, unless we were occupying the whole country

think about the security problems we have with 130,000 troops in the country. Now remove 129,500 of them.
We have 160,000 troops there and the official policy is you don't move around in the Green Zone without a flak vest and a helmet! The GREEN ZONE!

Now remove all but 500 troops. Would you want to be posted to Baghdad, Iraq as part of an embassy staff, not someone particularly important with your own security detail, just a regular part of the staff...?

I wouldn't take on a 6 month contract to do that for 5 million dollars. Not for 10 either. Because my life in Iraq wouldn't be worth a plug nickel.

That's all just to say this line you hear that "all troops out" from candidates somehow does not really mean all troops out if there's still going to be an embassy guard is just moot irrelevant Republite BULLSHIT.

(Attn, people against continuing genocide: Don't let the Republites bother you.)

[neweurope]

34. Just get the hell out. If the Iraqis ever want you to have an

embassy there, they'll protect you.

Right now I'm pretty certain that you are not all that welcome...


-------------------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[kenny blankenship]

42. I'm certain of that, too.

Right now though there is a backbiting rearguard action being fought by those who still hold onto the dream of a spreading U.S.Axis Empire in the Middle East. They think there are points to be scored in the current election by calling candidates who want us to get out--all the way out-- liars.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

43. A peacekeeping force...

would be required for Iraq, I believe. One from Muslim countries would be preferrable. American troops should be out Iraq anywhere but the Embassy.

[kenny blankenship]

48. I am sure you mean well, but ....

There is no workable proposal for this as yet--to say the least. In fact, the idea of a force drawn from Muslim countries, which you think "preferable", is regarded by many as perhaps the most likely way to escalate this sectarian civil war in Iraq into a region wide sectarian war.

[Bonobo]

13. Hell no. Not until THEY want us to have one!

[rjones2818]

15. Not even then.

It'd mean that we had a puppet government in Iraq.

[Bonobo]

17. I meant REALLY want us (which is virtually never at this point, I guess)

[rjones2818]

26. I understand what you're saying,

but I think a stable country willing to live with it's neighbors wouldn't want troops from another country on their soil (perhaps, someday, we'll get to the point that we could occupy the embassy, but that's another matter).

[robertpaulsen]

40. No. Wait, let me amend that. FUCK NO.

The US is responsible for GENOCIDE in Iraq. 1,068,035 dead and counting.

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

We should not be allowed to SNEEZE in Iraq, let alone maintain an embassy or "permanent" bases. Even with the political intransigence we are currently witnessing, we will leave Iraq, probably the same way we left Vietnam: fleeing in helicopters, clinging for life. It won't be pretty, but for the majority of Americans, it will be a RELIEF.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

41. The only acceptable continued American military presence in Iraq....

should be for the American Embassy, as we would have in any other country. Period.

[Bonobo]

44. By what right or reason should we have an embassy?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

45. I don't think there...

is a country on the planet we don't have an embassy in. :shrug: Standard inter-country deal. It's important to have a diplomatic presence in a country. An Iraq embassy would facilitate Americans traveling to and from Iraq, and well as Iraqis looking to immigrate or seek refuge.

Yes, this is the world's biggest frickin' embassy and it will be loaded with spies and intel people, but I think embassies general offer a good service for average people, too. Let's just say that an American embassy came in awfully handy once when I was traveling through Europe. ;)

[Bonobo]

47. How about Taiwan?

How about Somalia?
How about Bhutan?
Cuba?
Iran?
North Korea?
Andorra
Antigua and Barbuda
Bhutan
Comoros
Cuba
Dominica
Grenada
Guinea-Bissau
Iran
Kiribati
Libya
Liechtenstein
North Korea
Maldives
Monaco
Nauru
Palau
Republic of the Congo
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Seychelles
Solomon Islands
Somalia
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu

[eridani]

62. Rent a fucking building elsewhere from the Iraqi government

You know, like we do in other countries without oil.

[The Count]

63. Best. Answer. Ever.

:yourock:

[LSK]

72. so we should leave Iraq and NEVER DEAL WITH THEM AGAIN???

UNBELIEVABLE!!!

[eridani]

61. No, we should not have an embassy or any bases

What does a slave-labor built embassy on territory larger than the whole fucking country of Kuwait which has all the electricity and clean water that it wants say to Iraqis who have neither?

[txaslftist]

82. No and no.

As for the embassy, if the Iraqis want us there so desperately, they can provide security. If they can't, then no embassy. We don't have one in Iran, after all.

[The Count]

14. Whether it will happen or not, I want them out NOW - and nothing less will do

Which is why I am only paying attention to Gravel and DK.

[Bonobo]

18. The Count has been counted! PB&J sandwiches anyone?

[Pawel K]

19. I don't care who gets elected, we will not be out of there by 2009

take my word on it.

[Bonobo]

24. You think Kucinich wouldn't do as he promised. He said 3 months.

[Pawel K]

64. There is no way chance you can pull out all troops in 3 months

if you did it would be a policy disaster. Every general, democratic or republican, is telling you that there is no way to pull out in a year. In addition you will need time to plan how you will pull these troops out once you get in to office. It's on par with Richardson saying he would start pulling troops out his first day. I think Richardson is being dishonest when he says it, Kucinich is probably being honest which is what scares me about him.

But I do like Kucinich, enough to probably vote for him in the primaries when they come, but lets get real; his chances of winning are slim to none. And its not only because of some media conspiracy, his campaign is too incompetent to take this election seriously. We saw this when they forgot to sign up for a debate and then claimed that he was being shut out of it, when in reality he wasn't.

[MadHound]

74. It's going to be a disaster no matter when we pull out,

Whether it's in three months, three years or three decades. There will be a period of violence when we pull out, because the people of Iraq will tear down every construct and institution that they feel we've set up or supported.

The only real question is how much damage will we inflict between now and when we pull out. The longer we stay, the more death and destruction we will inflict. That is why I'm in favor of pulling out immediately, and will be voting for Kucinich.

[Pawel K]

79. I totally agree with you, I think you misunderstood what I'm saying

I'm not saying we can't pull out within 3 months because there will be violance. I am saying you can't pull out 160,000 troops and all the equipment within 3 months, it will take at minimum a year.

[Zandor]

21. YEAH LETS VOTE REPUBLICAN INSTEAD

That'll show em.

:)

[Bonobo]

25. Your approach is working dandily. More troops than ever.

[txaslftist]

83. I'll take an antiwar Republican versus any of our 2013 crowd, thanks.

[superkia]

28. I feel very confident in voting for Kucinich and this is one of the reasons.

[MazeRat7]

32. We need to dump "the top three"... they dont have the chops, judgment, or experience. -nt

[Bonobo]

35. I agree. DUMP THEM. It is still early.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

37. Let them know!

I faxed the following out last week:

Sen. Hillary Clinton
Sen. Barrack Obama
Sen. John Edwards
Sen. Bill Richardson
Rep. Dennis Kucinich
Sen. Michael Gravel
Sen. Christopher Dodd
Sen. Joe Biden


During Mr. Bush's recent speech to the country regarding our future in Iraq, he made reference to something many of us suspected from the beginning of the Iraq invasion: he intends that US military forces never fully be removed from that country.

In light of those remarks, I want to make something perfectly clear to you:

I will not vote for any Democratic Presidential candidate -- in the primaries or in the general election -- who does not come out unequivocally and forcefully against a permanent military force on Iraq soil.

I will not vote for you. I will not donate to your election fund. I will not campaign locally on your behalf. I will actively work for your defeat. I say this as someone who has voted Democratic since I registered to vote for my first Presidential election in 1979.

I believe with 100% certainty that our illegal invasion of a sovereign Iraq has been one of the biggest foreign blunders in our country's history, one that has left US credibility and prestige in tatters and our Armed Forces on the brink of collapse. That I may have to vote for those of you who willing supported this obscenity with your "Yea" vote for the IWR is galling enough. That I could vote for a person who dared to continue such insanity beyond Bush's term is simply impossible.

During debates and in interviews I have witnessed several of the Democratic candidates carefully parsing their words when talking about our future role in Iraq and how we get our troops home. I'm sorry, but that is not good enough.

Other than a limited force required for any other American Embassy in any other foreign country, we have no business maintaining troops of any nature any longer than it takes us to get our men and women out of that country safely. You can give me any excuse you want. You can try to convince me of the necessity of a permanent military presence to control access to Iraq's oil reserves, or to preserve "regional stability", or for the ever enigmatic "national security interests", but it doesn't change one fact:

We have NO right to continue to occupy that country. Period.

So, you have fair warning. Refuse to denounce a permanent military force in Iraq and face this Democrat writing in her Presidential candidate of choice.

I hope you do the right thing.

Sincerely,

Hell Hath No Fury
San Francisco, CA


cc:

Chairmen Howard Dean
Chairmen Rahm Emmanuel
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Senate Majorioty Leader Harry Reid
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer

[Bonobo]

39. That is a great letter. I fucking love it. Perfect.

[neweurope]

46. Great letter. I wish more of you did that...

--------------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[The Count]

50. Fantastic!

I'd like to adapt it and use it as well - if it's OK with you.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

55. Knock yourself out!

I pray that if enough of us take action, we can make the Democratic candidates feel some serious heat on this issue. When I read about DUers telling the DNC / DSCC et al fundraisers "no out of Iraq, no money" that gives me a bit of hope they will get the message. The candidates ned to hear this message loud and clear!

[Psyop Samurai]

52. Excellent !! n/t

:bounce:

[fenriswolf]

68. so i take it

since hillary still expects to be doing military operations in 2013 she has lost your vote.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

84. Yes, she did.

Between that and her Lieberman/Kyle vote, she will never get my vote.

[brentspeak]

49. I say: speak for yourself

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LittleClarkie]

53. So that was a royal we you were using?

Angry little monkey, aren't you.

[Bonobo]

56. Yeah, I am angry, but bonobos are apes, not monkeys.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

57. You're not a progressive...

...so he wasn't talking to you. "We" is people like me, ya know, progressives? :shrug:

[LittleClarkie]

59. I think his issue is not who Bonobo was talking to, but who he was talking for

I would imagine there is a variety of opinion even amongst progressives. Lockstep and progressive wouldn't seem to go together.

[Bonobo]

60. Look, obviously I'm not talking "for" anyone.

I offered my opinion of what should be done and I know many others feel as I do.

So what exactly is your problem?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

65. A "variety of opinion"...

about getting us the hell out of Iraq amongst progressives??? On this, progressives are "lockstep" -- being against military aggression and occupation is a basic progressive value.

[LittleClarkie]

73. Do you mean that every progressive is an "out now" person?

With no shades of opinion on exactly when or exactly how this is to be accomplished? And that all of you are reacting NOW all of a sudden to something all y'all should have know before this, which is that the only "out now" person running is Kucinich?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

77. Every single Progressive...

I know, and I live in SF, so I am surrounded by them, is a "get us the hell out of Iraq now" person. No American military bases. No long term presence beyond the embassy. The idea of being in there up until or beyond 2013 is just ridiculous.

Every Progressive I know thinks this was an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, followed by an illegal occupation. WE ARE THE PROBLEM and, as long as we are there, our presence will continue to make matters worse than better.

As for the Progressives reacting "all of a sudden" -- last time I checked, that would have been us, along with others, marching by the tens of thousands prior to the invasion to try to stop it, and dozens of times afterwards to end it. We are still trying to stop it by holding our candidates accountable and letting them know any talk short of getting us out ASAP is not acceptable for a Democratic presidential candidate.

[earth mom]

54. I hear ya. Why isn't everyone on DU totally pissed off about this?

:wtf:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

58. They don't care about your vote or mine. They are looking towards the general election

and picking up moderate democrats, disenchanted republicans and independents.

[Dinger]

66. Wes Clark: Come Baaaaaaaaaak!

You can still change your mind ya know.:patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[xiamiam]

67. i am absolutely shocked at the 2013 statement made my the candidates...6 more years of this crap

and ..what?..i cant even think straight after hearing this the other night...how many more dead?...how much more chaos can we endure?...is anyone listening?...I am so saddened by that stance...

[fenriswolf]

70. dennis is listening

[LSK]

71. DO DUERS EVER READ PAST HEADLINES ANYMORE???

DO DETAILS MATTER???

Edwards said maybe 5000 to protect the Embassy. Randi said yesterday we still have 10,000 in Bosnia.

But lets lynch them all!!!

Im so sick of this simplistic kneejerking nonsense here.

[2rth2pwr]

75. I'm pretty sure that the candidates know that their stances will piss

off many "out now" people and they have already calculated that into their campaigns. So they either believe that the netroots are not important enough to them or they believe in what they are saying so much they don't care if it hurts them.

Or both.

[never cry wolf]

76. They didn't say they didn't want to or wouldn't try to get them out, sheesh!

They just said they couldn't pledge zero troops by 2013. No one knows what bunnypants will do in the next 2 years or what twists and turns may happen before and after that. Maybe the UN will take over with the US contributing. We'll still have an embassy there presumably and there are troops at embassies.

It was an horribly framed question, IMHO. It should have been, 'will you make every attempt to pull the troops out by the end of your first term?' Hell, I can't pledge I'll wake up tomorrow.

Washington Journal had a segment on this this morning, Dems only allowed to call, I was screaming at the TV & tried to call. Dem callers saying they're not gonna vote because the candidates want to continue the war.... Grrrrrrr, the "librul" media at work.... They did their job to get dems to not vote...

[trekbiker]

78. agree.. I WILL NOT VOTE for any of the top three

all Gore has to do is announce and plege to get us the hell out of Iraq within a year and he basically can walk away with the election.. Hell, half the repugs would even vote for him

[Ganja Ninja]

80. I don't intend to demand anything.

If the Democrats can't read the handwriting on the wall then I'll vote for someone who can.

[bvar22]

81. The American Refusenik Movement!

The "Refusenik" Movement started in Israel when patriotic Israelis refused to participate in the illegal occupation of Palestinian territories.

"We shall no longer lend a hand in the occupation of the territories. We shall no longer take part in the deprivation of basic human rights from millions of Palestinians. We shall no longer serve as a shield in the crusade of the settlements. We shall no longer corrupt our moral character in missions of oppression."

"We, for whom the Israel Defense Forces and the Air Force are an inalienable part of ourselves, refuse to continue to harm innocent civilians. These actions are illegal and immoral, and are a direct result of the ongoing occupation which is corrupting all of Israeli society. Perpetuation of the occupation is fatally harming the security of the state of Israel and its moral strength."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refusal_to_serve_in_the_Israeli_military

I join in solidarity with the Israeli Refuseniks in refusing to support the illegal and immoral Occupation of Iraq.

I will NOT vote for, or suppport in any way, politicians of ANY Political Party who fail to support the immediate withdrawal of ALL American Military Personel and Mercenaries from Iraq.

I am an American Refusenik!

[Hell Hath No Fury]

85. Hey Bonobo!

Contact all the candidates and let'em know how you feel! Info is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1932851