You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

There is a TON of misinformation about Duckworth v. Cegelis re: Iraq [View All]

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
wndycty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-04-06 07:28 AM
Original message
There is a TON of misinformation about Duckworth v. Cegelis re: Iraq
Advertisements [?]
And who benefits by spreading that misinformation? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

It appears that we are constantly being told that Cegelis and Duckworth are world's apart on the issue of Iraq. In today's Daily Herald both of them answered a series of questions and I'm sure those who have been MISLED about Duckworth will be surprised to see her answers. Even Cegelis is not advocating IMMEDIATE withdrawl, she is for setting benchmarks. Here is a sampling of both candidates, as well as Lindy Scott, in their own words.

Cegelis:
I have opposed this war from the beginning. However, America’s military actions mean that we have a commitment to the citizens of Iraq. We must do all that we can to bring peace and a stable and sovereign Iraq can emerge when the U.S. becomes an ally, not an occupying force. We must spell out a reasonable and detailed plan to transfer power to Iraq’s military and police forces and bring U.S. combat troops home by Dec. 31, 2006.

This means setting reasonable benchmarks to indicate when Iraqi forces should be satisfactorily trained, equipped and ready to take over security operations.
-snip-

Duckworth:
To bring our troops home, we need a more aggressive plan than the Bush administration has offered for training the Iraqi police and military.

The administration has yet to develop a set of measurable benchmarks to determine when a reduction in forces is possible. We should do so, and proceed to stand down a certain number of U.S. units for every Iraqi battalion that becomes combat-ready.
-snip-

Scott:
We must also renounce any desire to control Iraqi oil and we must renounce our plans to have permanent bases there. We can begin removing 50,000 troops from the areas where they are not needed (largely in the south and in the Kurdish north) and where they can be replaced by national police. Moving toward a 12-month timeline for the redeployment of troops would motivate the three sectors of Iraqis to begin to work together as they resolve differences.

As we withdraw troops, we allow Iraq to get on with the process of governing themselves without having to tolerate a huge foreign occupying force in their land.
-snip-

http://www.dailyherald.com/politics/ele_story.asp?id=162874
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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