Kerry to Pull No Punches Taking on the Bush Administration in Iraq Speech

[kerrygoddess]

C-SPAN will be taping the film today - It's not clear yet, whether they will braodcast live - I will update as soon as I know.

Kerry to Pull No Punches Taking on the Bush Administration in Iraq Speech Today
October 26th, 2005

John Kerry will be delivering a speech on Iraq, today, at 1:00 p.m. est, at Georgetown University. In his speech he will will leave no doubt about his position on the Iraq war. From advance excerpts of Kerry’s speech, it’s clear that he will hold no punches…

Kerry will be offering a detailed, concrete plan from troop draw-down, to Iraqi troop training, to regional security arrangements, to political solutions, to reconstruction. He will propose a 12-15 month plan that will help stabilize Iraq and bring our troops home, starting with the process of reducing our forces by withdrawing 20,000 troops over the course of the holidays.

In his speech today, Kerry speaks truth to power. As he did thirty five years ago with his Fulbright Commission testimony, John Kerry will take on those who say we can’t ask tough questions because we are at war, and he will insist instead that in a time of war we must ask the hardest questions of all. Kerry will argue, “no matter what the President says, asking tough questions isn’t pessimism; it’s patriotism.” This belief is fundamental to John Kerry’s character.

In stark and honest contrast to the Bush Administration’s shifting rationales for war, John Kerry will tell the truth that this country and the Congress were misled into war. He will reiterate, as he said more than a year ago that, knowing what we know now, he would not have gone to war in Iraq.

“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 not.”

John Kerry will offer the only real path forward in Iraq.

MORE - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=950

[gmoney]

1. Uh, John...

about 15 months too late to stop pulling your punches, dude...

[SeattleRob]

3. My thoughts exactly! N/T

[LittleClarkie]

53. In election terms maybe

but in terms of where Iraq is in their development, he's right on schedule. This isn't Kerry the candidate. This is Kerry the Foreign Relations Committee member.

Didn't Dean talk yesterday about success in Iraq? He's not an "out now" guy either. He, like Kerry, is probably closer to a "sane timeline" guy. I don't remember any of our candidates in the last election, except Dennis, saying out now. (not counting Ralph). Most spoke of certain conditions being met first.

The Iraqis have held their elections, with one more to go in December. If Bush doesn't pull out by then, watch for Sen. Kerry to get even louder.

[DenaliDemocrat]

54. Kerry can go pound sand

he punked out like a little prissy premadonna and let them bully him last year right around this time. NOW he wants to jack bad. Go pound sand Kerry.

[LittleClarkie]

55. The Cat Came Back the very next day

The cat came back, they thought he was a goner. But the cat came back, he just wouldn't stay away.

Sorry, I suspect he ain't goin' noplace.

[liberalnurse]

2. Now he talks tough......

Who really is listening to him now? Not me.

[TayTay]

I am

I think the more Democrats that we get to speak up the better.

This is a good thing and I look forward to the speech.

[second edition]

23. I am, actually I have been all along. His way makes sense to me. N/t

[MH1]

57. Oh, lots of folks are still listening to him.

That's why he's out campaigning for other pols like Corzine, Kaine, and Ferrer.

I saw something recently that while Hillary is hoarding her stash (and quite a bit of it, she has), Mr. Kerry is spreading his around to help other Dems win.

I can't find the link, unfortunately. But I know I heard it, and it fits.

[LiberalVoice]

4. Too bad you couldn't do that when ummm.....

you know...you were running for president. Dumbass.

[second edition]

24. Gee, you seem to know so much more than Kerry, where did you

get your information? Ummm,I wasn't sold and still am not on an immediate withdraw. Certainly, not during the election. For all parties concerned a positive leveraged, gradual pull out seems the wise decision.

[LiberalVoice]

49. I didn't say anything about withdrawal.

My comments were directed to his "attacking the * admin", or lack thereof.

I must say I do appreciate the sarcasm. It's used so well :eyes:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. Let's hope that the MSM covers this

I still think the main reason the Democratic message doesn't get out is because the mainstream media doesn't report it.

[noahmijo]

6. Though he's not my first choice this time (Clark is at the moment) in 2008

If he is again the nominee I will proudly vote for him again.

The naysayers yea I see where you're coming from but at the moment better late than never rings too true.

[maxsolomon]

7. still half measures i see

there is no stabilizing iraq that america will do. cut our losses & bring the military home. start rebuilding america.

[second edition]

25. Yeah think? Where are you gathering your intelligence from,

that your certain there is no stabilizing Iraq?

[reality based]

8. Are there other Democratic Senators or potential Presidential

candidates who are willing to go as far as Kerry does in this speech?

[Mass]

10. Feingold seems to propose something similar, though Kerry

is more detailed.

Except for him, I do not think so.

[reality based]

28. Well that makes two viable candidates for nomination in 2008

I don't think anyone who doesn't go at least as far as Kerry has gone has a prayer. I am interested in where Clark, Clinton and Edwards come down on the question.

[Kashka-Kat]

39. 'Feingold on Fire'

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/10/1190/5803

his thoughts re: Democrat Iraq strategy

[soothsayer]

9. Eh, better late than never.

[flaminbats]

62. you took the words right out of my post!!!

if he had only given this speech two years ago..I would have backed him in the primaries, at least he's on my list for 2008. :thumbsup:

[Kashka-Kat]

11. mr. kerry, you got some splaning to do...

You and every dem who voted for this war. "Misled" - give me a break! Every reason not to go to war was out there being openly discussed well in advance of the congress vote. What the heck were those unprecedented, world-wide anti-war demos about, for crying out loud? What about all the dissent within the state dept. and c.i.a. PRIOR TO invasion? Powell's UN testimony was thoroughly discredited in the British press within a day or 2 of him having delivered it. (remember the 11 year old Phd dissertation?)

Don't get me wrong I am completely ready willing and able to put the past behind me and support any and all efforts toward withdrawing from this disgusting immoral war. Im just saying Mr. Kerry would get a lot further in the credibility department if he'd say, I made a mistake. Take some responsibility! The calculated political stance of the dem party at the time was to keep silent-- and it was WRONG. They abdicated their responsibility to serve as opposition party--and to some degree they STILL are continuing in that policy. You know that checks and balances thang?

[zulchzulu]

19. Here...

Here are some explanations concerning your concern:

"You and every dem who voted for this war."

The IWR was not a "vote for the war". That's BS. It was a vote for the UN to be able to continue inspections and if needed, have a multinational force under the auspices of the UN and its rules within the resolutions to go into Iraq as a last resort. Sections 3 and 4 of the IWR were basically abandoned by Bush as well as the fact that he pulled the UN inspectors out before they had completed their tasks assigned by the UN. Without the IWR, the UN would not have been allowed to go in and inspect for WMDs.

"Every reason not to go to war was out there being openly discussed well in advance of the congress vote."

While I personally would not have voted for the IWR, there was enough "proof" that reasons for inspections of WMDs was needed. Again, without the IWR, no inspections would have been allowed. Bush could have attacked even sooner.

"What about all the dissent within the state dept. and c.i.a. PRIOR TO invasion?"

Kerry was firmly against ANY invasion of Iraq until and after the UN finished inspections in Iraq. Here is a speech (MP3) on March 1, 2003 where he warns Bush NOT to unilaterally attack Iraq.

"Powell's UN testimony was thoroughly discredited in the British press within a day or 2 of him having delivered it."

This speech was well after the IWR. It had nothing to do with Kerry.

[Jacobin]

29. then why did 100 plus congresscritters vote against it?

If 'all it was' was what you say?

I remember the debates raging when it took place. EVERYONE knew smirk was going to invade and wanted congress' fig leaf to cover his ass.

To revise history now is an insult to those who fought against the resolution and to those with enough moral courage to vote against.

Kerry didn't have that courage and no amount of whitewash can cover that up

[Kashka-Kat]

38. don't remember it that way

thnx for yr clarifications

but I do think that particular resolution was widely seen as permission or a nudge-wink to Bush to go ahead...

Sen. Feingold's statement voting in opposition sez it all http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/02/10/2002A10531.html

Like I say, I'll get on board the Kerry bus if it's finally leaving the station, and being 40 something I've been around the block a few times and know all about making mistakes and making difficult choices and so am quite willing to forgive and forget ... but I see no reason to play along with a charade. And it kind of irks me when I'm asked to do so. If that's bashing, so be it-- I would hope though that it could be seen as intended, as constructive criticism.

[OneTwentyoNine]

50. The IWR was drafted to continue inspections?? Bawhahaha....WRONG

The IWR was to STOP all inspections,give the inspectors time to get the hell out so SHOCK and AWE could begin.

Your way off on this....

[karynnj]

59. No, Mr. ONeTwetyNine, that is NOT RIGHT

THe IWR in OCT 2002, was voted on BEFORE Bush and Powell went to the UN and got a resolution to get the inspectors back in (in accordance with earlier UN resolutions that Iraq be disarmed).

The UN voted the resolution

The inspectors went back in in late November. The agreement was they could even check the Presidential palaces.

They determined that the new Iraqi missiles went too far and Saddam allowed them to be destroyed

In Jan there was a huge DC anti-war rally because Bush was still talking war.

In Feb there were huge rallies on Presidents' weekend in NYC, London and I think Rome

In Jan, Feb, and March, Kerry and other Democrats and a few Republicans asked that Bush no go to war

In March - Bush invaded.

What you might be misremembering is that that is what happpened in 1998

[zulchzulu]

63. Thanks for clarifying that

It does seem that the bigger the Kerry basher, the more mixed up they are with those funny things called facts.

[Dogmudgeon]

12. Hey, everybody! Let's all bash John Kerry!

That'll show those Republicans!

--p!

[Kashka-Kat]

13. "bash" vs. "constructive criticism"?

[thebigidea]

18. complaining about "bashing" was annoying when Republicans did it.

its probably about as annoying when we do it too, eh?

[Jacobin]

35. He enabled the neocons to kill hundreds of thousands

by losing his spine and voting for the war.....and please, no cut and paste of 'he didn't vote for the war, he voted to hold saddam accountable' tripe.

its revising history and we all know it

Kerry gets to 'live with it'. hundreds of thousands of other humans don't

[TayTay]

36. We don't 'all know it'

that is your opinion. You are confusing the facts of what he said with what you think he said.

We don't 'all know this' I, for one, specifically deny what you are saying. There is too much eveidence to the contrary.

[BillZBubb]

14. Yawn! TLTL John.

Now he speaks "candidly" when no one will be listening.

[second edition]

26. I'm listening and I think others will listen too. Go back to bed-please!

[MaineDem]

15. Link to the speech

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_10_26.html

[kerrygoddess]

22. That's excerpts - Full speech here

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=952

[zulchzulu]

16. The morans here at DU can't wait to bash Kerry

It's sickening...circle jerking in the circular firing squad...pathetic...

[second edition]

30. Your right. you have to wonder about some people who can't

even see beyond there own narrow opinions and unsubstantiated claims.

[welshTerrier2]

17. Kerry's plan is DOA !!

Kerry did not "speak truth to power" ... he didn't refuse to give up his seat on the bus ... the very phrase is insulting ...

his plan it totally conditional on things yet to be defined ...

and you compare this to his excellent Fulbright testimony??? the old John Kerry would roll over in his grave ...

could you imagine the old John Kerry calling for no withdrawal until the South Vietnamese made progress against the Viet Cong ... we'd still be in Vietnam today !!!!

Kerry's speech is DOA ... it will have zero impact ... Kerry has chosen the soft mush middle instead of backing the wishes of the American people and the Iraqi people ...

the 3 viable options were:
1. immediate withdrawal
2. a "timetable" of 6 - 9 months based soley on the passage of time with an immediate drawdown of some troops to demonstrate good faith
3. a referendum of the Iraqi people to decide if they want us to leave

instead, Kerry gave us more of the "we can't leave until" theme ... well, "until" could take a long, long time ... "until" is NOT a timetable ... Kerry's proposal fails to hold bush accountable because it calls on bush to define the plan and it calls on bush to measure the plan ... the more bush fails under Kerry's system, the longer we'll be there ... that just doesn't seem to make any sense at all ...

[TayTay]

20. Those don't seem like viable options to me

Immediate withdrawal is not going to happen. We have to phase out withdrawal. (Bare logistics alone suggest this.)

This is a time table of 12-15 months with 20,000 immediate withdrawals around Christmas.

The Iraqi people have already indicated that they want us gone. But they also don't want the kind of collapse that a instant withdrawal would bring. I think this plan is in line with that.

I am also pleased that other Senate Dems are getting on the page that we can't stay and have to start making plans to leave. Sen. Leahy of Vermont said this in a speech on the floor yesterday: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/102505A.shtml

It's a very good start toward a united Dem statement.

[kerrygoddess]

21. READ THE SPEECH!

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=952#more-952

I'm sorry to say WT2 you're no expert on Foriegn Policy. KERRY IS!

He's laid out the most viable timetable to date.

[Skelington]

32. I'm backing Clark now.....

I voted for Kerry, I gave what $ I could, I had his sticker, his sign in my yard, and went to a few of the SMALL rallies we had here in Albuquerque for him. I don't live my life in politics, but I try and stay aware of what is happening, there are LOTS of people like me here. I like the sound of Preident General "I got the job done" Clark a lot better than ......Senator "wait untill to see how good my next speech will be " Kerry.

Bottom line I'm tired of hearing "NOW THE GLOVES COME OFF" , "NOW KERRY HAS THE PLAN" , "KERRY WILL FIGHT FOR US" blah blah blah

I believe Kerry does have extensive knowledge and ability in forign policy, but the rollover he accomplished in the election is still stuck in a lot of peoples craw. Plus his stand up speeches seem to always elude to a bigger and better push forward........comming soon.

His time came and went.

[politicasista]

34. Can we just be glad that Dems are speaking out instead of eating our own?

Hindsight is 20-20. I like General Clark. I like Kerry, but rehashing the primaries and election only plays right into the hands of the republicans. Plus it's not good for us if we want to win in 2006.

[Skelington]

37. Not trashing Kerry per se,

I would GLADLY eat a WHOLE HUMBLE PIE and wash it down with a side of crow if the next speech from Kerry was a credability building "THIS IS WHAT I'VE DONE, THIS IS WHY, and GODDAMMIT IF THIS SHIT DOESN'T STOP RIGHT F*****G NOW WAIT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS NEXT !!!!! I just don't think he will.

I don't think Clark will say that either, however I do believe Clark's credibility in the US and the world is,.. and would be,.. in better shape to jump start our road back to redemption in the eyes of the world.

[karynnj]

44. Could you post Clark's plan?

I've seen at least 2 plans that he's had that seemed different and I don't know his plan now.

[second edition]

31. As you wish! I don't read it that way and I don't agree with your

recommendations. Oh, he doesn't mention being there for a long, long time. Actually, he is pretty clear on withdraw guidelines. I can't figure out why you don't seem to give a sh*t about Iraqi stability and vulnerability in the ME. Unfortunately, we have to deal with this aspect also for our own safety.
Why not admit that no matter what he had to say, even if it was immediate withdraw, you would have found something to grip about.

[welshTerrier2]

43. sadly, your post is bullshit ...

your statement is totally without merit ... i would have applauded Kerry if he had called for immediate withdrawal ... you have no basis for your personal attacks ...

and it's also bullshit to say i don't give a shit about Iraqi stability ... i do ... i've written here many times that i don't believe stability can be achieved while the US remains in occupation ... again, you have no basis for your comment ...

the problem with Kerry's plan, which of course you completely failed to respond to, is that it is CONDITIONAL ... it requires progress to be made ... it requires bush to define HIS plan and then report the results as HE measures them ... as i said before, the worse bush does the longer bush gets to stay in Iraq ... and that seems like a pretty bad plan to me ...

i said under Kerry's plan we will remain in Iraq for a long, long time because it is dependent on what bush does ... if the last two and a half years are any indication, i see no reason to be hopeful ...

[karynnj]

45. Frankly any Kerry plan is dependent on what Bush does

If Kerry said out now - what would it mean. What Kerry has done is define the situation and demand what our own military and the Iraqi think is best.

[welshTerrier2]

48. two things

first, it looks like you may have left a word out of your post ... what did you mean to say when you used the phrase "the Iraqi think is best" ?? did you mean the Iraqi government or the Iraqi people?

the poll i saw of the Iraqi people (from August) said 82% want us to leave now ... and an article i posted in another thread today said that Sunni leaders want the US to withdraw immediately ...

second, i wanted to address your point about "all plans being dependent on bush" ... it's certainly true that bush is in command right now ... but all the energy and the direction of the American people is for withdrawal ... not in 12 -15 months but now ... Americans have had enough of this war ...

i really had hoped that Kerry would step up to lead the movement ... just from a political perspective, i just don't see an outcry from the American people to get all fired up behind the plan that Kerry is proposing ... Kerry's plan reflects Kerry's style ... and i'm looking beyond the content with the following comment ... the plan sounds "cerebral" ... it sounds calculated ... it sounds cautious and measured ... my point is NOT that there's anything at all wrong with these traits ... they are all important ...

but what's missing here is that sometimes you have to ride the tidal wave into the beach ... especially because we are a party out of power, i think it's important to "catch the fire" of the American people and run with it ... we need to be bold and passionate rather than cool and calculating ... again, there's great value to the "ice in their veins" chessplayers ... but for too long, Democrats have been policy wonks and technicians and the Party's soul has not been visible to voters ... this is not to say that Democrats are not passionate about their ideas but rather that they don't convey their passion to the voters ... and yes, of course it takes more than just passion and noise; it also requires good solid ideas ...

anyway, that's how i see Kerry ... good ideas but not inspiring ... and on Iraq, neither ... those of us who see Iraq as a done deal where things will just get worse and worse if we remain, continue to be mostly unrepresented by the Party's elite ... this is not a healthy situation going into the midterms ... i am truly saddened that i will not be supporting Democrats who condone continued occupation as Kerry has done with his proposal ... i hope there is still time for dialog and reconciliation ... but unity will have to be earned ... and today's announcement does nothing to earn it ...

one last thing ... i posted this thread ==> http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2182534&mesg_id=2182534
that outlines exactly what i see our choices are in Iraq ... i'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on the issues i raised ... and second, it's interesting that most of the Kerry regulars never seem to show up on discussion threads that are issues focussed ... with some obvious exceptions, they seem to only appear on Kerry threads ...

[robbedvoter]

27. In 5 years he'll tell us he was mislead about conceding a won election

Sorry, John, your self promoting events are a bit clumsy on timing.

[second edition]

33. Oh, drop it won't you. This was a very personal and heart wrenching

thing for him to do, and you hide behind your keyboard with nothing positive to say, he has more guts then you'll ever have and your to blind to see it.

[rodeodance]

40. I got this email from him.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: A critical time for Iraq
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:55:32 -0500
From: John Kerry <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: xxxx



JohnKerry.com


Dear xxxx,

Later today, I will deliver a major speech on the war in Iraq.

It asks a hard and essential question: how do we bring our troops home within a reasonable and responsible timeframe, while achieving what needs to be achieved in Iraq?

One thing is certain. It isn't by continuing to pursue the Bush administration's "stay for as long as it takes" rhetoric. And it isn't by blindly following their policy of cutting and running from the truth that underlies that rhetoric.

That's why my speech today will call on the Bush administration to immediately draw up -- and present to Congress and the American people -- a detailed plan with target dates for the transfer of military and police responsibilities to Iraqis so the majority of our combat forces can be withdrawn.

I hope you'll take a moment to read excerpts from this critically important call to action on Iraq.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_10_26.html

My speech today will assert that there is no reason Iraq cannot be relatively stable, no reason the majority of our combat troops can't soon be on their way home, and no reason we can't take on a new role in Iraq, as an ally not an occupier, training Iraqis to defend themselves by the end of 2006.

Today of all days, it is important to note that instead of attacking Ambassador Wilson's report, instead of attacking his wife to justify attacking Iraq, the Bush administration should have simply paid attention to what his report revealed.

As I write this, we are waiting to learn whether the administration's attacks will prove to be an indictable offense in a court of law. But for its CIA leaks, and for misleading a nation into war, the Bush administration will most certainly be indicted in the high court of history.

Sadly, there have been a legion of Bush administration miscalculations that have left us having far too few options in Iraq.

It is never easy to discuss what has gone wrong while our troops are in constant danger. I know this dilemma first-hand. After serving in war, I returned home to offer my own personal voice of dissent. I did so because I believed strongly that we owed it to those risking their lives to speak truth to power. We still do.

In fact, while some say we can't ask tough questions because we are at war, I say no -- in a time of war we must ask the hardest questions of all. No matter what President Bush says, asking tough questions isn't pessimism, it's patriotism. If you agree, I urge you to join me in demanding a new course in Iraq. You can start by making sure as many people as possible see this speech.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_10_26.html

The American people -- most importantly, the families of the brave men and women serving in Iraq -- can no longer tolerate George W. Bush's failure to spell out a reasonable and detailed plan of action on Iraq. If the President refuses to act, we must call on Congress to take the decision out of his hands.

I urge you to read the speech I plan to deliver at Georgetown University in a matter of hours -- and to forward it to as many people as possible. Most of all, I hope you will resolve to join the entire johnkerry.com community in the weeks ahead as we work to create an undeniable groundswell of public pressure for a detailed, date-specific plan of action on Iraq.

Sincerely,

John Kerry
Paid for by Friends of John Kerry, Inc.

[TayTay]

41. Gee, no request for money either

Huh! Maybe it was a genuine appeal for understanding and a genuine appeal for people to read the speech and make up their own minds.

[frogmarch]

42. I'm having flashes of deja vu

reading this thread. Some of the posts take me back to when I was debating with Bushbots before the election.

Kerry's tops in my book.

[npincus]

46. too fucking little, too fucking late

fresh blood is wanted

[politicasista]

47. Yawn

:boring:

[Disturbed]

51. I have the list of Senators and Reps who voted no..

on the IWR. For some reason it won't materialize. If anyone has it please post it.

J. Kerry is a Dem Senator that Dems can be proud of. He should keep that job. He made too many mistakes in his campaign and his time is past for being Prez. It doesn't hurt now that he is pushing an end to the illegal Occupation of Iraq and Dems should support him in that effort.

[MH1]

56. IWR votes

These are easy to find by searching Thomas. However, someone has already gone to the trouble:

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/Iraq_War_Resolution

Please also note sponsors and cosponsors.

[Clarkie1]

52. Kerry fails to inspire me.

He's a good senator, but he doesn't have what it takes to be a great president.

[MH1]

58. Well, he inspires me, and quite a few others.

Take a look at the Kerry group here at DU.

As for what it takes to be a great president, it is nice that you have an opinion about that, but I don't think very many people are prescient enough to know ahead of time who will go down in history as great, and who won't.

Tit for tat, I don't feel especially "inspired" by Wes Clark at this time, and don't think he'd make a "great" president, but damned if you'll hear me say that or see me posting it if he gets the nomination. And I absolutely think he'd be an improvement over anything that's likely to come out of the republican primary.

I'll still take the inspiration of John Kerry over all the other Dems. No contest.

[politicasista]

60. Then why ruin a positive thread?

[Guaranteed]

61. I think it's going to take some time for people to get over the '04 loss.

I know that Kerry has been doing an excellent job since a couple of months after the election. I like him a lot, and I like hearing from him. I know he's grown a lot. But I think it's going to take a lot of hard work from him to regain the confidence of all Dems.