Kerry & Feingold to offer amendment with deadline to redeploy US troops

[rox63]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 19, 2006
CONTACTS: April Boyd, 202-224-4159
Zach Lowe, 202-224-8657

John Kerry and Russ Feingold to Offer Amendment with Deadline to Redeploy U.S. Combat Troops From Iraq

Tomorrow John Kerry, Russ Feingold and Barbara Boxer will offer an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill that sets a deadline of July 1, 2007, for U.S. troops to be redeployed out of Iraq, for purposes of strengthening U.S. national security and increasing the Iraqis’ ability to establish stability throughout their country.

Below is a joint statement from John Kerry and Russ Feingold:

“For three years, Congress has played political games while the war in Iraq has gone on unchecked and unending. With the administration’s failure to offer a coherent or effective strategy in Iraq, it is long past time for Congress to offer a plan to redeploy our troops so we can give Iraq its best chance at stability, and refocus on al Qaeda and the terrorist networks that threaten the security of all Americans.

“We must redeploy to succeed – and we will put this national security imperative to a test in the United States Senate this week. We need a deadline for the redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq. A deadline gives Iraqis the best chance for stability and self-government, and most importantly, it allows us to begin refocusing on the true threats that face our country.

“Our amendment recognizes the need to keep an over-the-horizon military presence in the Middle East to fight al Qaeda and its affiliates and protect regional security interests. Only troops essential to finishing the job of training Iraqi forces, conducting targeted counter-terrorist operations and protecting U.S. facilities and personnel should remain inside Iraq. The president also must move immediately to work with the Iraqis to convene a summit of Iraq’s neighbors and the international community to forge a lasting political settlement to give all Iraqis a stake in the new Iraq.

“A strong national security policy begins with recognizing that our massive presence in Iraq weakens our security and gives Iraqi politicians a crutch to avoid creating stability in their country. As long as 130,000 U.S. troops remain in Iraq indefinitely, that country will remain what a series of mistakes have made it -- a crucible for the recruitment and development of terrorists determined to fight Americans and an obstacle to an Iraqi government capable of governing and securing its country. Our troops have done their job in Iraq. It is time to redeploy – to help increase stability in Iraq, and more importantly, to strengthen the national security of the United States.”

The goal of the Kerry-Feingold plan is to undermine the insurgency by simultaneously pursing a political settlement and the redeployment of American forces. Their plan calls requires:

• The redeployment of U.S. combat troops out of Iraq by July 1, 2007.



• Only U.S. troops essential to completing the mission of standing up Iraqi security forces, conducting targeted counter-terrorist operations and protecting U.S. personnel and facilities would remain. President Bush has repeatedly said that when Iraqis stand up, we will stand down. However, that has not been happening. So far, the Iraqis have trained 265,600 security forces – just 7,000 shy of the Bush administration’s stated goal of 272,566. Yet just a few weeks ago, the Pentagon announced that they are sending 3,500 additional U.S. troops from Kuwait to Iraq.



• The United States to maintain an over-the-horizon military presence to prosecute the war on terror and protect regional security interests. /li]
  
  
• The President to work with the new Iraqi government to convene a summit that includes those leaders, the leaders of the governments of each country bordering Iraq, representatives of the Arab League, the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, representatives of the European Union, and leaders of the governments of each permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, to reach a comprehensive political agreement for Iraq that addresses fundamental issues including federalism, oil revenues, the militias, security guarantees, reconstruction, economic assistance and border security.



• The Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on how U.S. troops will be withdrawn from Iraq by July 1, 2007.

# # #

[LSparkle]

1. Heard Boxer is a co-sponsor too

YEEEEEAAAAHHHHH!

[chill_wind]

2. Kick kick kick.

and recommend.

[blm]

4. This is just the kind of uniform voice the withdrawal plan needed.

I am so happy they are JOINING FORCES to speak out together. Any action works better with more voices on the same page, taking on the same battle.

[flpoljunkie]

5. Two senators with the guts to stand up and speak out for the troops best

interests as well as for our country. And thanks to the gutsy Barbara Boxer for joining them. Let's hope their resolution garners more votes than the one put forward by the despicable Mitch McConnell last week.

[LittleClarkie]

3. Why do the Democrats hate America?

If my morning radio guy says that one more damn time...

[Patchuli]

23. I wish you would ask him! nt

[Tiggeroshii]

6. Kerry/Feingold

...I like the sound of that

[politicasista]

7. kick!

:kick:

[globalvillage]

8. Great news.

I can hardly wait till tomorrow.
Wonder how many votes they pick up with the July compromise? I know they wanted sooner.

Kerry, Feingold and Boxer! I love 'em!
:patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[bklyncowgirl]

9. It's nice to see two prosepective rivals acting like grownups.

I'm glad they came together on this--it shows a maturity that we don't often see in politics where oneupsmanship is the byword.

[fedupinBushcountry]

10. Very good to see indeed

this isn't about politics, its about doing whats right.

[TayTay]

11. It is good to see Sens. Feingold, Boxer and Kerry working together

for the good of the country and against this immoral war. I hope that more Democrats can get behind this sound amendment and show that there are people in the Senate who have heard the American people and are responding to their concerns. As Jack Murtha pointed out last week, Congress isn't fighting this war, only a select group of Americans, away from comfortable air-conditioned offices and cozy conference rooms are fighting this war.

We need Senators who hear the voices of those who are doing the actual fighting and who have said that the US has done it's job militarily and it's time for the troops to go home. Bravo to all brave Senators for doing this and becoming the subject of RW derision, scorn and mockery.

[karynnj]

24. I love that too - this is way to important

for the two of them to have dueling amendments when they are actually pretty much in agreement. Can they high light the diplomatic piece on Biden's copy so he actually reads it this time.

I am glad they are putting the soldiers and country ahead of ego.

[Olney Blue]

12. The repugs were skewering Kerry on Hardball tonight on the date

changing from end of 2006 to July, 2007. Why did the date change?

[LittleClarkie]

13. Some negotiation we're not privy to?

Perhaps it came from Boxer or Feingold. So why skewer Kerry, I wonder? It's not his original amendment. It's a joint effort.

Hmm. Or perhaps an attempt to avoid the mid-terms.

[Olney Blue]

16. They framed it as Kerry being unstable and a sure sign that the Dems

are unfit to run this war. Norah O'D said that they would have to get Kerry on
to Harpballs to explain himself. It was a disgusting show of bias against the Dems (but what else is new?)

[LittleClarkie]

17. He will have to make the rounds in the media I think

to push the thing.

[Mass]

18. I agree - He definitively have to explain that on the media, because these

idiots will skewer him (from the right and the left).

[TayTay]

19. Well Kerry is reported to be on Imus tomorrow morning

that should start some sort of explanation process going. He should also do other radio and media, as should Sens. Feingold and Boxer.

I see it as a compromise move that takes the more recent Iraqi statements into view, but I should like to hear this from original sources as well.

[Olney Blue]

20. Thanks for the heads up about the Imus appearance- I will watch it.

[jillan]

22. ugh - Imus!

Sometimes I just want to throw something at the tv at him.
As in the last time Kerry was on.

[LittleClarkie]

25. Oh good. Imus and he make for good radio!

I loved the last Imus interview. I think they have an affinity for each other, and Imus definitely seems to have an affection for Kerry.

[karynnj]

27. Some times - the December 2005 interview when

Kerry actually stopped in (because he was in NYC and Secacus NJ is very close) was very good. The call in on St Patrick's Day was awful - Imus was in Boston. Roomney was there too with some of his followers. Imus made several comments about how good Romney was and how well liked he appeared to be in Boston. He claimed Kerry was disliked in Boston and Imus was pretty rude. (though considering what he calls Hillary and Gore - Kerry gets off lightly.)

[TayTay]

14. Probably because the circumstances changed

Probably because some Senators said they might support the Amendment if the date was a little more flexible. I can guess on other circumstances, but it's just a guess. (The Iraqis have been talking about asking for a timed withdrawal. They could have picked this date as well. The Sens proposing this would then put an end date more in line with what the Iraqis thought was doable.)

It doesn't mean we can't begin to withdraw troops before then and the main logical points still stand.

[Mass]

15. Probably because they hope that they will get a little more support.

I doubt circumstances changed since last week, but they probably thought that it was more important to get some democrats on record on the notion of deadline.

[blm]

21. Because Bush never moved on the original plan - and just logistics take at

least 6 months if you're in a burning hurry, but, usually closer to 10-12 months.

[Olney Blue]

26. Makes sense, but that rationale explanation did not get mentioned.

Only that it shows once again that Dems are incompetent..... :grr: