Only Richardson went so far as to say no troops should be left in Iraq.

[bigtree]

"All the candidates agreed the war should end. But only New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson went so far as to say no troops should be left in Iraq. The other candidates all supported some number of U.S. troops remaining in the country for different periods of time.

"We must end this war," Richardson said. "This is what I would do if were president today. I would withdraw all of our troops, including residual troops, by the end of this calendar year."

http://www.heraldonline.com/109/story/16328.html

[John Q. Citizen]

1. Kucinich's bill HR 1234 would do the same. His plan calls on the US

to announce a total and complete withdrawal and a US funded UN peace keeping force to come in as US troops leave.

He advocates that the US has a responsibilty to clean up our mess.

[hang a left]

2. What is a "residual" troop?

Is that a private contractor?

[bigtree]

3. I believe so

"lock stock and barrel, he's said."

from Move On.org Virtual Town Hall Meeting on Iraq: http://pol.moveon.org/townhall/iraq/transcripts_p.html

Here’s my position on Iraq and it’s not on the one hand on the other hand, benchmarks, etc… if I were President today, I would withdraw American troops by the end of this calendar year. I would have no residual force whatsoever.

What I would do coupled with that withdrawal, using the leverage of an American withdrawal of forces, would be to convene two very strong diplomatic initiatives, two diplomatic conferences. One, in a US-led effort to get the three entities, the three religious groups, the three sects, the Sunni, the Shia, the Kurds… to put them in a room and I would say, there’s gonna be a coalition government, you’re gonna divide up oil revenues, you’re gonna divide up ministries, cabinet ministries, there’s gonna be three entities in Iraq, based on the Dayton Accords. And what I would do is have an Iraqi central government. Hopefully that would be Iraq’s future political structure.

{snip}

I am for a time table of withdrawal. I would be for a cut-off of appropriations. What I would do, however, is one step further: this Congress several years ago, the Republican Congress, authorized this war. I would pass a Congressional resolution, de-authorizing the war based on the War Powers Act. I served in Congress for 15 years. I believe this is the cleanest and quickest way to deal with this issue, otherwise we’re gonna be in endless debates, vetoes. I believe it’s important we proceed with cutting off funds and ending this war, but de-authorizing this war based on the War Powers Act, I believe, is the most important step.

In resolution de-authorizing the war, you have a clear timetable, I would prefer it this calendar year, but if March 2008 is what Congressional Democrats have come up with to get the most votes, so be it. But there would be benchmarks, there would be very clear timetable for withdrawal. I would not support anything beyond 2008 of March… I believe that is too long. There would not be a residual force.

What would then happen is the Bush administration would probably say, “We do not observe the War Powers Act.” The next step would then be to take this case to the US Supreme Court. I believe that is a clear, cleaner course and the thrust of the American people would be clear. The position of the American people would be clear, the Congress would be clear, and I believe it would be a 50/50 chance in the US Supreme court. I admire what Congress is doing… I think they need to be stronger, at the same time we have to look at how we can end this war as quickly as possible.

ELI PARISER: And now, one final question: Do you support efforts to keep large U.S.-based oil companies from retaining the rights to Iraqi oil fields?

GOVERNOR RICHARDSON: Well, this is a decision that would be made in that reconciliation conference that I said I would pursue. I believe this decision should be made by the Iraqi people. By the Sunni, the Shia, the Kurds… obviously, US leverage would be useful to try to obtain, but at the same time I think it’s important that we find ways to have a reconciliation process where oil revenues are divided. This is a major source of income… of economic development for Iraq, and I think it’s important to let the Iraqi people make this decision. If it’s the condition of the United States to have this kind of Iraqi control of oil fields by US companies, I would reject that. It’s what’s best for the Iraqi people, and we must let them make this decision in the context of an American withdrawal, in the context of a reconciliation conference of the three ethnic groups.

http://pol.moveon.org/townhall/iraq/transcripts_p.html

[hang a left]

4. sorry bigtree...

I still don't understand what a "residual troop" is.

[tblue]

5. I think it's the few left behind to assist in the transition.>> All the troops means ALL the troops.

But it's late and what do I know?

[bigtree]

7. he's obviously referring to the plans to leave

Bill Richardson: Withdrawl Means Withdrawal

Chris Bowers from MyDD talked to him. <1> Here are the highlights: http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/4/13/145545/540

* Apart from a contingent of marines to protect the American embassy, he does indeed mean "no residual force whatsoever." No American troops in Iraqi to serve as trainers, no American counter-terrorism units in Iraq, no American troops to protect humanitarian workers--no none of that. Also, since marines are part of every American embassy contingent, he did not consider that a residual force. He would keep American troops in the region, but not in Iraq itself.

* His rationale behind this plan is that no matter what residual American forces are doing in Iraq, they will both be targets and serve as one of the main justifications for continuing violence in the country. His solution is to convene a regional diplomatic conference, in which American withdrawal can be used as leverage, to bring in security forces from neighboring countries such as turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.

* Governor Richardson agreed when I asked him if he felt other candidates were being disingenuous when they claimed they were in favor of total withdrawal, but still wanted residual American military forces in Iraq to accomplish x, y, and z. He promised that is a distinction he would draw, and an issue he would repeatedly raise in public during the campaign. I told him that would probably help him quite a bit, looked forward to that issue being discussed, and thanked him for his time.

[Pastiche423]

6. Let's see...

Both Richardson and Kucinich want out of the war NOW, but only Richardson may tap James Baker III as Mideast envoy.

Not tough for me to decide.

[bigtree]

8. I still don't have a direct quote from him on that

just the word of the reporter from that Israeli rag.

What he is quoted as saying earlier is that he would expect Bush to send his own friend Baker to the ME; nothing about him personally choosing Baker as his envoy. I wouldn't be surprised if all of the hyperventilation on this turned out to be a case where he actually made nothing more than a restatement of the earlier quote.

[bigtree]

9. video: Richardson on Iraq

:kick:

http://video.msn.com/v/us/fv/fv.htm??g=8b0c330b-4927-44e7-9d35-19311f48ac05&f=34&fg=rss