The War in Iraq
As many of you saw in the email, Jon laid out a policy for Iraq today. A more complete description of his reasoning is available at TesterForSenate.com.
Feel free to use the comments thread here to discuss the stance.
Posted on Wednesday, November 9th, 2005 at 9:45 am. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The War in Iraq
“I support the war in Afghanistan, I support the War on Terror, and I fully support our troops in Iraq and everywhere they serve. However, President Bush was too quick to declare victory in Iraq, and he was unprepared for the insurgency that followed.
“It is time for the President to articulate a clear exit strategy for American troops from Iraq. An open-ended occupation is not in the best interests of the United States, the Iraqi people, or the Middle East. The time has come to support our troops by laying out a plan to bring them home.�
-Jon Tester
Background
On October 11, 2002, the U.S. Senate voted to authorize war with Iraq. That vote was based on evidence provided by the Bush Administration that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. We now know that the Administration’s evidence was not accurate.
The war in Iraq has diverted the United States from necessary missions in Afghanistan and against terror networks around the globe, drawing resources from these crucial fronts.
Our President and his advisers were too quick to declare victory and too slow to put together a successful strategy for containing the insurgency that followed. I believe it is improper and imprudent to enter a war without any idea of how to leave. But that is now the situation this Administration finds itself in in Iraq.
Our continued presence in Iraq is undermining National Security in four ways, creating a security gap here at home:
- By relying heavily on Reserve and National Guard units, the President has depleted our supply of first responders here at home, heavily undermining our ability to respond quickly and appropriately to domestic catastrophes. This problem was only highlighted by the all-too-slow response to Hurricane Katrina.
- By failing to provide a timeline for withdrawal in Iraq, the Administration has allowed insurgents in Iraq to portray the American presence there as an open-ended occupation. Providing an exit strategy will undermine the recruitment of terrorist networks in Iraq as well as place clear pressure on Iraqi leaders to take responsibility for governing their own nation.
- The continued cost of the war in Iraq, at $60 billion a year, is drawing resources away from Homeland Security, the War on Terror, and is exploding our deficit, undermining our economic security here at home.
- In addition to taking military and economic resources away from larger threats to American security, Iraq has distracted America’s attention from important threats, including terrorist networks like al Qaeda and nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran. The sooner we have a successful strategy in Iraq, the sooner we can turn our attention to these pressing dangers.
Some of our best retired generals who understand the situation in Iraq have argued that an exit strategy for American troops from Iraq by the end of 2006 is feasible and in the best interests of America.
The President and the U.S. Congress need to put a successful exit strategy in place to bring our troops home. Additionally, we need to consider redeploying some of these troops to Afghanistan and other critical fronts in the War on Terror.
The time has simply come for us to have a plan in Iraq so that our nation can turn its attention, and its economic and military resources, toward pressing economic and homeland security needs.
Posted on Wednesday, November 9th, 2005 at 9:45 am.
November 8th, 2005 at 8:11 pm
[…] […]
November 9th, 2005 at 12:27 pm
[…] Tester has come out with an official position on Iraq, which is nice for all those commenters demanding that he do so here. You can comment on his position in this thread at Tester Time. Generally, his stance seems reasonable to me, and his thoughts are fairly representative of my values, when it comes to Iraq. In short, his position is this: Iraq is too costly both to our soldiers and to our homeland security, and we need an exit strategy now. [link] […]
November 9th, 2005 at 3:42 pm
[…] John Tester has come out with his official position on Iraq. Same-same as most of the Dems in the Senate and certainly no “plan” to give Bush of what really should be done except the “make a timeline” prattle. […]
February 12th, 2006 at 2:26 pm
[…] It accuses Tester and Morrison of being unclear and silent on the issues, including Iraq. Citing articles by Cathy Siegner FROM AUGUST AND OCTOBER, it claims that Tester and Morrison have been silent on the Iraq War. Sure, I still don’t know what Morrison thinks, but it is clear what Tester’s position is. Wow, this seems pretty comprehensive. […]
March 9th, 2006 at 1:28 am
[…] My question is simple: what does Morrison stand for? I keep visiting his web site, scouring newspapers, and asking, but I have no idea what Morrison’s position on the Iraq War is. I called his campaign two days ago to ask that question, and was told “I’ll have to run that up the flagpole and get back to you.” Well, no one’s gotten back to me–and by now, shouldn’t his staff know? Shouldn’t the public? How can Montanan Democrats support a candidate who is silent on the central foreign policy question of the past three years–and likely the next five? I know what Paul Richards thinks about the Iraq War. I know what Jon Tester thinks. Before anyone is going to get my vote in 2006, they will need to have the courage to take a stand on this critical issue, not wait for public opinion to coalesce around one point of view. […]
April 25th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
[…] Conrad Burns is attacking the Democrats in this race for their positions on Iraq, accusing Morrison of not having one and saying Tester wants to take his focus off al Qaeda. Too bad for them Tester is actually saying the exact opposite: On October 11, 2002, the U.S. Senate voted to authorize war with Iraq. That vote was based on evidence provided by the Bush Administration that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. We now know that the Administration’s evidence was not accurate. […]
June 2nd, 2006 at 3:21 am
[…] IraqJon Tester has a more clearly articulated (and correct) position on the Iraq War. He has long supported a withdrawal plan by the end of 2006 and support for focusing our attention on true concerns: like the threat of Osama bin Laden, homeland security, and our economic interests. In contrast, Morrison has never moved past vague criticism of permanent bases in Iraq. He doesn’t even list the Iraq War, the most important foreign policy issue facing the nation today, on his issues page. The war matters, and voters deserve to know if we will have a Senator who will stand up to the neocon’s imperialist ambitions, or just go along. Jon Tester will fight for our security, and better treatment of the men and women in our armed services; what would Morrison do? […]