Iraq: The Real Cost of War Can't Be Ignored

At each stop I make in this campaign, there are a lot of issues that I can talk about. Right now, too many Americans are worried about keeping their jobs, keeping their homes, and making sure their kids have quality education and quality health care.

But there is one issue that I believe is the linchpin to everything we want to do in a post-Bush world:

Ending the war in Iraq.

Some of my fellow candidates have decided to stop talking about Iraq. I'm not sure if they think the surge is working, or just that their polls tell them it is simpler and safer to follow the media's lead and just forget our brave troops and what this war is costing us.

Well, I believe that "easy" isn't necessarily right, so even if I'm the only person speaking the truth on this issue, I'm not going to stop.

I'm going to keep talking about ending this war and getting all of our troops out every chance I get.

The fact is, we cannot move forward on any of the issues that matter until we extract ourselves from this black hole that is robbing us of precious lives, money and time.

And we simply can't wait until 2013 to get this done.

Some of my fellow Democrats are willing to leave troops in Iraq for 5 years or longer -- the Republicans are talking decades -- yet still think we can make the dramatic changes here at home we need. But spending $10 billion a month on a war and working towards universal health care, building a new energy economy, and ending our dependence on foreign oil is an equation that doesn't add up.

It doesn't add up financially.

It doesn't add up morally.

It doesn't add up for America.

A few weeks ago, my campaign launched a very strong website www.2013istoolate.com which details the core problem I have with the Iraq plans of Senator Edwards, Clinton and Obama -- they won't even commit to getting all of our troops out of Iraq by 2013 -- almost five years from now.

And today, I'm proud that we've released another TV ad to bring attention back to this issue.

I'm going to do everything I can to make sure we don't forget this war, and forget what we need to do to end it.

Ending the war means getting all the troops out -- there is no room for rhetorical hair-splitting. We're either in or we're out. Now, or the war continues.

We hadn't planned on this, but I'm glad today is the day this ad is coming out -- because just yesterday Congress lost another chance to end this war, choosing instead to once again give Bush what he needs to draw out this tragedy even longer.

Where is the leadership? Just this week, with the fight over telecom immunity, we saw what can happen when a single Senator shows up and stands up for what's right, and yet, yesterday four senators in this race who say they oppose the war -- Senators Obama, Clinton, Dodd and Biden -- were all away while the president got what is essentially another blank check.

This Congress was elected to end this war and they have once again failed to stand up to President Bush. Yesterday, they didn't even show up ready to fight.

With a long history of repelling occupying forces, the people of the Middle East are very sensitive to foreign occupation. So long as U.S. troops occupy those lands, millions of Iraqis and those in surrounding nations will see American troops as jihadist propaganda portrays us -- as occupiers there to repress them and plunder their oil. If we want them to believe we won't occupy Iraq indefinitely, then we need to act like we won't -- and get our troops out.

In addition, our presence in Iraq perpetuates Iraq's political stalemate and undermines political reconciliation. As long as U.S. troops are there, the Iraqi factions have every incentive to jockey for power, rather than to reconcile and compromise.

As president, I will get all of our troops out, and I will get them out my first year in office.

A slow redeployment over many years would only prolong the suffering of Iraqis, and delay the process of reconciliation and reconstruction. The longer we take to redeploy, the longer our troops are in harm's way. While redeployment must be done carefully, as determined by our military leaders, to maximize political impact and minimize harm, we can't afford to drag it out over many years.

2013 is over five years from now. If we still have troops in Iraq in 2013, the Iraqis sure won't think the war is over. And neither will the American people.

I have profound differences with my opponents.

Senator Edwards says he will remove combat troops, but not necessarily non-combat troops, and not necessarily by 2013. This contradicts military doctrine that states non-combat troops must be withdrawn first with combat troops providing protection. Leaving non-combat troops behind will either turn them into combat troops or leave them as targets without any support.

Senators Obama and Clinton talk about ending the war, but when given the chance to commit to withdrawing troops by 2013, they both declined. They both say they will end the war, but I also remember hearing that when we elected a Democratic majority to Congress in 2006.

If we have a Democratic President willing to keep us in this war for five more years, what chance do we have of restoring our place in the world? Of creating real peace in the Middle East? Of having the diplomatic strength to broker peace in Darfur or Pakistan or North Korea?

If we have a Democratic President who is willing to keep us in this war for five more years, what hope do we have of funding full care for all of our veterans who have been injured and need our help?

What hope do we have of giving health insurance to children? Of paying teachers a living wage? Of dealing with global warming?

I think the answer speaks for itself.

I won't stop talking about Iraq, because you can't talk about solving any problem we face without talking about Iraq. We can't forget that.

Read several of the Governor's past posts on Iraq here, here and here.

Comments

[Vajara]

Way to go Governor Richardson. You have been persistent and unwavering about bringing our troop home and ending our participation in this religious war. There is no end in sight and we continue to fund and support war, not our troops. I hope others will listen to you as all of the "R's" are war mongers and will support any and every war. Seems that their corporations are benefiting while America continues to suffer.

Thanks, Bill...you are the best!!!

[irishgawdess]

Dear Governor Richardson,

I appreciate your position on ending the conflict in Iraq.

Whenever I've heard you speak on this topic though, I'm reminded about the support afforded to the nuclear and defense industries by your state of New Mexico. If you had been outspoken previously, it would have been in direct conflict with the defense contractors located in NM. NM must receive millions of dollars in taxes from corporations such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Honeywell, all part of the Military Industrial Complex (MIC), the number one industry in America today. Yet, it concerns me that New Mexico is the third poorest state in America; what can American citizens expect from you as president of the United States?

How do you explain your proposed plan to include nuclear energy in your "aggressive clean energy platform?" Nuclear energy is not "clean," and the issue of dumping nuclear waste safely has not been resolved. Many Americans want to move away from our dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear power towards renewable and clean sources of energy, i.e. solar, wind, and biofuels. Does the inclusion of nuclear power in your energy plan have anything to do with the fact that last August, "Louisiana Energy Services began building a uranium enrichment plant, which will use thousands of centrifuge­s... to convert uranium 235 into fuel for nuclear power plants"?

To be honest, I don't see you ending the conflict in Iraq if you were to become our next president, Governor Richardson. You’ve been too closely entwined with the nuclear and fossil fuel industries for years. Plus, you would have to divest yourself of all personal holdings and positions to avoid any conflict of interest.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, as of 10/29/2007 you have raised $18,699,937 in campaign funds. How much of the total amount is related to your support of fossil fuels and nuclear energy?

Respectfully,
(real name withheld)

Sources:
"Is Bill Richardson Radioactive?" http://www.progressive.org/mag_paskus1207

2008 Presidential Race, Contributions. Center for Responsive Politics http://opensecrets.org/pres08/

[bsuzz]

Thank you for remembering our brave and patient troops. And thank you for stating your views confidently and without triangulation.

We were duped into believing the new democratic congress would stand up to the Bush administration. Weren't we promised "No more blank checks?". Yet they gave the president 2 of those in the past year?

The “top” few candidates don’t seem intent on bringing peace to the world. I’m not happy with the current “wars” polluting our society. We need someone who will address the serious issue of bringing our troops home so they will cease to be targets in a civil war our current president caused and restore our peaceful standing in the world.

The senators running for president place a higher priority on their lofty aspirations than their jobs of protecting us and guiding this country in a safe and prosperous direction. Ignoring the multiple threats caused by our unwelcome presence in Iraq by not voting against this occupation's funding without a specific withdrawal date is not representing me. I know that no matter how badly I wanted to be president, I would NOT miss THAT vote. Even if I didn't have a chance of making a difference, my conscious wouldn't allow me to miss it. Governor Richardson is laying out his concern for our troops and plan for their withdrawal - just as I would.

This election will be the most important election of my life. This primary process is getting ugly. The Karl Rove inspired whisper campaigns have started. It is up to citizens to learn about our candidates without being distracted by scandalous headlines and snide remarks made by paid talking heads. It will be difficult to ignore all the deception, distortions and lies. We must choose the person who truly best represents who we are. The future of our country is riding on the character and esteem of our next president. Since my dream of President Gore reclaiming his rightful place as our leader is dashed, I have to start looking for the next best. Governor Richardson has impressed me with this essay.

[Plowboy]

The Neocans have used the Republicans up completely. And that explains why they have migrated to the Democrats. There are sell-outs there to be used yet.
In fact some are now seemingly trying to outBush Bush.
Let's stick with an American candidate who will be a great -- and moral! -- American president.

Why does the MSM ignore the best candidate? Because of who owns and controls the MSM. It is timme to take America back from them, and to take their illused powewr from them.

[OETKB]

It is more than obvious that by experience, training, and accomplishments Governor Richardson should be the President of the United States. Others may bumble into the right path but to sculpt the most optimistic one we need someone who knows what they are doing.

Anyone who supports his candidacy needs to help out in Iowa and NH at the grass roots level if they can. As Dick Gregory once said, "If you not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem."

[realitytrumpsbull]

Um, Bill? Where's the violin? If you support
ending the war, why not just stand up and say,
"I support ending the war, ASAP"? What's
your angle, what's your deal, how much money
does your state make per DAY off of the war?
It all boils down to money, Bill.

[PaulAbrams]

The Gov is, of course, correct. He doesn't even mention that the British have left Southern Iraq, 100 militias strong, with a REDUCTION in violence by 90%, and that the British inter-party defence committee decided there was no reason to leave troops behind.

For those promoting the "Biden approach", I think it is important for you all to understand that Biden too could not commit to having troops out by 2013; that his plan, while perhaps a great idea, is irrelevant if WE try to impose it, and that Richardson has endorsed it IF and ONLY IF the Iraqis want it.

Thus, for those who understand that this war is being pursued just for the vanity of Bush and Cheney, and that the outcome is not going to be determined by the US military, and that whenever we leave, the situation will have to sort itself out where we can help, perhaps, but not dictate...­.. i.e., for those who think we should not sacrifice more lives, limbs or money awaiting Iraqi politicians to decide to resolve their difference­s...Biden is not your answer. Again, that is NOT to argue against his plan, it IS to argue against the US imposing it, or the US sticking around to 2013 to see that it happens.

[lisakaz]

I understand their reluctance for a committment BUT I am so sick of this craven toady Congress and this criminal WH than I cannot stand it anymore. I wanna punch someone.

[getoffmedz]

Dear Governor Richardson - Every attempt made by the administration to stabilize Iraq has failed. The Iraqi want us OUT!

Don't let the administration take credit for recent progress in Northern Iraq. They had nothing to do with it.

Iraqi PRTs [provincial reconstruction teams] instituted by the Iraqi government are working successfully - bringing prosperity, are creating jobs and facilitating political reconciliation between militant factions in many parts of Iraq especially in the North. (Where the Turk threatens to destabilize everything, btw.)

Incidentally, these PRTs were completely rejected by the U.S two years ago but the Iraqi parliament went ahead despite U.S. interference to make them work, anyway.

The faster the U.S. leaves Iraq, the faster the Iraqi will solve the huge mess we have caused them.

There is no longer any justification to remain.

And you will restore trust and integrity to the office of the (Vice) President.

[recoveringrepublican]

As part of the Clinton posse, your strategy to siphon serious anti-war voters away from the TRUE anti-war candidate, Obama, is brilliant. I suppose, in Iowa, your precinct captains will then encourage your supporters to caucus for Hillary after you are eliminated for not reaching the 15% threshold.

While I admire the strategy of the Richardson / Clinton plan, as an anti-war activist, I am deeply dismayed at your cynicism. What you write about the war is true, which is why it is imperative that Obama wins and Hillary loses. Hillary voted for this war in the first place, and was the LAST democratic contender to shift away from support. Her current Iraq policy calls for a large permanent continuation of the conflict. Moreover, Hillary has intimated that she supports escalating the conflict by attacking Iran. This is why Murdoch and other conservatives love her. In contrast, Obama's position on Iraq and Iran has been consistent. He opposed the Iraq war, wants us to get out now, and opposes military action against Iran.

I hope your supporters come to realize that a vote for you is in fact a vote for Hillary, and is therefore a vote to escalate the war in Iraq.

[outnow]

The "surge is working" propaganda is swallowed by most Americans. That's why we are not hearing much about the war from the media or the candidates.

Bill Richardson is one of the most qualified candidates. He will end the war and prevent us from the next folly. America needs a new foreign policy. The greatest threat is from within.

Many Americans have also bought into the argument that Colin Powell made - "you broke it you fix it." The pottery barb rule was created by one of the generals who lent his name to the effort to break it. How about New Rules - those who lied us into the war should have to pay out of their own pockets to fix the mess they created?

I advocate a new law that makes it a crime to lie us into war and awards monetary damages, attorneys fees and costs to the plaintiff who can prove that the war was a "lie."

Moving off shore or declaring bankruptcy would not immunize the defendant. Halliburton, are you listening?

[research]

Bill, I very very respectfully disagree. While congress must not allow another dollar for the war, more importantly, we must begin impeachment trials.

Don'thave the 67 senate votes? ok. But you have plenty of democrats in the house to start the impeachment trials.

Instead of the Bush$Co smirking in your face, destroying evidence and ignoring your subpoenas, the president is constitutionally required to turn over documents in an impeachment trial.

The evidence will force the senate to convict.

If we let them get away with it, we will have generations of fanatical rethugs emulating their example.

The bullshit failed Clinton impeachment didn't hurt the rethugs either.

Is there too much self incriminated evidence of democratic graft? Is congress so corrupt that everyone except a few "fools" like Kucinich are on the take? This is what many Americans are now considering.

Don't let the proof we should have impeached be WW III.

[robrit]

Bill can also add the cost of oil to his cost of war.

The Congressional Budget Office says that the cost of the war in 2006 was around $54 Bn. Iraq oil exports in 2006 were rported as 521 million barrels. (Before the war it was twice this rate). If you divide the cost of the war by oil production you get $103 war cost per barrel.

So if our Iraq war investment was to protect this oil source, this insurance comes at a cost of $103 a barrel - in effect doubling the current cost of oil out of Iraq. In addition Iraq is now only producing 50% of what Saddam did, so this cost doesn't include what reducing the annual global supply by 521 million barrels has done for the global price of oil.

Sounds like expensive insurance to me.

[ProgressivePartisan]

Governor Richardson you are completely on message with regards to the bush-created catastrophe in Iraq and its far reaching consequences. It CANNOT be allowed to continue past that glorious day when the current administration's term is concluded.
If ending the U.S. presence in Iraq is no longer one of THE 3 most important issues for the Democrats vying for the 2008 Presidential nomination - along with the economy and health care - it is because they have callously and calculatedly chosen to cease talking about it ... with the complete support of the mainstream media.
The Democratic Party is making a serious miscalculation in assuming that Independents, Progressives, and anti-neocon Republicans are going to blindly follow their "same old, same old" "cram it down our throats" choice come next November. We are sick to death of being taken for granted!!!!!
I personally support you and I never miss an opportunity to urge others to check out your stand on the important issues as well as your impressive resume.
Wish you the best, Governor!

[GuiltyByStander]

Thanks to Richardson and Biden for keeping the Iraq war front and center. I find it really disturbing that the media are now wandering off to blather about the economy as if it is a separate issue. The war has huge, daily and direct costs and there are multiplied by interest on the debt we are building to support them. None of this offers an investment value. And that's just the economic, not the more fundamental moral problem.

Biden calls the war "the boulder in the road" and Richardson calls it "the linchpin". They're both on the right track.