It's Time to Make a Choice in Iraq

Yesterday, twelve former Army captains wrote that short of reinstating the draft, "our best option is to leave Iraq immediately." In an extraordinary editorial in the Washington Post, these captains--all of whom served in Iraq--made it clear that we need to end this war and we need to end it now. They wrote that a " scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war and it will spend more blood and treasure on a losing proposition."

I strongly urge every American to read this important report from those who served in the failed conflict in Iraq. Army captains are the staff officers who plan operations against insurgent strongholds. They are the company commanders who lead our soldiers through the streets of Baghdad. And they are the soldiers who will direct our withdrawal from Iraq.

These men and women know the score. They know that we must leave Iraq. As they put it, "It's time to make a choice." Americans are fed up with the President's stalling and Congressional failure to act. Frankly, it is well past time we make a choice. And the only responsible choice left to us is to get all of our troops out of Iraq, with no residual forces left behind--no combat forces, no non-combat forces. As President, I will do it. I will get all of our troops out within a year after I take office - sooner if we can get it done safely.

The other major candidates in this race have said--again and again--that they will not. Senators Edwards, Obama, and Clinton have all refused to commit to getting all of our troops out of Iraq by 2013. None of them are willing to be clear about removing all troops - combat and non-combat. It's unbelievable. Are they looking at the same war the rest of us are? Furthermore, they are all advocating precisely the sort of scaled withdrawal that these twelve captains are warning against. It doesn't make any sense. Real leadership is about making the tough choices, and knowing when it is time to make bold moves. Now is the time for action, not hesitation. Ending this war requires real change, not more incrementalism.

Ending this war is the most important issue of our time. And it is the fundamental difference between me and Senators Edwards, Obama, and Clinton. I will end the war; they will not. I will get all of our troops out; they will leave troops behind indefinitely. I will order a safe and rapid withdrawal and have our troops out within a year. They have proposed a long, protracted withdrawal that will only increase the danger to our fighting men and women and drag out the war.

2013 is six years from now - six years. In six years, will we have lost 6,000 men and women in Iraq? 10,000? More? In six years will this be a $2 trillion mistake? Or $3 trillion? The war has been going on for four and half years already. Six years from now, we will have been there for more than a decade. Are you okay with that? I'm not.

The choice in Iraq is clear. We need to get all our troops out quickly. We need to end this war for real. Go to getourtroopsout.com to join Americans across the country in calling for a quick, clear, responsible end to the war in Iraq.

Comments

[glitz]

The mentality that states, "we have to win to honor those we have lost" is the same mentality we saw during Viet Nam. What is winning in Iraq? How many more lives have to be destroyed? Every point made by this administration is hollow told to a survivor of a loved one lost, told to a wife teaching her husband how to walk without legs, or told to a mother caring for her brain injured son, or told to a soldier replaying mental Hell every day. These troops, now serving, volunteered to fight an enemy who attacked us..that enemy is not in Iraq. We are creating new enemies there and in the region the longer we stay.

We voted for this new Democratic Congress to remove our troops from Iraq. Most now agree that we are still there to secure the oil and therefore refuse to end the fiasco until the oil is secure in American contracts. The American public has to decide just how much in dollars and lives they are willing to pay. I also have to ask...why do you want this job?? There is nothing that has been accomplished by this administration to improve America...and for Americans. Which fights are you willing to take on? There's allot to choose from.

[UltraClassic]

Hate to break it to you Bill but 12 signatures from 12 army captains does not provide a bases for US policy.

I can at the drop of a hat provide countless more names of officers in Iraq that feel quite differently than these 12 army captains.

[glitz]

From the beginning of this war..what was the Policy?? What makes you think there is a US Policy now? Soldiers and officers do not determine policy. The officers in Iraq are only concerned with their mission at the moment. None of them can promote opinion until they are no longer active duty. The only thing that seems appropriate to say is an old Army term.."PROPER PRIOR PLANNING PREVENTS PISS POOR PERFORMANCE".

[TankerRat]

Hey glitz. In the Corps we called it Piss Poor Planning Presents Problems.

Same thing though.

[hopeless277]

Please do so.

[Cassandra2]

Please do. We'd all love to see anyone actually serving in Iraq who thinks we have any shot at all of "winning" this particular quagmire.

If there are so many, how about a real "volunteer" army? Anyone who wants to stay, stay; anyone who wants to leave, leave. Fair enough?

[Ben Dixon]

You are correct, 12 Army Captains do not provide the bases for US policy, however, I would listen to them before I listen to someone who has never served or even been to Iraq. But they are correct in thier assessment that of the three opitions we faced (go big, go long, go home) that go home is the porbablly the best choice. Going big won't happen unless there is a draft (something this country is to weak to stomach), and going long dosn't provide enough troops to fix Iraq with out breaking the Army. There for the only logical opition left is swallow our pride, go home, and prepare for the fall out of our decision.

[animalhamilton]

I thank you, Mr. Richardson, for remaining so outspoken and against the war, please keep up the good fight.

[VeniceDave]

Not only is the choice is Iraq is clear, but Bill Richardson's position is the clearest on Iraq. Katrina Vanden Huevel said it best: "Only Bill Richardson is showing clarity with regards to the Iraq War, and the voters are responding."
One of my favorite quotes is Josh Lyman in the West Wing:
"The country's waiting for someone to step up. It should be us."
Our answer for our involvement in Iraq, our answer for educating our future from kindergarten through college, our answer for universal health care for all Americans, our answer for restoring the middle class, our answer to combatting global climate change must be clear and decisive.
Bill Richardson is providing that type of leadership, presidential caliber leadership.

[mamacat]

Thank you Gov. Richardson for being a consistent voice for sanity. Good luck to you, and to us.

[Vexed]

Sanity and clarity!?!? Here's the guy who wants to stop construction of the border fence and who defended Gonzo because "he was hispanic"... Just what kinda President are we going to have who uses as his barometer whether someone is hispanic...

[AmandaM]

Richardson said he was more inclined to give Gonzalez the benefit of the doubt because they are both Hispanic and that's a rarity in this government. But he also doesn't have any real influence on what happens to Gonzalez since he's a governor.

Also, a border fence achieves what, exactly? We already have fences in some areas and they aren't stopping immigrants from crossing the border. They'll dig tunnels underneath or find ways to scale the fence or they'll start coming across the Gulf of Mexico. A 1000 mile long fence is a huge waste of time and money. How do you propose to maintain it? Will it include a staff of guards to monitor what can and can't cross the fence? And where do you think the money will come from to build it in the first place?

The most practical solution to our immigration problem has 3 main parts. First, since the majority of the illegal immigrants cross through Mexico, we need to find a way to hold the Mexican government accountable and to help them provide for their own population. Second, we have to crack down on employers of illegal immigrants. Take away the jobs and you take away their reason to come here. And third, we need to reform our current legal immigration policies so that we are better able to track who comes into the country. If we allow for more legal immigrants, make the process less complex, and reduce the waiting period, we'll have fewer people crossing illegally.

[AmandaM]

Thank you, Governor Richardson, for your sanity and your clarity. Thank you for saying what needs to be said and for being right about the war. Good luck in the primaries - you have my vote!

[Nonamnesiac]

Richardson/Clinton would be a good ticket in 2008. Clinton/anyone would not be a good ticket. Progressives may want to delude themselves, but Hillary now has three strikes against her -- voting for the original Iraq resolution -- refusing to commit to leaving Iraq by 2013 (2013???????????) -- voting to give Bush more credibiility on the Kyl-Lieberman "let's-attack-Iran' resolution.

She will continue to prosecute and expand the war in the Middle East.

Three strikes and you're OUT!!!!!!!!!!!! Just say "NO" to Hillary for President.

[Paul]

What's worse is Hillary will feel obliged to prove that a woman President can be a "War President", so withdrawal will be off the table.

Richardson/Clark combines the diplomatic and military expertise we need to get out of Iraq safely.

[TankerRat]

I will support no ticket that bears the name Clinton in any position. Period. End of Story. A Richardson/Edwards ticket or reverse thereof I could support. Also such people as Biden, Kucinich, etc as cabinet officers.

[AuntSally]

Just going off the title here:

It's way, waay, waaay, waaaayyyyyy past time to make a choice on Iraq...

[Paul]

Good points Governor.

It is a mystery why you are not in the top tier of Democratic candidates.

Good luck.

[NotAConspiracyTheorist]

One reason for that is the MSM has already decided who they want to cover. Evidently they can only count to 3. Another big factor could be that the Repugs keep talking about Hilary this and Hilary that. The major players on the Right see Hilary's nomination as their only chance of winning by playing off her negatives. A passionate outsider like Richardson would be impossible for them to counter. Therefore the moguls running the media don't want to give him any exposure.

[Merrysunshine]

His stance is exactly why he's not in the top-tier.

[mjkblog]

It's no mystery, just ask the Traditional Media, who have been force-feeding us their top three candidates for months now. It is going to take us, the Governor's supporters, to get his name into the top tier, by being outspoken critics of the Traditional Media's horserace mentality, and of the other candidates' positions on Iraq, Health Care, and Education. Gov. Richardson needs us to get his message out to everyone we can reach. Hand-wringing and blog-ranting will not do it.

Do not settle for the Media's nominee (Hillary). Tell the Media who OUR nominee is.

[TankerRat]

Another well stated post mjk. I've been doing this myself for some time. Glad to see you aboard.

[TankerRat]

MSM is why Paul. Who do you think controls them.