From Bill Richardson, governor of New Mexico and Democratic candidate for president, in an opinion column in the Washington Post:
In the most recent debate, I asked the other candidates how many troops they would leave in Iraq and for what purposes. I got no answers. The American people need answers. If we elect a president who thinks that troops should stay in Iraq for years, they will stay for years -- a tragic mistake.
Clinton, Obama and Edwards reflect the inside-the-Beltway thinking that a complete withdrawal of all American forces somehow would be "irresponsible." On the contrary, the facts suggest that a rapid, complete withdrawal -- not a drawn-out, Vietnam-like process -- would be the most responsible and effective course of action.
....
My position has been clear since I entered this race: Remove all the troops and launch energetic diplomatic efforts in Iraq and internationally to bring stability. If Congress fails to end this war, I will remove all troops without delay, and without hesitation, beginning on my first day in office.
Let's stop pretending that all Democratic plans are similar. The American people deserve precise answers from anyone who would be commander in chief. How many troops would you leave in Iraq? For how long? To do what, exactly? And the media should be asking these questions of the candidates, rather than allowing them to continue saying, "We are against the war . . . but please don't read the small print."
Bravo, Bill Richardson. I absolutely agree. He's thrown down the gauntlet. He's challenged the other candidates to state plainly what they will do about Iraq. I challenge them, too. I want details from all of the candidates, not vague statements like, "Well, it's complicated." Dennis Kucinich has stated that he will bring all of the troops home, but what about the rest of them?
I put to them the question that John Kerry asked about the Vietnam War, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" Think about that, Democratic candidates, and tell us what you will do if you become president.
I have some issues supporting Richardson in general, but I must say he has been clear about this and in a very smart way, from the start!
ReplyDeleteFran, neither he nor Kucinich have much of a chance, and I have issues with Richardson, too, but maybe he and Dennis can shame the others into taking a position of getting us the hell out of Iraq and - in our dreams! - perhaps help the Iraqis begin to recover.
ReplyDeleteI have to say I don't yet know much about the candidates' overall positions -- but I do know that Richardson is right and that we should get out of Iraq. He says that rapid, complete withdrawal is the "most" responsible course of action. I think it is the only responsible course of action.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in fairness to at least some of the other candidates, I have to say that it is complicated. The current mess in Iraq was made by the irresponsible actions (of (in varying degrees) George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, and the "establishment" in general. The cleanup, including troop withdrawal, will have to be made under the leadership of a new president. How that can happen is indeed complicated.
Nevertheless, the declaration of intention by Richardson and by Kucinich is a very important witness.
Allen, I have no illusions that the withdrawal will be pretty. The aftermath of our departure will very likely be bloody, but I think that anything that resembles a return to normal functioning as a society cannot begin until we, as an occupying force, are out.
ReplyDeleteI agree completely, Mimi. As an occupying force we need to leave. And as you say, we need to help the Iraqis begin to recover -- and I agree that's an "in our dreams" proposition.
ReplyDeleteAllen, I'm getting obsessed again, but people are dying and our leaders are lying, telling us that things are getting better, when clearly - at least to me - they are not.
ReplyDeleteI rather like the thought of President Richardson - well on that issue at least.
ReplyDeleteOver here, many anti war campaigners are putting faith in Obama but I get the impression that he is equivocating at present.
Whatever, I don't want a repeat of 2,000 when I went to sleep with ahappy glow thinking Shrub had been weeded, only to wake up to news of chads et al putting him into the big house. Please nothing like that again!
Turbulent Cleric, I may be busted for speaking ill of Democrats, but both Clinton and Obama look Republican-lite to me. I hasten to add that I am registered as a Democrat, and I will vote for either of them rather than a Republican.
ReplyDeleteI would not rule out hanky-panky in the voting process, but this time not with hanging chads, but with electronic voting machines, which I don't trust at all, unless a signed paper ballot is included in the process.
And on that we agree.
ReplyDeleteYoung Fogey, welcome.
ReplyDeleteWhat is it that we agree on? Clinton and Obama, or the voting machines? Or both?
Richardson for President is censoring blog postings from people who are asking him to help fight child sexual abuse
ReplyDeleteI am involved in helping a family whose daughter was sexually abused by her grandfather. Her name is Madison and she lives in El Paso, TX. The grandfather is a resident of Hobbs, NM. Judge William A. McBee of the Fifth Judicial District Court for Chaves, Eddy & Lea Counties in New Mexico recently awarded the grandfather unsupervised visitation with Madison, against the advice of Madison's therapist, who testified that the grandfather had, indeed, molested Madison. I have launched a campaign to get this decision reversed and to protect Madison.
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson advised Madison's father through his staffer, Elizabeth Osorio, that he wouldn't get involved to help Madison because her case is "too complex." Governor Richardson is running for President. How can he be trusted with the multitude of complex issues he would face as our President if the concept of protecting innocent children from pedophiles is "too complex" for him? I posted two blogs on the Richardson for President website, hoping to get some action on behalf of this child. Oh, I got action, all right. THEY DELETED MY BLOGS AND DISABLED MY ACCOUNT. I immediately set up a new account and reposted my comments, but the new blog was deleted and the new account was disabled. This has not only happened to me, but to several other users, as well, all for posting comments on this topic.
Here are the deleted blogs and disabled accounts:
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/akbooher
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/annebooher
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/amiedavis
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/amycaudillo
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/candicetschauner
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/mistyperkins
Please look into this. It's bad enough that Richardson isn't interested in helping protect a five year-old child that was sexually molested in his state, but now he's trying to censor those of us who DO want to help. This is NOT anyone who should ever be the president of this great nation.
Thank you,
Anne Booher
http://www.petitiononline.com/Madison/petition.html
http://www.geocities.com/campaign4madison/C4M.html
akbooher@hotmail.com