The 2008 campaign has begun, and the Democratic presidential candidates are competing for the support of the anti-war majority - that's us, folks!
It's extremely rare for progressives to be courted by Democratic leaders, so let's make them really compete for our votes by making our position clear:
1. Deny all funds for Bush's escalation
2. Use the Supplemental Appropriations to restrict all funds to safe withdrawal of our troops (Lee Amendment) attach a withdrawal timeline, even if Bush vetoes the bill
3. Support legislation for immediate redeployment of U.S. troops, to be completed by the end of 2007 using the funds already appropriated
4. Oppose continued U.S. occupation of Iraq beyond 2007
We will track the candidates' positions below. Please help us by contacting the campaigns (click on their names for the contact form). Ask them to state their position on the 4 issues above - simply copy/paste into their contact form after this introduction: "As a member of Democrats.com, I support these positions on Iraq. Do you?"
| Running |
2002 - 2006 |
1/07 Surge Funds |
5/07 $100B Supplemental Veto Response |
5/07 Redeployment Completed in 2007 |
10/07 $200B request |
09
Plan |
Residual force |
Iran |
| Biden |
Authorized and fully funded |
Non-binding resolution |
|
Withdraw all but 20,000 troops in 2007 |
I will vote for the money necessary to protect them, period |
|
. |
|
| Clinton |
Authorized and fully funded |
Set troop cap but allow escalation with Congressional approval |
keep the pressure on him not to veto it |
Supports non-specific phased withdrawal; Urges Bush to complete by 1/09 but won't support legislation requiring it; has a secret plan to complete withdrawal if elected |
I have voted against funding this war, and I will vote against funding this war as long as it takes. |
|
vastly reduced residual force to remain for some limited period of time to train Iraqi troops.. to provide logistical support, for counter-terrorism missions, to protect the Kurds... a continuing mission to protect America’s vital interests, and to support an Iraqi government... reassess in 2009 |
"We cannot, we should not, we must not
permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons"
"no option can be taken off the table." |
| Dodd |
Authorized and fully funded |
Set troop cap but allow escalation with Congressional approval |
Supports Feingold-Reid |
Begin immediately, complete by 4/08 |
terminate the funding of this effort here, give us a new direction. |
|
Supports Feingold-Reid |
|
| Edwards |
Authorized and funded
until 2005 |
 Deny funds |
send another funding bill to him with a binding plan to bring the troops home. And if he vetoes it again, they should do it again. |
cap troops at 100,000, forcing withdrawal of 40-50,000 immediately, all combat troops by 9/08, meanwhile training Iraqi troops |
|
|
Embassy guards, humanitarian relief protection, regional force to to prevent the sectarian violence in Iraq from spilling over into other countries, for counter-terrorism, or to prevent a genocide |
"Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to
have nuclear weapons."
"We need to keep all options on the
table." |
| Gravel |
Opposed |
. |
|
Immediate and orderly withdrawal |
|
|
. |
|
| Kucinich |
Led Dem opposition, including 2004 Presidential campaign; opposed all funding. |
Deny funds |
Adopt Kucinich plan below |
Begin immediately, replace all with UN |
|
|
None - see Kucinich plan below |
Pre-emptive U.S. attack is impeachable |
| Obama |
Opposed in 02 but fully funded in 05-06 |
Set troop cap |
find 67 votes to override the veto and shorten the funding periods to three or four month intervals |
Begin by 5/1/07, end by 3/31/08 |
we not vote for funding without some timetable for this war. |
remove 1-2 combat brigades per month, all by 5/10 |
limited missions of protecting our diplomats and carrying out targeted strikes on al Qaeda |
Iran is "a threat to all of
us" and "we should take no option, including military action, off the table." |
| Richardson |
? |
Deny funds and deauthorize the war based on the War Powers Act |
|
Start now, complete by 12/31/07 |
|
|
None whatsoever (except embassy guards) |
|
The Kucinich Plan (H.R. 1234): How do the other candidates compare?
| |
Biden |
Clinton |
Dodd |
Edwards |
Gravel |
Obama |
Richardson |
| 1. The US announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes |
| 2. US announces that it will use existing funds to bring the troops and necessary equipment home. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3. Order a simultaneous return of all US contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4. Convene a regional conference for the purpose of developing a security and stabilization force for Iraq. |
|
Yes |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
| 5. Prepare an international security and peacekeeping force to move in, replacing US troops who then return home. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6. Develop and fund a process of national reconciliation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes |
| 7. Reconstruction and Jobs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes |
| 8. Reparations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9. Political Sovereignty. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10. Iraq Economy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11. Economic Sovereignty. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12. International Truth and Reconciliation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.
Funding for War
I urge you as Americans to stop the funding for this illegal war. The war was founded on lies and our troops are dying and maimed because of these lies. I believe if any member of the House or Congress sees justification for this war, he or she should enlist themselves. The people have spoken in November 2006, no more war, end it now. My wish is that anyone for this war, such as McCain, gets defeated November 2008. I can hardly wait for that date, to be free of Bush has been my dream since 2000 when he was selected, not elected. I believe that Electoral College should be abolished and let the people choose the president.
The Iraqi War Was Started On Lies And Thousands Have Died...
In the beginning, I think our president had plans to breeze into Iraq; kill Saddam; install a puppet government and take control of the second largest oil field on the planet! Mr. Bush ignored the comparison of Iraq and Viet Nam. He ignored those that stated that Iraq could become a quagmire just like Nam. Now, several thousand troops are dead. More than one hundred thousand Iraqi citizens are dead...And the dead are growing every single day. This administration has failed in this war. There is no way to win this war because there is no trust or respect held for this administration by the Iraqi people. The troops he are sending are no more than placing a band-aid on an ax wound! And giving the bombers more U.S. targets to shoot at and blow up! It's time to back off and let the Iraqi people work out their own differences and work for peace. The Sunni and Shiite factions hold a difference of opinions that go back more than a thousand years...No one but them selves will ever be able to resolve this matter: It's time to get our troops out! Advisors? Maybe. Combat troops? No more!!!! It's time for them to come home... Thank you.
Dubya Has Been Smoking Too Much Lebanese Hashish
This is where the rubber meets the road according to
Gore's old sayings, too much Lebanese Hashish. Unfortunately,
some of our people have been smoking this stuff with him.
We have to support the Commander in Chief and support the
troops, and the next thing you know our foreign policy is
nothing more than a bumper sticker.
The scorecard reads we are running scared as a political party in opposing this religious war in the Middle East.
We should withdrawl immediately on Constitutional grounds
and use the bully pulpit as Speaker of House and
Majority Leader in Senate and sound off about religious
violence. We should also pressure our allies to get
the terrorists out of the caves and on Oprah for a
makeover.
By
The time his term is over, there are going to be a lot of people wishing he would share that hash!!!!
Kerry "regrets" war vote before the '06 Election
"I did not like fascists when I fought them as a diplomat for 23 years and I don't like them now in my own country." - retired American diplomat Joe Wilson
If I understand the
If I understand the presidential aspirant chart correctly Kucinich wants to begin the redployment (an ambiguous term - redeployment to where?) of American troops immediately and replace them with UN troops. This seems to be saying that he favors an immediate withdrawal of American troops.
However in his position on his website he says:
"5. Prepare an international security and peacekeeping force to move in, replacing US troops WHO THEN RETURN HOME (CAPS MINE)." which seems to say that U.S. withdrawal is after and contingent on the introduction of UN
Peacemakers." Is my interpretation correct, especially of the quote from his website?
Jim Lucas
Democrats with no spine!
They talk big but lack the spine to do anything and follow up the talk with action. Money must stop but politicians are controlled by the invisable players pulling the strings. That is the nature of politics now! It has been outsourced like everything!
hmmmmmmmm
What? The no spine that Passed everything they said they would pass in one hundred hours!!!!! Come on you can do better then that.....
Iraq
Outraged, you're right. My son is deploying for Iraq next month. Please try to understand me, if my son were killed in action in Afghanistan it would be a tragedy of epic proportions for me, but believe it or not I could accept it over time. He would be dieing for a noble cause, after all they attacked us. But if something happens to him in Iraq, what did he die for. The whole thing is based on a lie. Not a noble cause in my view.
The Dems. said they were going to stop the war and what did they do? They extended the damn thing. Just to add a slap in the face the Prezzz comes out and says to expect a bloody summer with heavy fighting. Face it folks we were sold out.
Does it really matter?
We post our comments here and other blogs but, do they really make a difference? The Internet has made us lazy. We should get off our backsides and get outside. Carrying signs protesting. Get in the news, make photo ops. Where are the college's, protesting on campus?
This is what we did during Viet Nam. It worked then, It'll work now.
Yes geyser, it really does matter...
This, like other democratic sites, is a gathering place for those who would protest further. It is also an idea generator for activists to use in both local and national protests.
Many of our members(and this applies to all sites)have been involved in protests, campaigns, highway blogging, election campaigning and all the rest.
Some college campuses have organized protests and other programs to counter the actions of the current misadministration, as well as the on-campus actions of Young Republicans--an organization fully and well funded by our right wing.
Sure we did this during Nam. The difference then was the draft. That brought the message directly to the young voices with it's threat of personal involvement. In those days, we had two kinds of people protesting...those who would become cannon-fodder...and those who would grow up to be chickenhawks: pretty much our present leadership(GOP). The biggest difference between then(Nam)and now(war on terra)is that the media covered the Nam protests...and seldom, if ever, cover today's protests. The media. A bought and paid for commodity loaded with journalistic whores.
This, and other similar sites, allows everyone to participate in activism. It encourages activism. What happens here inspires those who choose to get to the streets whenever possible.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Blogs
Submarine USS Wahoo ss238
They do matter, case in point was the Ned Lamont
win in the CT Dem Primary.........too bad
he didnt win.
Politicians SUCK! Ken
I am so tired of hearing how
I am so tired of hearing how Democrats want to "cut and run" in Iraq Wasn't it the Republicans who stopped funding for Clinton in Somalia and he had to set a deadline to get our troops out? Clinton actually worked with the UN to replace our troops with UN, is Bush doing this? I am sick of all the patriotic folly that Republicans can wrap themselves in but still continue to say that Democrats are on the side of the terrorists.
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/09/25/clinton/index.html
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security
like it's some kind of federal program."
- George W. Bush in a debate in St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000
King George
Never underestamate the power of human stupidity
Question?
How did Gen. Petraeus pass the Senate unanimously?
No doubt he is a qualified soldier- but he wholly supports this "surge" and not one Democrat has a problem with his appointment?
Was this just a tactical political decision- fight this battle elsewhere?
My guess
is that the senate didn't want to show disapproval of the general, but only to bush and to his surge. They will probably vote on their disapproval of the surge plan next week to put it squarely on bush and chaney. They are being very careful right now not to do anything that looks to be against the troops.
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis
In a time of deception telling the truth is a revolutionary act. ~ George Orwell
Thanks
Thanks everyone for the answers (above and below).
If it had been Jerry Boykin(LT. GEN), then there would...
probably have been some opposition. For Petraeus, it was just a promotion to full general and taking command of a bad situation--someone has to be the theater commander.
Remember too, that many generals were retired or forced out when this war began. Wes Clark was one who disagreed and he joined the rest. As a result of this purge, there are many openings at or near the top of the chain of command.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Thanks for your reply
I did not know that. How many generals were actually purged?
I can't wait to see the look on my co-workers' faces who support Bush when I tell them like 40-50 generals have been fired.
I'd love a link where all those dozens who have been purged are- if anyone has it?
sbtix, I don't remember how many and who exactly was...
relieved of command and/or retired. They were however, the prime movers and shakers at the very top of the Pentagon command structure. Their relief has been fully documented so a simple search will dig them up fairly easily.
Most were at the top of the command structure when Bush started cooking the books on Iraqi intelligence with the help of Rummy, Wolfowitz, and Pearle. You remember them: The cakewalk trio.
The most intense disagreement was over the number of troops required to invade Iraq. Rummy and his crew felt that this was an easy war. It would not take more than 100,000 or so troops to do the job. The top generals were fairly solid about the job requiring 500,000 troops at a minimum.
This all became public once these dissenting generals were retired. Then they could speak...many did...and they have been speaking ever since.
Clark was one of the dissenters.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Really research who you vote for
Our President Bush got his position because of his father. Hilary only has people's attention because of her husband. We need to do away with this family thing and really decide who will help our country. Most of the leadint candidates seem so phony. Kucinich is the only one who has given straight answers (ex: by saying yes or no before he starts his answers to the questions instead making interpret his answer). Check out his website and make an intelligent vote. Nevermind the Media.