Kerry; Anticipates No More Troops To Iraq

[JSJ]

SPRINGFIELD, Ohio (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Sunday he did not anticipate sending more American troops to Iraq and hoped to bring "significant numbers" home during his first term.

Promising a fresh start with U.S. allies "burned" by President Bush, Kerry said, "I would consider it an unsuccessful policy if I hadn't brought significant numbers of troops back within the first term. And I will do that."


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5837201

Sounds good, doesn't it- but, of course, only time will tell.-SJ

[lebkuchen]

1. Music to the ears of our army, NG, Reservists, generals, recruiters

and certainly military spouses and their children.

I also like the way Kerry is out and out calling Bush a liar. And why not. The Chimp has a litany of 'em. Ron Reagan highlights some of those lies in his Esquire article, well-worth a read, posted by Jen6 yesterday.

http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2004/040729_mfe_reagan_1.html

[JSJ]

3. it is beautiful music, indeed, but will it be sustained...

...through the overture?

[lebkuchen]

6. Iraq is out of control

You either pull an "LBJ" and send in more troops, or make preparations to pull them out, something Bush has absolutely no intention of doing. In fact, if the Chimpp is elected, he will, as the conservative CATO Institute has made known, proceed to prepare the US for a "generational commitment to democratize the Middle East." All war, all the time.

Kerry knows this, and that's why he can make his statement confidently, that he does have an exit plan and will pull the troops, as opposed to Bush's plan to escalate.

[JSJ]

7. kerry's sunday comments were the first i'd heard...

...a position that could be construed as anti-war. I think this is big news, whether it's a sop to the anti-war contingent or a sincere promise. Hearing that he won't send more (after saying he wanted 40,000 more to go over) is, in my opinion, a wonderful reversal of positions for the nominee. Oughta be worth a few (or a few million) votes for the two Jakes.

[AndyTiedye]

8. Wasn't that 40,000 Regulars to replace 40.000 Reservists?

[WindRavenX]

2. also keep this in mind:

Kerry CAN and WILL be able to get more international support, which will probably translate into more troops, taking some of the burden off of our tired/burned out troops.
International support is the only way in hell anything positive can be done in Iraq...

[JSJ]

4. yes, the transition might be difficult...

...through the reduction of US troops, unless international troop contributions are made. Or, maybe a total pull-out would be the best bet- allowing non-military solutions to be tried in place of the 'already tried'.

[WindRavenX]

5. either way

We cannot do a thing in Iraq without the help of our allies. And I'm not talking about a few token soldiers or relief aid- I'm talking getting NATO involved. Bush has burned his bridges so under his leadership, this is impossible. But not with Kerry. We need him.

[dolstein]

9. Who's he kidding?

One of the biggest problems with the Bush administration's handling of the war in Iraq is that it didn't send in enough troops maintain the peace. How can we, on the one hand, criticize Rumsfeld and Bush for ignoring the advice of General Shinseli, and on the other hand say we aren't going to send in any more troops? I thought Kerry said he would listen to the generals. Are there any generals who truly believe they have all the troops they need?

[jpgray]

12. My guess is, Kerry plans to bug out.

And that may well be the wisest course. Can't tell the electorate that, though. Not in this climate.

[demoman123]

14. Then why did he tell the WSJ he would keep troops there until 2008?

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/SB108994509460465669.htm

[jpgray]

15. LOL, reducing the number to zero would be a significant reduction

"At the end of my first term I would consider it a failure of my diplomacy if we haven't reduced the number significantly."

[demoman123]

18. ROFLMAO: So would reducing the number by 10%

The point is that he didn't HAVE to say that he would keep troops there through the end of his first term. That's way stronger than anything he "has to say to get elected."

[jpgray]

19. Reading that as a promise to stay for four years is bad logic

It's a limited interpretation--the meaning of his quote has more possibilities. And no need to get snarky, no one's making fun of you here.

[demoman123]

21. Reading that as a promise to withdraw is bad logic.

And who got snarky?

[jpgray]

22. Yes, but I didn't read it as a promise to withdraw

The only one reading absolutes into that statement is you.

[demoman123]

23. Kerry is unreadable.

On purpose.

[jpgray]

24. Yes, he is purposely vague about Iraq

And there are political reasons for keeping that way. Sorry if I sounded snarky in my first reply--I wouldn't have put the LOL in there if I knew it would have been taken that way.

[Massacure]

17. My best guess is that by the time January rolls around

The Iraqi security forces will be better than they are right now.

[papau]

10. Kerry Foresees No More U.S. Troops for Iraq (substancial cut within 4 yrs)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&nci...

Kerry Foresees No More U.S. Troops for Iraq

Sun Aug 1, 5:35 PM ET By Patricia Wilson

BOWLING GREEN, Ohio (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Sunday he did not anticipate sending more American troops to Iraq (news - web sites) and hoped to bring "significant numbers" home during his first term.

Promising a fresh start with U.S. allies alienated by President Bush (news - web sites), Kerry said, "I would consider it an unsuccessful policy if I hadn't brought significant numbers of troops back within the first term. And I will do that." <snip>

The poll of registered voters(CNN/Gallup) showed Kerry leading 50 percent to 47 percent for Bush, compared to a larger lead last month, 49 percent to 45 percent. <snip>

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&nc...

Kerry Pledges Iraq Troop Cut Within 4 Years

Mon Aug 2, 9:35 AM ET

By Dan Balz and Lois Romano, Washington Post Staff Writers

BOWLING GREEN, Ohio, Aug. 1 -- John F. Kerry pledged Sunday he would substantially reduce U.S. troop strength in Iraq by the end of his first term in office but declined to offer any details of what he said is his plan to attract significantly more allied military and financial support there.<snip>

[phasev]

11. it's about time we get some support from the international community n/t

[demoman123]

13. On April 30, he said we might need to send MORE troops...

"If our commanders believe they need more American troops, they should say so and they should get them ... But more and more American soldiers cannot be the only solution ... The coalition should organise an expanded international security forces, preferably with Nato, but clearly under US command...."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0%2C3604%2C1257429%2C00.html

[enki23]

16. we might need more troops short-term

and especially, we needed more troops when we fucking went in. that's true, even though it's also true that we never should have fucking gone in.

[demoman123]

20. "Short term" has a way of becoming "long term."

You are right that (a)we should never have gone in, and (b) we should have had more troops when we did go in. But I draw the opposite conclusion: we should withdraw US troops now, and allow the Iraqis to settle their own affairs. If that means an Islamic republic or a return of the Baathists, that is none of our business.

We should also pay reparations.

[enki23]

25. i agree with you entirely.

but kerry has committed to "finishing the job" whatever that means. in the short run, it seems doubtful that we'll see what we want to see. i only hope, and fervently, that after the first six months to a year we start seeing substantial troop reductions. the most likely scenario would be to do it in order to cut our losses. it doesn't seem as though any good is going to come of this iraqi adventure at all, not even on accident.

i don't think my hope is likely to bear fruit, but i hope anyway.