Email from Biden today

[jillan]

As a strong supporter and contributor to our campaign, I would like to bring you up to date on yesterday's historic events regarding Iraq. I believe that this is truly the moment to bring a clear message to the American people and Democratic primary voters that we must act now to force a change in policy or face another year of a "surge" that will cost American resources and lives -- for no purpose.

Yesterday's testimony by General Petraeus before the Senate's Foreign Relations and Armed Services Committees was a "watershed" in the history of President Bush's failed policy in Iraq.


Last Friday, I returned from my eighth trip to Iraq. While I have great personal respect for General Petraeus, I disagree with the surge policy. General Petraeus again yesterday reaffirmed that only a political solution is possible in Iraq.



There is no purely military answer in Iraq. The primary objective of the "surge" was to provide time for the Iraqi leadership in Baghdad to reach a political solution. Not only has that not happened but thousands of brave American men and women have been wounded and hundreds killed in pursuit of this failed objective.


Before the Foreign Relations Committee, General Petraeus testified:


BIDEN: If, in fact, the circumstances on the ground are exactly what they are today in March of next year, will you recommend the continuation of somewhere between 130,000 and 160,000 American troops being shot at, killed and maimed every day there?
PETRAEUS: Mr. Chairman, I -- that's a pretty big hypothetical.
BIDEN: Well, I don't think it's hypothetical -- if they're the same.
PETRAEUS: I would be very hard-pressed to recommend that at that point in time.
BIDEN: I would pray you would be wise enough not to recommend it and start to listen to General Jones and others who talk about a fundamental redeployment of our force, a fundamental change in our footprint in the region, and a fundamental alteration of our objective in moving toward a federal system.


This war must end. We must begin to get out now, protecting our troops as we withdraw.


While leaving Iraq is necessary, it is not enough. We also have to shape what we leave behind so that we don't trade a dictator for chaos and endanger America's interests for a generation.


For more than a year I have argued for the adoption of a plan -- the Bidden-Gelb plan -- that offers the possibility of stabilizing Iraq as we leave. My plan is based on the reality that Iraq cannot be governed from the center because the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds are too fearful of each other to entrust their futures to one another.


Instead, we should give the warring factions breathing room in regions, with local control over what matters in their daily lives, like the police, education and jobs.


Yesterday the only truly positive success that General Petraeus could cite was in Anbar province -- where "local control" acted to take on al Qaeda.


And I'm calling for a diplomatic offensive -- not a continued surge -- to get the U.N., Iraqi's neighbors, and major countries behind this plan and to help move Iraq in that direction.


I was asked last evening to appear on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews. Please take a minute to view part of my response to yesterday's events -- particularly the failure of General Petraeus to answer Senator Warner's question concerning whether this policy was making America safer.




As Democratic caucus voters in Iowa begin to decide who to support, we need to effectively deliver the message that I am the most experienced candidate in this contest -- with a real plan to end the war, and the knowledge, contacts, and relationships with world leaders to get it done.


Thank you for all of your help to date in this effort.


Can you help once again so we can effectively get our message out?


The "fallen angels" of Iraq deserve a commitment that their sacrifices are not forgotten.


We need to raise $100,000 by September 21 to continue to get the message of the Biden Plan to every Iowa caucus voter so that those voters understand what I would do to end the war.



Help us raise $100,000 by September 21 so we can tell Iowa voters about the Biden Plan for Iraq. Click here to contribute.


Thank you,

Joe Biden
================
Go Joe!

[Prince Paul]

1. I feel sorry for that guy

He's a pro establishment candidate and he still only wins like .03% of the vote

[gateley]

2. "He's a pro establishment candidate and he still only wins like .03% of the vote"

Long way to go and I'm hopeful those numbers will rise. Soar!

[jillan]

3. You shouldn't talk about poll numbers.

[Prince Paul]

4. Why not ?

My candidate is a true liberal democrat and an anti establishment candidate. It would only make sense the corporate establishment media would try to smear him and keep his poll numbers down. Him winning is not in their best interests. Biden on the other hand is an establishment candidate. His only excuse for not doing well in the polls is that nobody likes him.

[jillan]

5. I'm not going to go there with you about Kucinich.

I try real hard not to be negative about other candidates.
They all have their strengths. And I would appreciate it if you
did the same. 'nuff said.

[NI4NI]

6. but, but....... Biden voted for the Bankruptcy Bill!

but, but...... who was so instrumental in crafting the VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT

but, but, didn't the "BIDEN LAW" get 19 specific semi-automatic assault weapons banned along with the the possession of newly manufactured magazines holding mre than 10 rounds of ammo? (I wonder what Joe's rating is with the National Rifle Association)

but, but, who wrote the VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT?

but, but, who wrote legislation that gave parents a $10,000 tax deduction towards their children's college tuition?

but, but, who called Slobodan Miloschev "a war criminal" to his face and personally advised President Clinton to end the ethnic cleansing in the former country of Yugoslavia by military force.

My Senator, Joe Biden did, plus more!

But but, the Biden bashers either don't know it, fail to mention it, or consider those issues creditless.

Until another Democratic candidate can show me that they've done more, or is capable of doing more, both nationally and internationally, I'm votin' for Joe!

[jillan]

7. Isn't that the truth?

I hate that Biden voted for the bankruptcy bill.
I watched the whole debate and vote on C-Span.
I sat in my living room yelling at Joe.

There are other things he has done that I don't agree with.

But when you look at the whole picture, his entire career - I can't think of anyone better to run this country than him.
And I honestly believe he will have the easiest time in the General Election.

[Catchawave]

13. I've always been a big fan of Joe....

He's my strongest number two go-to guy after Edwards :toast:

Despite what some cranks say on DU, I enjoy him on the political talkies as he brings so much to the discussions.....passionately, sincerely, and very smartly.

I think he would eat Obama alive in a debate, so I really wish they'd start doing more debates with fewer candidates so we can get to the meat and potatoes of this campaign instead of the game show format.

I like all our candidates, but there's only two I would support with my time, money and trouble :hi:

[murbley40]

8. My Senator too...

and I contributed again.

[PatSeg]

9. Good Grief!

Will you stop supporting your position with FACTS??? It is so distracting!!!

I wish supporters would build their candidates up instead of tearing the other democratic candidates down.

[ericgtr]

12. I am guilty of this

and you are right, if I spent more time focusing on who I prefer rather than bashing who I don't I would've probably decided on a candidate by now. This is something I am taking a personal look at.

[PatSeg]

14. It is an easy mindset to fall into

Sometimes I "think" that way, but I've started to make a conscious effort to avoid saying the first negative thing that pops into my head. It only triggers more negative comments and brings the debate down.

There is room for constructive criticism. Issues such as electability, competence, and experience are valid points, but they can be addressed intelligently.

[benEzra]

10. Dianne Feinstein was much more closely connected with the "assault weapon" law than Biden...

but, but, didn't the "BIDEN LAW" get 19 specific semi-automatic assault weapons banned along with the the possession of newly manufactured magazines holding mre than 10 rounds of ammo? (I wonder what Joe's rating is with the National Rifle Association)

Dianne Feinstein was much more closely connected with the "assault weapon" law of '94 (which played a major role in the loss of the House and Senate a month later, BTW). Biden was a vocal supporter, but it was not his pet issue; it was Senator Feinstein's.

The Feinstein ban didn't ban "19 specific guns," though--or any guns, for that matter. It banned marketing of civilian guns under 19 banned names, and also specified that civilian guns manufactured after the ban could only have one of a list of nontraditional features, i.e. a rifle could have a protruding handgrip or a muzzle threaded for a brake, but not both. The primary effect was to raise prices by 500% on replacement magazines for full-size defensive pistols (Smith & Wessons, Glocks, Sigs, Rugers), but it didn't affect rifle magazine prices to any significant extent. My wife paid over $100 for a Glock magazine in the late '90s, but AK magazines were consistently under $10.



-------------------
Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

[derby378]

11. Just what we need - another gun-grabber in the White House

I think I'll stick with Bill Richardson, thanks.