Just got pro-kerry email including this bit-

[Goldom]

"While President Bush obstinately calls for ”staying the course,” just last week Senator John Kerry told news reporters that he supported decreasing troop levels.

"I believe that within a year from now, we could significantly reduce American forces in Iraq, and that's my plan," Kerry told National Public Radio. "I believe we can."
"

Confused. I thought Kerry wanted to increase the number of forces.

[Qutzupalotl]

1. I thought it was like this...

Increase the number of active military, but decrease troop levels in Iraq if possible.

[Melodybe]

2. In other parts of the world, Kerry wants to beef up the sercret services

to prevent terrorism. I think it makes sense.

[Richardo]

3. Reduce AMERICAN forces by increasing INTERNATIONAL participation.

Simple, no?

Plus he chanted the mantra of "whatever the commanders want, they'll get" which disappointed me somewhat since it sounded so Rumsfeldian*.

*Whatever happened to THAT guy? ;-)

[goodhue]

4. Kerry's latest goal is to reduce troops in Iraq by Aug 2005

Kerry supports 40,000 more troops overall but has recently made clear that they would not be deployed in Iraq, and that indeed he favors internationalization and reduction of US troops in Iraq.

Kerry rhetoric about troop reductions in Iraq has gotten increasingly focused toward troop reductions in Iraq sooner over later. I wish this would get more media play because I think it will help get votes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52839-2004Aug9.html

At the same time, the Democratic presidential nominee said that his goal as president would be to reduce the number of U.S. troops in Iraq during his first six months in office through diplomacy and foreign assistance.

"I believe if you do the statesmanship properly, I believe if you do the kind of alliance-building that is available to us, that it is appropriate to have a goal of reducing our troops" by August 2005, Kerry told reporters during a news briefing from the edge of the Grand Canyon.

* * * *

In the past, Kerry has said he would want to talk to commanders in the field before determining troop size and never ruled out increasing U.S. forces if needed. Later, he set a goal of reducing troops by the end of his first term. In an interview last week with National Public Radio, Kerry said he could "significantly" reduce troops a year from now -- a position his aides quickly tried to soften. Stephanie Cutter, Kerry's spokeswoman, said his position has not changed.

As evidence his goal is attainable, Kerry said fellow senators who have traveled abroad told him that other countries will be willing to provide more assistance if Bush is defeated this fall. He also said Arab countries have a stake in Iraq's future and could lessen the United States' burden.

"Obviously we have to see how events unfold," Kerry said. "The measurement has to be . . . the stability of Iraq, the ability to have the elections, and the training and transformation of the Iraqi security force itself."

After the news conference, James P. Rubin, Kerry's national security adviser, said he wanted to "clarify" the candidate's comments as a best-case target for troop reduction contingent upon conditions on the ground changing and other nations offering up more peacekeeping troops in Iraq.

The candidate has made his pledge to internationalize the peacekeeping effort the central tenet of his Iraq policy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52839-2004Aug9.html