You are herecontent / Feingold Debunks Myths about US Policy in Iraq

Feingold Debunks Myths about US Policy in Iraq


t r u t h o u t | Press Release
Friday 09 September 2005

Senator Russ Feingold has called on the President to issue a flexible timeframe for the completion of the military mission in Iraq and has suggested December 31, 2006 as a target date for returning American troops home from Iraq. In discussing his proposal, he has been debunking several myths about US policy in Iraq.

Myth #1: There are only two options for the US in Iraq: 'stay the course' or 'cut and run.'

Senator Feingold: "This is a false choice offered by the President. The course we are on in Iraq is not sustainable, nor is it making the US more secure. At the same time, I am not in the "cut and run" or "immediate withdrawal" camp, nor do I propose a hard deadline for troop withdrawal, regardless of conditions on the ground. I believe that our military still has a mission to complete but the President needs to make clear what the mission is, and what our plan to get the job done is. We can't hold ourselves accountable for getting our troops the support they need to get the job done if we never clearly define where we are going, or when we plan to get there, in the first place."

Myth #2: Fighting terrorists in Iraq means we will not have to fight them elsewhere.

Senator Feingold: "It would be nice to believe that these terrorists will be swept into Iraq only to be annihilated by US forces. But that kind of "roach motel" approach to fighting is hardly a strategic vision. At its best, it is wishful thinking - and more wishful thinking is just what our Iraq policy and our strategy for fighting terrorism do not need. Terrorist networks exist around the world. Fighting terrorists in Baghdad does not mean that we won't have to fight them elsewhere, and, sadly, we need only look at the headlines over the past few weeks to find the terrible evidence of this hard fact. We need a tough, smart global strategy to combat and defeat terrorist networks, not a misguided belief that Iraq is the solution to the national security challenge before us."

Myth #3: If the US issues a clear timeframe for the remaining military mission in Iraq, the insurgents will simply wait us out.

Senator Feingold: "This doesn't make a lot of sense. If the insurgents wanted to wait until we withdrew in order to execute their plans, why wouldn't they cease all attacks now, lay low, let everyone believe that stability has been achieved, and spring up again once the US presence in Iraq is dramatically reduced?

We need to be honest about the fact that one day, the US will withdraw from Iraq, and it will not be secret when we do. Does the Administration believe that the insurgents will be entirely defeated at that point? Is it really our policy to stay in Iraq until every last insurgent is defeated? The Secretary of Defense has acknowledged that ultimately, "foreign forces are not going to repress that insurgency," rather it is going to be defeated by the Iraqis themselves. If the remaining military mission is to train Iraqis to provide for their own security, we ought to be able to articulate a clear plan for getting that job done and have public benchmarks for success.

Moreover, providing a clear, public plan and timeframe for the remaining US mission could undermine both the recruiting efforts and the unity of insurgents; while encouraging Iraqi ownership of the transition process and bolstering the legitimacy of the Iraqi authorities."

Myth #4: Those who resist staying the current course fail to understand that if the US military leaves, Iraq will degenerate into dangerous chaos.

Senator Feingold: "Frankly, parts of Iraq are already in a state of dangerous chaos. And it's clear that the US military presence won't be able to guarantee security for Iraqis in the long run. As many senior leaders have acknowledged, ultimately only a political solution, devised and agreed to by Iraqis, can point the way toward stability - not the indefinite presence of American troops on the ground.

We need to take a hard look at the nature of the insurgency in Iraq. Since the foreign troop presence is helping efforts to recruit foreign terrorists, and since nationalism and a sense of humiliation among some Iraqis are causing them to join forces with foreign terrorists to resist what they see as an occupation, sticking around indefinitely will not help to achieve stability.

Intense US diplomatic and political engagement and support will likely be needed long after the troops are withdrawn. I also expect that we will continue some important degree of military and security cooperation with the Iraqis, as we work with them and with others around the world to combat terrorist networks, whether they are operating in Iraq or Afghanistan or England or elsewhere."

Myth #5: Any discussion of policy options beyond "staying the course" is a symbol of weakness that will embolden terrorists.

Senator Feingold: "It is simply not true that anything other than a firm commitment to support more of the same is somehow weakness. The course we are on is not leading to strength - it is weakening our military and it is strengthening our enemies. The US Army is rapidly nearing the breaking point and the American public is increasingly and rightly uneasy about our policy. Meanwhile the terrorists operating in Iraq are adapting to our own techniques and increasing in sophistication, even as they use Iraq to rally additional support around the world. This is not a winning US strategy. The way to defeat terrorists is to make sure that our Iraq policy is consistent with the global fight against terrorism, rather than letting Iraq dominate our security strategy and drain vital security resources for an unlimited amount of time."

Tags

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If Feingold, stays the course, and announces his bid for the presidency he will have my vote. And my money.

Not announcing a hard and fast date for withdrawl will allow this lying administration to extend the occupation indefinately. I can just see little George Stupid finally agreeing to a flexinle date for withdrawl to appease the anti war movement, then he will use that flexibility to do what ever he wants. I do not believe this administration has any intention of complete withdrawl, other wise why the permament bases being constructed. Our continued occupation is the main cause of all the violence and killing, the best way to stop it is to leave immediately, all troops home within 90 days, and let the Iraqi's solve there own problems as they may.

When is congress going to grow some industrial size cajones and bring an end to this war. Congress does not need little George Stupid's permission or cooperation to end this war. Congress cut the funding and little George will have no choice but to bring the troops home. Our involvement in Vietnam never came to a complete end until congress finally cut all funding!

Delay is the Big Oil nutcase who does everything for ego and money. He must be cut loose out of the machine, forced out of position in shame. He will be indicted so he must resign from majority leader post or be moved over. He and Hastert=praetorian guard. Get rid of them, and the war ends for good. So does the impeachment process begin....

Doug E.

So what's the "myth" that's being "debunked" here. The "myth" that really needs debunking is the one about Democrats and Republicans serving different interests or that either party any longer exists to serve the people of the United States.

I really love how putting an end to an illegal and immoral invasion and occupation of another sovereign country is characterized as "cutting and running". As if U.S. forces were put there in the first place for the benefit of the Iraqi people and have some legitimate role in determining their future.

They Fiddled While Nero Got the Matches

The thing that really gets my goat - and we're talking about one of those big, shaggy goats with horns the size of a man's arm and unblinking reptilian eyes, not some diminutive frog-belly from the petting zoo - is all this codswallop about how events in Iraq have gone so unpredictably wrong. Cacavi braccatum. The instructions for this war went as follows:

http://www.mwcnews.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1309&It...

Bushco needs more time to set up his,their puppet government.The one where we protect them and they give all their oil to us.Simple Math,at least two more years,but probably more like fifty.This is the same system we have used for years all over the world.BIG OIL=EVIL EMPIRE.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Stores:























Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.