The Presidential Candidates on Iraq

- FARHANA HOSSAIN AND BEN WERSCHKUL The war in Iraq is, as expected, one of the threshhold issues of the 2008 presidential election. A look at the candidates and what they have said on various aspects of the issue.



THE CANDIDATE POSITION ON THE 2002 INVASION POSITION ON PRESIDENT BUSH'S TROOP INCREASE POSITION ON WITHDRAWAL

Joseph R.

Biden Jr.

Democrat



Related Article

Biden Opposes a Troop Increase in Iraq (Dec. 27, 2006) VOTED YES IN 2002, NOW OPPOSED It was a mistake to assume the president would use the authority we gave him properly...We gave the president the authority to unite the world to isolate Saddam. And the fact of the matter is, we went too soon. We went without sufficient force. And we went without a plan.

-- On "Meet the Press," Nov. 27, 2005 It was a mistake to assume the president would use the authority we gave him properly...We gave the president the authority to unite the world to isolate Saddam. And the fact of the matter is, we went too soon. We went without sufficient force. And we went without a plan. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE I believe the president's strategy is not a solution...I believe it's a tragic mistake...We've tried that kind of escalation twice before in Baghdad, and it's failed twice in Baghdad, and I fear it will fail a third time.

-- At the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jan. 11, 2007 I believe the president's strategy is not a solution...I believe it's a tragic mistake...We've tried that kind of escalation twice before in Baghdad, and it's failed twice in Baghdad, and I fear it will fail a third time. PHASED REDEPLOYMENT WITH DECENTRALIZATION [T]he real question is, are we going to be able to leave Iraq, get our troops out and leave behind something other than chaos? In order to do that, the president should start off by not vetoing the language...saying begin to draw down American troops right now, and move toward a political solution. Look, there's only one way. You got to change the fundamental premise of this engagement, and that is, you got to decentralize Iraq, you got to give the regions control over their own destiny, give them control over their own police forces, their own identity, and have a limited central government and share their oil wealth.

-- At the Democratic Candidates Debate, April 26, 2007 [T]he real question is, are we going to be able to leave Iraq, get our troops out and leave behind something other than chaos? In order to do that, the president should start off by not vetoing the language...saying begin to draw down American troops right now, and move toward a political solution. Look, there's only one way. You got to change the fundamental premise of this engagement, and that is, you got to decentralize Iraq, you got to give the regions control over their own destiny, give them control over their own police forces, their own identity, and have a limited central government and share their oil wealth.

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Democrat



Related Article

Clinton Says Some G.I.s in Iraq Would Remain (March 15, 2007) VOTED YES IN 2002, NOW OPPOSED If I had been President in October of 2002, I would have never asked for authority to divert our attention from Afghanistan to Iraq, and I certainly would never have started this war.

-- On the Senate Floor, Feb. 7, 2007 If I had been President in October of 2002, I would have never asked for authority to divert our attention from Afghanistan to Iraq, and I certainly would never have started this war. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE The surge, which is ongoing, and obviously if were going to do it we hope it is more successful than perhaps I think it could be. Im going to root for it if it has any chance of success, but I think its more likely that the anti-American violence and sectarian violence just moves from place to place to place like the old Whac a Mole.

-- In an Interview, March 15, 2007 The surge, which is ongoing, and obviously if were going to do it we hope it is more successful than perhaps I think it could be. Im going to root for it if it has any chance of success, but I think its more likely that the anti-American violence and sectarian violence just moves from place to place to place like the old Whac a Mole. PHASED REDEPLOYMENT [T]rying to withdraw is not something you snap your fingers and tell people, do it tomorrow. It has to be done in a thoughtful, orderly, careful way that defends our troops on these routes theyre going to have to take to get men and equipment out of Iraq.

-- In an Interview, March 15, 2007 [T]rying to withdraw is not something you snap your fingers and tell people, do it tomorrow. It has to be done in a thoughtful, orderly, careful way that defends our troops on these routes theyre going to have to take to get men and equipment out of Iraq.

Chris Dodd

Democrat VOTED YES IN 2002, NOW OPPOSED Had we known before the war what we know today - that there were no weapons of mass destruction; that there were no links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda; that there was no imminent threat from Iraq to America's security or vital interests - Congress would never have considered, let alone voted to authorize, the use of force in Iraq.

-- In a Speech, Oct. 12, 2006 Had we known before the war what we know today - that there were no weapons of mass destruction; that there were no links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda; that there was no imminent threat from Iraq to America's security or vital interests - Congress would never have considered, let alone voted to authorize, the use of force in Iraq. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE I do not believe that the authorization provided by the Congress in 2002 gives the President the unlimited authority to send additional troops to Iraq.

-- In a Speech, Oct. 12, 2006 I do not believe that the authorization provided by the Congress in 2002 gives the President the unlimited authority to send additional troops to Iraq. PHASED REDEPLOYMENT We must begin immediately to reposition our troops from Baghdad, Fallujah, and other large urban centers to Kurdistan, where there is relative law and order, and where they would be more accepted; to other, less populated areas of Iraq, where their training of Iraqi forces can continue; and to border areas, where they can protect the territorial integrity of Iraq until Iraqi forces can do so themselves.

-- In a Speech, Oct. 12, 2006 We must begin immediately to reposition our troops from Baghdad, Fallujah, and other large urban centers to Kurdistan, where there is relative law and order, and where they would be more accepted; to other, less populated areas of Iraq, where their training of Iraqi forces can continue; and to border areas, where they can protect the territorial integrity of Iraq until Iraqi forces can do so themselves.

John Edwards

Democrat



Related Article

Familiar Face, but a New Tone to the Message (Feb. 5, 2007) VOTED YES IN 2002, NOW OPPOSED I was wrong...The argument for going to war with Iraq was based on intelligence that we now know was inaccurate. The information the American people were hearing from the president -- and that I was being given by our intelligence community -- wasn't the whole story. Had I known this at the time, I never would have voted for this war.

-- Washington Post Op-Ed,

Nov. 13, 2005 I was wrong...The argument for going to war with Iraq was based on intelligence that we now know was inaccurate. The information the American people were hearing from the president -- and that I was being given by our intelligence community -- wasn't the whole story. Had I known this at the time, I never would have voted for this war. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE I believe it is a betrayal not to speak out against the escalation of the war our nation is engaged in today, in Iraq. It is a betrayal for this President to send more troops into harm's way when we know it will not succeed in bringing stability to the region.

-- To the Democratic National Committee, Feb. 2, 2007 I believe it is a betrayal not to speak out against the escalation of the war our nation is engaged in today, in Iraq. It is a betrayal for this President to send more troops into harm's way when we know it will not succeed in bringing stability to the region. WITHDRAWAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS We have to take the next step and cap funding to mandate a withdrawal. We don't need debate; we don't need non-binding resolutions; we need to end this war, and Congress has the power to do it.

-- His Plan for Iraq, Feb. 14, 2007 We have to take the next step and cap funding to mandate a withdrawal. We don't need debate; we don't need non-binding resolutions; we need to end this war, and Congress has the power to do it.

Mike Gravel

Democrat OPPOSED FROM THE BEGINNING Given the extreme importance of any decision to go to war, and I am anguished to say this, it's my opinion that anyone who voted for the war on October 11 - based on what President Bush represented - is not qualified to hold the office of President.

-- To the Democratic National Committee, Feb. 5, 2007 Given the extreme importance of any decision to go to war, and I am anguished to say this, it's my opinion that anyone who voted for the war on October 11 - based on what President Bush represented - is not qualified to hold the office of President. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE It is not enough for congress to merely voice opposition to the 'surge' of over 20,000 new troops, nor is it enough to threaten to withhold funding or pass non binding, symbolic resolutions. We must demand an end to this war now - not 6 or 12 or 24 months from now.

-- gravel2008.us It is not enough for congress to merely voice opposition to the 'surge' of over 20,000 new troops, nor is it enough to threaten to withhold funding or pass non binding, symbolic resolutions. We must demand an end to this war now - not 6 or 12 or 24 months from now. WITHDRAW NOW I got to tell you, we should just plain get out. Just plain get out. It's their country. They're asking us to leave, and we insist on staying there..

-- At the Democratic Candidates Debate, April 26, 2007 I got to tell you, we should just plain get out. Just plain get out. It's their country. They're asking us to leave, and we insist on staying there..

Dennis Kucinich

Democrat VOTED NO IN 2002, STILL OPPOSED This attempt to foment a war is really against the best interests of America, it is against the spirit of the country, it is against the economic interests of the people.

-- In an Interview, Sept. 21, 2002 This attempt to foment a war is really against the best interests of America, it is against the spirit of the country, it is against the economic interests of the people. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE This escalation means a continuation of the occupation, more troop and civilian casualties, more anger toward the US, more support for the insurgency, more instability in Iraq and in the region, and prolonged civil war at a time when there is a general agreement in the world community that the solution in Iraq must be political not military. What is needed is a comprehensive political process. And the decision is not President Bush's alone to make.

-- In a Speech, Jan. 8, 2007 This escalation means a continuation of the occupation, more troop and civilian casualties, more anger toward the US, more support for the insurgency, more instability in Iraq and in the region, and prolonged civil war at a time when there is a general agreement in the world community that the solution in Iraq must be political not military. What is needed is a comprehensive political process. And the decision is not President Bush's alone to make. DE-FUND AND WITHDRAW NOW I think it's inconsistent to tell the American people that you oppose the war, and yet you continue to vote to fund the war, because every time you vote to fund the war, you're reauthorizing the war all over again.

-- At the Democratic Candidates Debate, April 26, 2007 I think it's inconsistent to tell the American people that you oppose the war, and yet you continue to vote to fund the war, because every time you vote to fund the war, you're reauthorizing the war all over again.

Barack Obama

Democrat



Related Article

As Candidate, Obama Carves Antiwar Stance (Feb. 26, 2007) OPPOSED FROM THE BEGINNING I know that invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East and encourage the worst rather than best impulses in the Arab world and strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars, I am opposed to dumb wars.

-- Speech to Illinois state legislature, Oct. 2002 I know that invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East and encourage the worst rather than best impulses in the Arab world and strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars, I am opposed to dumb wars. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE Too many lives have been lost and too many billions have been spent for us to trust the President on another tried and failed policy opposed by generals and experts, Democrats and Republicans, Americans and even the Iraqis themselves. It is time for us to fundamentally change our policy.



Jan. 30, 2007 -- On the Senate Floor, Jan. 30, 2007 Too many lives have been lost and too many billions have been spent for us to trust the President on another tried and failed policy opposed by generals and experts, Democrats and Republicans, Americans and even the Iraqis themselves. It is time for us to fundamentally change our policy. PHASED REDEPLOYMENT I'm proud of the fact that I put forward a plan in January that mirrors what Congress ultimately adopted, and it says, there's no military solution to this. We've got to have a political solution, begin a phased withdrawal, and make certain that we've got benchmarks in place so that the Iraqi people can make a determination about how they want to move forward.

-- At the Democratic Candidates Debate, April 26, 2007 I'm proud of the fact that I put forward a plan in January that mirrors what Congress ultimately adopted, and it says, there's no military solution to this. We've got to have a political solution, begin a phased withdrawal, and make certain that we've got benchmarks in place so that the Iraqi people can make a determination about how they want to move forward.

Bill Richardson

Democrat OPPOSED, KNOWING WHAT HE KNOWS NOW I have struggled for a long time over Iraq. Like most Americans, I am saddened by the horrific violence that takes dozens, scores of innocent lives every day. And like most Americans, I believe that our country has a moral obligation to do what we can to help the Iraqis end that violence. And because of that belief, it has not been easy for me to come to this conclusion: that the best thing we can doófor them as well as for ourselvesóis to leave.

-- In a Speech, Dec. 16, 2006 I have struggled for a long time over Iraq. Like most Americans, I am saddened by the horrific violence that takes dozens, scores of innocent lives every day. And like most Americans, I believe that our country has a moral obligation to do what we can to help the Iraqis end that violence. And because of that belief, it has not been easy for me to come to this conclusion: that the best thing we can doófor them as well as for ourselvesóis to leave. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE Like every American, I want to give the president a chance. I want him to succeed. But what he's proposing is just not going to work. Twenty-thousand additional troops, it's a quagmire. Our military, our bipartisan Iraq Study Group says that we have got to reverse course and he is not listening.



Jan. 24, 2007 -- "Larry King Live," Jan. 24, 2007 Like every American, I want to give the president a chance. I want him to succeed. But what he's proposing is just not going to work. Twenty-thousand additional troops, it's a quagmire. Our military, our bipartisan Iraq Study Group says that we have got to reverse course and he is not listening. WITHDRAWAL BY END OF 2007 This is what I would do if I were president today. I would withdraw all of our troops, including residual troops, by the end of this calendar year. I would use the leverage of that withdrawal, coupled with intensive diplomacy in three areas: One, a political framework led by the United States where the three religious entities in Iraq have a coalition government....Number two, I would convene a security conference, and I would invite Iran and Syria...And thirdly, I would have a donor conference. I would have other countries take over the reconstruction responsibility and the security of Iraq.

-- At the Democratic Candidates Debate, April 26, 2007 This is what I would do if I were president today. I would withdraw all of our troops, including residual troops, by the end of this calendar year. I would use the leverage of that withdrawal, coupled with intensive diplomacy in three areas: One, a political framework led by the United States where the three religious entities in Iraq have a coalition government....Number two, I would convene a security conference, and I would invite Iran and Syria...And thirdly, I would have a donor conference. I would have other countries take over the reconstruction responsibility and the security of Iraq.

THE CANDIDATE POSITION ON THE 2002 INVASION POSITION ON PRESIDENT BUSH'S TROOP INCREASE POSITION ON WITHDRAWAL

Sam Brownback

Republican VOTED YES IN 2002, STILL SUPPORTIVE I support that mission...[our troops] are crucial to denying radical Islamic extremists a safe haven from which they can launch further attacks. They are essential to providing the training necessary for the Iraqi Security Forces to take charge of their country's security. We cannot afford to lose this fight. Iraq is the key front in the war on terrorism.



Feb. 9, 2007 -- On the Senate Floor, Feb. 9, 2007 I support that mission...[our troops] are crucial to denying radical Islamic extremists a safe haven from which they can launch further attacks. They are essential to providing the training necessary for the Iraqi Security Forces to take charge of their country's security. We cannot afford to lose this fight. Iraq is the key front in the war on terrorism. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer. Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution.

-- In an Interview, Jan. 10, 2007 I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer. Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution. GRADUAL CEDING OF RESPONSIBILITY TO IRAQIS We have to [have] a much more aggressive political solution on the ground in Iraq. That has to take place, and that's why I've been pushing a three-state, one-country solution where you have a Sunni region, a Shi'a region and a Kurdish state that already exists, within a weak federation.

-- At the Republican Candidates Debate, May 15, 2007 We have to [have] a much more aggressive political solution on the ground in Iraq. That has to take place, and that's why I've been pushing a three-state, one-country solution where you have a Sunni region, a Shi'a region and a Kurdish state that already exists, within a weak federation.

James Gilmore

Republican HAS NOT DIRECTLY SAID I can't tell you why we went into Iraq at this point, I think the president certainly had some positions he was taking; perhaps he thought something was happening that wasn't true. But now we're in, and we have to make sure that the United States' interests are protected.

-- In an Interview, March 11, 2007 I can't tell you why we went into Iraq at this point, I think the president certainly had some positions he was taking; perhaps he thought something was happening that wasn't true. But now we're in, and we have to make sure that the United States' interests are protected.

It's wrong to stand pat. We have to actually take some affirmative action to get control of that situation and to defend this nation in the war on terror. And I think the president is endeavoring to do that. We ought to give him a shot at doing that. I think he's trying to make some progress.





-- On MSNBC , March 27, 2007 It's wrong to stand pat. We have to actually take some affirmative action to get control of that situation and to defend this nation in the war on terror. And I think the president is endeavoring to do that. We ought to give him a shot at doing that. I think he's trying to make some progress. IN FAVOR

I've put a lot of thought into this over the past year, and I've had the same frustrations as many people here in the United States, but the fact is, I don't how you tell young men and women in uniform to put on a helmet and carry a rile, you know, on the streets of Iraq, and then just tell them that it's all going to be done in one year, and expect them to go out and face the dangers that they're asking to be faced for on the behalf of the United States and on behalf of their country. So I think this is a bad decision. I think it's wrong policy.

-- On MSNBC , March 27, 2007 I've put a lot of thought into this over the past year, and I've had the same frustrations as many people here in the United States, but the fact is, I don't how you tell young men and women in uniform to put on a helmet and carry a rile, you know, on the streets of Iraq, and then just tell them that it's all going to be done in one year, and expect them to go out and face the dangers that they're asking to be faced for on the behalf of the United States and on behalf of their country. So I think this is a bad decision. I think it's wrong policy. MAINTAIN TROOP LEVELS

Rudy Giuliani

Republican



Related Article

Giulianiís Iraq Views May Provide Cover (Feb. 14, 2007) SUPPORTIVE OF DECISION TO INVADE I think it's quite appropriate to go back and explain, 'Well, I might have done it this way, or I might have done it with more troops, or I might have done it some other way.' But here's the reality of it: We're at war. And we're at war because they're at war with us. They want to come here and kill us....so we've got to put Iraq in the context of a much broader picture than just Iraq.

-- On " Hannity and Colmes", Feb. 6, 2007 I think it's quite appropriate to go back and explain, 'Well, I might have done it this way, or I might have done it with more troops, or I might have done it some other way.' But here's the reality of it: We're at war. And we're at war because they're at war with us. They want to come here and kill us....so we've got to put Iraq in the context of a much broader picture than just Iraq. IN FAVOR OF TROOP INCREASE I support what the president asked for support to do and what General Petraeus has asked for support to do, not because there's any guarantee it's going to work. There's never any guarantee at war. But if we can come out with a correct solution or a better solution in Iraq, it's going to make the whole war on terror go better.

-- On " Hannity and Colmes", Feb. 6, 2007 I support what the president asked for support to do and what General Petraeus has asked for support to do, not because there's any guarantee it's going to work. There's never any guarantee at war. But if we can come out with a correct solution or a better solution in Iraq, it's going to make the whole war on terror go better. MAINTAIN TROOP LEVELS I detect in the Democrats a kind of attempt to go back to a pre-September 11 mentality in which we're not anticipating. And I also believe that they would not have made the mistake of wanting to force us to give our enemies a timetable of our retreat  I've never heard of an army in the history of the world being required, if it's going to retreat, to give its enemy a timetable of that retreat..

-- On " Fox News Sunday", May 14, 2007 I detect in the Democrats a kind of attempt to go back to a pre-September 11 mentality in which we're not anticipating. And I also believe that they would not have made the mistake of wanting to force us to give our enemies a timetable of our retreat  I've never heard of an army in the history of the world being required, if it's going to retreat, to give its enemy a timetable of that retreat..

Mike Huckabee

Republican SUPPORTIVE, BUT CRITICAL OF HANDLING OF THE WAR The mission of bringing Saddam Hussein down didn't fail - our military didn't fail. Our policies may have been shortsighted and that they did not take into account the complexity of trying to build a democracy in a people who'd never experienced it.

-- In an Interview, Feb. 7, 2007

We need to understand that this is, in fact, World War III. Unlike any other world war we've ever fought, this one is one we cannot afford to lose.

-- In an Interview, Feb. 9, 2007 The mission of bringing Saddam Hussein down didn't fail - our military didn't fail. Our policies may have been shortsighted and that they did not take into account the complexity of trying to build a democracy in a people who'd never experienced it.We need to understand that this is, in fact, World War III. Unlike any other world war we've ever fought, this one is one we cannot afford to lose. TENTATIVELY IN FAVOR OF TROOP INCREASE I'm going to have to trust the people over there sucking that sand into their lungs and putting their boots on the ground every day, that they may know a little more about it than those of us who don't have the stack full of intelligence reports to look at.

-- On "MSNBC", Feb. 13, 2007 I'm going to have to trust the people over there sucking that sand into their lungs and putting their boots on the ground every day, that they may know a little more about it than those of us who don't have the stack full of intelligence reports to look at. GRADUAL CEDING OF RESPONSIBILITY TO IRAQIS It's like a baseball game, not a football game. You can't put on a specific clock...We have to tell them, look, we're not going to be here indefinitely. What we're going to expect of you is you're going to have to get control of the sectarian violence, the civil war that is just ripping this whole thing apart because the American people are not going to stay indefinitelyÖ It all depends on how things go over the next year.

-- On "This Week", Feb. 11, 2007 It's like a baseball game, not a football game. You can't put on a specific clock...We have to tell them, look, we're not going to be here indefinitely. What we're going to expect of you is you're going to have to get control of the sectarian violence, the civil war that is just ripping this whole thing apart because the American people are not going to stay indefinitelyÖ It all depends on how things go over the next year.

Duncan Hunter

Republican VOTED YES IN 2002, STILL SUPPORTIVE The greatest protection of human rights in this decade has been the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

-- gohunter08.com The greatest protection of human rights in this decade has been the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. IN FAVOR OF TROOP INCREASE The number of troops that we've got...is still less troops than we had last December, a year ago December. So the so-called big surge actually takes us up to fewer folks than we had one year and two months ago in Iraq.

-- On "Late Edition," Feb. 11, 2007 The number of troops that we've got...is still less troops than we had last December, a year ago December. So the so-called big surge actually takes us up to fewer folks than we had one year and two months ago in Iraq. GRADUAL CEDING OF RESPONSIBILITY TO IRAQIS There is a right way to leave Iraq and that is to continue to rotate Iraqi battalions that we've trained and equipped into the fight.

-- In an Interview, Feb. 20, 2007 There is a right way to leave Iraq and that is to continue to rotate Iraqi battalions that we've trained and equipped into the fight.

John McCain

Republican



Related Article

McCain Sees No Plan B for Iraq War (April 15, 2007) VOTED YES IN 2002, STILL SUPPORTIVE I agreed with the President's difficult decision to go to war in Iraq. I remain fully supportive of his determination not to leave Iraq until the freely elected government of that country and its armed forces are able to defend their country from foreign and domestic enemies intent on thwarting the will of the Iraqi people to create a civil society in which the rights and security of all Iraqis are protected.

-- In a Statement, Aug. 25, 2006 I agreed with the President's difficult decision to go to war in Iraq. I remain fully supportive of his determination not to leave Iraq until the freely elected government of that country and its armed forces are able to defend their country from foreign and domestic enemies intent on thwarting the will of the Iraqi people to create a civil society in which the rights and security of all Iraqis are protected. SUPPORTS THE TROOP INCREASE I've been a bit surprised at the level, at the amount of progress that they've achieved with only two, and now three, of the five brigades. I've also been not surprised but sorry that some of this activity has gone outside of Baghdad.

-- In an Interview, April 14, 2007 I've been a bit surprised at the level, at the amount of progress that they've achieved with only two, and now three, of the five brigades. I've also been not surprised but sorry that some of this activity has gone outside of Baghdad. MAINTAIN TROOP LEVELS I have no Plan B...I cannot give you a good alternative because if I had a good alternative, maybe we could consider it now. Every alternative that I know of that is keyed to a date for withdrawal, which that would dictate, is chaos in the region. And genocide.

-- In an Interview, April 14, 2007 I have no Plan B...I cannot give you a good alternative because if I had a good alternative, maybe we could consider it now. Every alternative that I know of that is keyed to a date for withdrawal, which that would dictate, is chaos in the region. And genocide.

Ron Paul

Republican OPPOSED FROM THE BEGINNING Many of the same voices who then demanded that the Clinton Administration attack Iraq are now demanding that the Bush Administration attack Iraq. It is unfortunate that these individuals are using the tragedy of September 11, 2001 as cover to force their long-standing desire to see an American invasion of Iraq. Despite all of the information to which I have access, I remain very skeptical that the nation of Iraq poses a serious and immanent terrorist threat to the United States.

-- On the Floor of the U.S. House, Oct. 8, 2002 Many of the same voices who then demanded that the Clinton Administration attack Iraq are now demanding that the Bush Administration attack Iraq. It is unfortunate that these individuals are using the tragedy of September 11, 2001 as cover to force their long-standing desire to see an American invasion of Iraq. Despite all of the information to which I have access, I remain very skeptical that the nation of Iraq poses a serious and immanent terrorist threat to the United States. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE A military victory in Iraq is unattainable, just as it was in the Vietnam war. As conditions deteriorate in Iraq, the American people are told more blood must be spilled to achieve just such a military victory. 20,000 additional troops and another $100 billion are needed for a surge. Yet the people remain rightfully skeptical. Though weve been in Iraq nearly four years, the meager goal today simply is to secure Baghdad. This hardly shows that the mission is even partly accomplished.

-- On the Floor of the U.S. House, Jan. 11, 2007 A military victory in Iraq is unattainable, just as it was in the Vietnam war. As conditions deteriorate in Iraq, the American people are told more blood must be spilled to achieve just such a military victory. 20,000 additional troops and another $100 billion are needed for a surge. Yet the people remain rightfully skeptical. Though weve been in Iraq nearly four years, the meager goal today simply is to secure Baghdad. This hardly shows that the mission is even partly accomplished. WITHDRAW NOW I think we should come home as quickly as possible. There were a lot of -- a lot of false information on the reasons we went in there, and there's no good reason to stay right now.

They say that the main reason for staying now, after given numerous reasons, we're supposed to stay now, because if we leave there will be chaos. My argument is there's plenty of chaos right there now, and a lot of Americans are being killed. And it was never in our national security interest to go over there.

-- On CNN, Feb. 26, 2007 I think we should come home as quickly as possible. There were a lot of -- a lot of false information on the reasons we went in there, and there's no good reason to stay right now.They say that the main reason for staying now, after given numerous reasons, we're supposed to stay now, because if we leave there will be chaos. My argument is there's plenty of chaos right there now, and a lot of Americans are being killed. And it was never in our national security interest to go over there.

Mitt Romney

Republican SUPPORTIVE, BUT CRITICAL OF HANDLING OF THE WAR Following the collapse of the Hussein government, we found that the planning level and the troop strength level were not adequate for the need.

-- On CNN, Oct. 17, 2006 Following the collapse of the Hussein government, we found that the planning level and the troop strength level were not adequate for the need. IN FAVOR OF TROOP INCREASE I believe that so long as there is a reasonable prospect of success, our wisest course is to seek stability in Iraq, with additional troops endeavoring to secure the civilian population.

-- During His Presidential Announcement, Feb. 13, 2007 I believe that so long as there is a reasonable prospect of success, our wisest course is to seek stability in Iraq, with additional troops endeavoring to secure the civilian population. MAINTAIN TROOP LEVELS



Well, I'm certainly not going to project failure, and those kind of circumstances that you would suggest would be projecting failure. It is critical for us to remember that Iraq has to be considered in the context of what's happening in the Middle East and throughout the world. There is a global jihadist effort. Violent, radical jihadists want to replace all the governments of the moderate Islamic states, replace them with a caliphate. And to do that, they also want to bring down the West, in particular us..

-- At the Republican Candidates Debate, May 15, 2007 Q: Can you foresee any circumstances under which you would pull out of Iraq without leaving behind a stable political and security situation?Well, I'm certainly not going to project failure, and those kind of circumstances that you would suggest would be projecting failure. It is critical for us to remember that Iraq has to be considered in the context of what's happening in the Middle East and throughout the world. There is a global jihadist effort. Violent, radical jihadists want to replace all the governments of the moderate Islamic states, replace them with a caliphate. And to do that, they also want to bring down the West, in particular us..

Tom Tancredo

Republican VOTED YES IN 2002, NOW OPPOSED Given the fact that [weapons of mass destruction] have not been found and perhaps were not there, we all wonder what we would have done in those circumstances had we known that. If I knew that was not the threat that had been posed to us . . . I think I would have voted no. I do not know right now that that (no vote) would have been the right vote because this thing hasn't played out.

-- In an Interview, Dec. 5, 2005 Given the fact that [weapons of mass destruction] have not been found and perhaps were not there, we all wonder what we would have done in those circumstances had we known that. If I knew that was not the threat that had been posed to us . . . I think I would have voted no. I do not know right now that that (no vote) would have been the right vote because this thing hasn't played out. OPPOSED TO TROOP INCREASE The bigger question raised by the President is whether an increased American military presence in Iraq will aid us in winning the global war against radical Islam and I am not convinced that it will.

-- In an Interview, Jan. 10, 2007 The bigger question raised by the President is whether an increased American military presence in Iraq will aid us in winning the global war against radical Islam and I am not convinced that it will. PHASED WITHDRAWAL I think that we have to understand that we are going to be in Iraq or at least in the region for a long time. Our national interests dictate that. We are not going to be removing our troops from the area. We can't, for all the reasons that have been identified here. The question is, in what capacity we will be there and what capacity those troops will be there? Will they be a constabulary force, which I do not believe they should be? Will they be a supporting force for the Iraqi government and for the Iraqi forces themselves, which I believe they should be?

-- At the Republican Candidates Debate, May 15, 2007 I think that we have to understand that we are going to be in Iraq or at least in the region for a long time. Our national interests dictate that. We are not going to be removing our troops from the area. We can't, for all the reasons that have been identified here. The question is, in what capacity we will be there and what capacity those troops will be there? Will they be a constabulary force, which I do not believe they should be? Will they be a supporting force for the Iraqi government and for the Iraqi forces themselves, which I believe they should be?