Kucinich: Obama's 'newfound' Iraq strategy is 'too little, too late' RAW STORY

Published: Wednesday September 12, 2007





Print This Email This Democratic presidential candidates spent part of Wednesday sniping at each other, beginning with a speech by Senator Barack Obama which alluded to a few of his opponents who voted to authorize the war in Iraq. Although one target, Senator Hillary Clinton, laid low for the time being, four other Democratic candidates fired back at Obama and also at the former first lady. "Conventional thinking in Washington lined up for war," Obama said, in remarks not specifically mentioning Clinton or Edwards, but targeting the Washington political class of which both were prime members. "Despite -- or perhaps because of how much experience they had in Washington, too many politicians feared looking weak and failed to ask hard questions." Obama added, "Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was. The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year -- now." Obama said if he were president now, he would immediately begin pulling combat troops out of Iraq at the rate of two brigades -- around 4,000 troops -- a month, to be completed by the end of next year. "Obama joked about making the speech in a city named Clinton," the Associated Press noted. "'I hope the headline when we leave is 'Clinton endorses Obama,'' he said." Later in the day, in a press release, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich challenged Obama's "newfound" Iraq strategy as "too little, too late, and too politically contrived and convenient to be credible or persuasive." The AP article continues, "But two other Democratic candidates, John Edwards and Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, chastised Obama and Clinton for not pursuing a troop withdrawal vigorously enough. Another rival, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, called Obama's plan dangerous and argued that he had dodged the question of how many troops he would leave in the country. Excerpts from AP article: # Edwards  who has been calling for an immediate withdrawal of 40-50,000 troops and a complete withdrawal of all combat troops within nine to 10 months  said Obama's plan would only "'begin' to end this war now." "Our young men and women are dying every day for a failed policy. Every member of Congress who believes this war must end, from Senators Obama and Clinton to (GOP Sen. John) Warner, has a moral responsibility to use every tool available to them, including a filibuster, to force the president to change course," said Edwards, the former North Carolina senator. Dodd said he was "disappointed" that Obama "didn't include a firm, enforceable deadline for redeployment," and dismayed that neither he nor Clinton "will give an unequivocal answer on whether they would support a measure if it didn't have such an enforceable deadline." Said Richardson: "Leaving behind tens of thousands of troops in Iraq for an indefinite amount of time is nothing new. This plan is inadequate and does not end the war." # Excerpts from Kucinich's press release: # Kucinich, the only Democratic Presidential candidate who voted against the original Iraq war authorization in 2002 and every supplemental war appropriation since, said Obama's announcement today of a "new approach" to Iraq is "sorely wanting at every level." "With all due respect to my friend and colleague, his newfound strategy for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq is too little, too late, and too politically contrived and convenient to be credible or persuasive," Kucinich said. "While Senator Obama is now struggling mightily to establish himself as the Party's leading advocate of ending the war and bringing our troops home, until recently, his record shows that he voted for every re-authorization of the war by approving of every additional spending measure placed before him by the Bush Administration. "He gave one highly publicized and highly promoted speech against the war before he was elected to the U.S. Senate. But, starting in 2004, when he was elected to do more than give speeches, his votes show that he bought the lies and paid for the war over and over again. It was only a few months ago -- when he became a candidate for the Presidency -- that he decided it was politically inconvenient to keep supporting the President, keep supporting the war, and keep supporting the diversion of hundreds of billions of dollars from our crucial domestic priorities. "The Senator's call for what's being described as 'an immediate withdrawal' is actually an unacceptable, inadequate, and disingenuous campaign tactic that leaves our brave men and women in Iraq at risk and in jeopardy until the end of next year. They need to come home now. The war needs to end now. The Congress needs to stop supporting the President's failed policies now. "I welcome the Senator's late arrival to the debate I began in 2002 when I led the opposition in the Congress to going to war. I'm glad that he has finally joined me in a call for more international involvement to stabilize the situation. I also appreciate his new willingness to support my call for additional spending to help Iraqi citizens whose lives and property have been destroyed by this war. "After almost three years, the Senator has finally recognized that he has a lot of catching up to do. What America needs is a leader, not someone who spends years struggling to catch up," Kucinich concluded. # (with wire reports)



