Local congressmen on Bush-McCain escalation plan for Iraq
Here’s a quick run-down on where Congressman stand on the Bush-McCain escalation “plan’ for Iraq: Slaughter opposes it unequivocally, Walsh seems to oppose it, Kuhl supports it.
Here’s Walsh’s statement (via Walsh Watch):
“I listened very, very closely to what the president had to say. I heard him say that only the Iraqis could stop the violence. And he took responsibility for the mistakes that were made, which I applaud him for. But there was nothing that he said that convinced me that sending in 20,000 or even 50,000 more troops would change anything in Iraq. My view is that until the Sunni and Shiia sects think they have something to gain from democracy … the violence will not stop. The real answer here is a political compromise.â€
Here’s Fighting29th’s summary of Kuhl’s exact position:
Randy Kuhl’s first reaction to Bush’s new Iraq plan is that it is better than doing nothing. Kuhl also thinks that Bush should engage Iran and Syria diplomatically, and pledges continued support: “Kuhl said he will continue to support the president’s plan with the expectation that troops will gradually be moved out of the region within the next year and a half.” I don’t see how Kuhl’s expectation is consistent with the plan announced Wednesday, though he’s certainly not the only Congressman who wants us to start leaving Iraq before the next election.
[...] was talking escalation in Iraq. Check out Oberman’s take - riveting. The “surge” debate started. Hey, it was only a year ago. Feel safer yet? Stlo7 was duped in this post as well. Check out the [...]