Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ramstad, (R-Minn.) vocal opposition to Bush "Surge"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
MnFats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-14-07 04:24 PM
Original message
Ramstad, (R-Minn.) vocal opposition to Bush "Surge"
This just came across the mojo wire.
this may be mainstream GOP thinking.
If so, Bush's 'surge' is dead as the proverbial doornail.

Statement by Jim Ramstad, R-Minn.:

Follow Advice of Commanders on the Ground

Mr. Speaker, the President has said for more than four years that he would follow the advice of his commanders on the ground with respect to troop levels in Iraq.

That's why I am surprised and disappointed the President did not follow the advice given as recently as two months ago by the Army and Marine Corps chiefs of staff, as well as General John Abizaid, General George Casey and General Colin Powell. All of these highly respected commanders expressed their opposition to increasing the number of U.S. troops in Iraq.

As General Abizaid, the top Commander in the Middle East said, an increase in U.S. troops would be counterproductive because it will perpetuate the dependency of Iraqi forces, create more targets and stretch our military too thin.

Until recently the top ground commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, has said that sending more American troops into Baghdad and Anbar Province would increase the Iraqi dependency on Washington.

As General Colin Powell, one of the most respected military leaders of our generation, put it, a surge was already tried in Baghdad last fall, and it failed.

Now, it will only further delay Iraqis taking control of their own security.

General Powell also noted that he had not heard any generals on the ground in Iraq ask for more troops.

Mr. Speaker, the original mission of U.S. troops in Iraq was to liberate the country and turn it over to the Iraqi people.

We need to get back to that original mission.

Our brave troops have done an absolutely heroic job of liberating the people of Iraq. Now, our troops should get back to the original mission of training Iraqi security forces so they can secure their own country and turn it over to the Iraqi people.

General Casey has long argued that the principal emphasis of American policy should be training Iraqi security forces and handing over responsibility to the Iraqis.

Mr. Speaker, the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, that was passed in the fall of 2002, was never intended to authorize the use of American troops to police a civil war. It was never intended to provide justification for sending 21,500 more American troops into the middle of a civil war.

As former Navy Secretary and Virginia Senator John Warner put it, "Whom do they shoot at, the Sunni or the Shia?"

With 325,000 Iraqi security forces already trained, according to our Defense Department, it's time for Iraqi troops to step up to the front lines in Baghdad, Anbar Province and Fallujah.

It's time to accelerate the training of Iraqi security forces and the turnover of security to the Iraqis so our troops can come home with their mission completed.

It's time for enforceable benchmarks to measure the progress of the Iraqi security forces.

It's time for a surge in diplomacy, not a surge in troops, to mend a broken country. It's time for a stepped-up regional peace effort in the Middle East to settle this conflict.

Mr. Speaker, Congress should listen to our Commanders on the ground in Iraq. We should follow the advice of the Army and Marine Corps chiefs of staff.

We should follow the advice of General Abziaid, General Casey and General Powell.

It's time for Congress to step up and express our strong support of our brave troops, our continued support of their original mission and our opposition to the increase of U.S. troops to police a civil war in Iraq.

I urge a "yes" vote on the resolution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
countmyvote4real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-14-07 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. k&r
This R gets it right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNWild Donating Member (56 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-14-07 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. He's my Representative and even though he's a republican
there are some issues where he actually represents my opinions. He is also frequently a co-sponsor for bills mandating mental health parity for example. I'll have to send him a few kudos. I let hem know when I disagree with him on an important issue, so it's only fair to give him proper recognition when he does spit the Kool-aid out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 01:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC