Skip to comments.Kerry called timetable 'cut and run' in 2003
Posted on 06/22/2006 5:54:37 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
While Democrats bristle at Republican descriptions of their Iraq policy as "cut and run," Sen. John Kerry, the author of a bill defeated today in the Senate, used that very term to criticize President Bush's consideration during the 2004 election campaign of a timetable for withdrawal.
In a December 2003 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City, the Massachusetts Democrat said he feared that "in the run-up to the 2004 election, the administration is considering what is tantamount to a cut-and-run strategy," notes Townhall.com writer Tim Chapman.
"Their sudden embrace of accelerated Iraqification and American troop withdrawal dates, without adequate stability, is an invitation to failure," Kerry said in his 2003 speech. "The hard work of rebuilding Iraq must not be dictated by the schedule of the next American election."
Kerry said it "would be a disaster and a disgraceful betrayal of principle to speed up the process simply to lay the groundwork for a politically expedient withdrawal of American troops. That could risk the hijacking of Iraq by terrorist groups and former Ba'athists."
Today, the Senate voted down two proposals to set a timetable for troop withdrawal.
Kerry's plan to require the administration to withdraw all combat troops from Iraq by July 1, 2007, with redeployments beginning this year, was rejected by an 86-13 vote. Later, the Senate voted 60-39, mostly along party lines, against a nonbinding resolution to urge the administration to begin withdrawing troops, but without a timetable.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said withdrawal is "not an option."
"Surrender is not a solution," he asserted.
Senate Minority leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., criticized Republicans for sticking with a "failed" strategy of "stay the course."
"It is long past time to change course in Iraq and start to end the president's open-ended commitment," he said.
Joining all Republicans in support of the nonbinding resolution, with the exception of Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, were Democrats Mark Dayton of Minnesota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, Bill Nelson of Florida and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
Lieberman, Bill Nelson and Ben Nelson are running for re-election this fall.
Last week, the House rejected withdrawal timetables.
Republicans have welcomed the debate, ahead of mid-term elections, because it points out stark differences with Democrats over the war and highlights divisions with the Democratic Party.
President Bush has said U.S. troops will remain in Iraq until Iraqi security forces are prepared to defend the country.
How can anyone take him seriously?
If you're going to advocate a withdrawal on a date certain, you might as well make it an immediate withdrawal. You are guaranteeing defeat. You might as well be defeated now as be defeated later. And it has the advantage that it is cheaper and less bloody.
The host on Air America was extreemly agry with Kerry over doing this. Said it was stupid move because it is dividing the Democratic party with the "Cut and runners" on one side and the "Stay the course but only for awhile"
Dems on the other.
Sundials were invented for people like Kerry. Of course, transcripts were invented for him too.
Outstanding find by Tim Chapman.
Bwahahahahaha ...sKerry is such a berk.
Hmmmm...looks like someone is a bit nervous in Minnesota?
Dayton isn't running.
I wonder if he was consistant before he wasn't.
I love it when their own words come back to haunt them.
Surrender's always been Kerry's choice. It's the French disease. Runs in the family.
Goodness, what a smoking gun!
I am just CERTAIN that I will be reading about this tomorrow in the NYT and LAT, right?
Kerry is Ted Baxter......
He only repeats what his handlers tell him.
Back when G. H. W. Bush was President, Kerry was against the war and voted against the use of force, then claimed we had failed because we followed the U.N to the letter and left Saddaam in power.
When Clinton attacked Iraq to purposely distract MonicaGate and impeachment, Kerry said Saddaam was a brutal dictator, and was supportive of Clinton's use of force without U.N approval that failed to removc Saddaam.
Before he was running for President, he voted for the use of force, but was against sending in troops with U.N. approval.
While he was running, he was for the war on terror with U.N. approval, but against the war in Iraq, but against the timetable of bringing them home, but didn't regret his vote authorizing force. (nuance?)
Now, he regrets his vote, is for the war in Iraq, but wants to bring our troops home on a timetable.
I'm confused. Are we on the Flip, or the Flop this time?
Flip-flop John Kerry. Just as bad as John McCain.
THS MORON IS A GIANT JOKE, NOTHING MORE - NOTHING LESS.
Is this the same John Kerry that served in Vietnam? Sold out his country? Threw his service medals away? Revises and extends his remarks almost daily? Thought so!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.