- October 10 - One year ago today, the United States House of Representatives passed the Iraq War resolution, despite the efforts led by Rep. Dennis Kucinich that persuaded two-thirds of the Democrats in the House to defy their partys leadership and vote No. Congressman Kucinich is the only presidential candidate in the race who voted No in the House or Senate. Since then, Kucinich has not wavered in his strong opposition to the Iraq War and Occupation. On the one year anniversary of the vote, Kucinich has issued a plan to replace US troops in Iraq with UN forces, a transfer of power that would be complete as early as New Years Day.
Kucinichs statement begins:
The war in Iraq is over and the occupation of Iraq has turned into a quagmire. The US troops have become the targets of criminals and terrorists who are flowing into Iraq for the chance to shoot Americans. The cost of the occupation keeps rising: The President has already asked for more than $150 billion to pay for it. And there is no end in sight. The UN is now in an impossible situation, where most of the members view the war and occupation of Iraq to be a US folly. Under these circumstances, the UN cant help. The US is stuck, mostly alone, with a costly, unpopular and unending occupation of Iraq. If we stay the course, it will do damage to American security. Iraq was not and is not a threat to the US, yet the demands of an occupation will overstretch our armed forces. And the extended deployment of reserve forces make us vulnerable at home because the reserve call ups include large numbers of firemen, policemen and other first responders who are needed for the homeland defense mission.
People are asking, is there a way out? I believe there is. I am writing to share with you a plan that will get the UN in Iraq and the US out. This plan could bring the troops home by New Years day, it will cost much less than the Presidents, and it will increase American security.
Read Congressman Kucinichs plan at http://www.kucinich.us/statements.htm#100903
PS. While this statement on withdrawal affirms Rep. Kucinich's consistent leadership in opposing the Iraq war and occupation, last night's debate exposed more vacillating from Gov. Dean (who is often called by the media the leading anti-war candidate). Where Dean had supported spending $87 billion more on war and occupation at the CNBC debate ("we have no choice," Sept. 25), he refused in yesterday's New York Times to say how he'd vote, if he were in Congress, on the $87 billion. Pressed by Rep. Kucinich last night, Dean said he would support the $87 billion if the money came from rescinding tax cuts -- raising the issue of how the merits of spending more money on a deepening quagmire in Iraq are settled by where the money comes from:
KUCINICH: I want to comment as the only person on this stage who actually voted against the war in Iraq. I want to say that Governor Dean's answer was incomplete before, because he told CNBC two weeks ago that we have no choice about funding the $87 billion. And this morning in the New York Times, he wouldn't take a position on the $87 billion, and the governor says that he's still for keeping 70,000 troops in Iraq...
...KUCINICH TO DEAN : I want to ask him, do you believe in spending $87 billion to keep our troops in Iraq? Because I don't. Do you?
DEAN: I get to answer the question?
DEAN: I believe if the president is serious about supporting our troops
in Iraq that he has to say where he's going to get the money from, and
that means he's got to get rid of $87 billion worth of the tax cuts that
went to Ken Lay and his friends at Enron.
KUCINICH: Would you fund to keep the troops in Iraq?
For more information: http://www.kucinich.us
For Rep. Kucinich's Schedule: http://www.kucinich.us/schedule.htm