Question about Dean/Iraq

[FreedomAngel82]

I know lately Dean has been saying we need to stay in Iraq to help clean the mess up that Bush made. I used to think that myself but it's just like Vietnam. I didn't follow him closely though until after this past election because I didn't follow politics until mid/late 2004 before the election. I am a Dean fan though, don't get me wrong, but I was wondering: before he became chairman what was he saying about getting out of Iraq? I know one of his main campaign theme's was he was anti-war and that's one of the many reason's why people were drawn to him. Did he say the same things before he became chairman or just recently? Thanks in advanced.

[ladjf]

1. I clearly remember that his position was the same as it is now.

We should stay and clean up the mess. However, I was in hopes that in light of the continued mess, he would change his position on the pullout.

[napi21]

2. I aaagree with Dean, but I think we should state a difinitive time.

For a long time, I've promoted the idea of TELLING the Iraqi people that we cam here to rid you of a despotic leader, and we did that. Now it's you're Country and you must gather an army, police force, etc. together and maintain your Country for yourselves. Then we state that "as of XX/XX/XXXX we are leaving! Between no and then, we will train your people, and give you the necessary arms to get the job done, but when that date comes, you better be ready, 'cause we're out of here!" That would give the Iraqi's a reason to fight for what THEY want! I happen to think if somebody is going to fight my fight for me, I'm sure going to let 'em do it, and not risk my own neck!

[Carolab]

3. His position was always the same.

Also, I think this is quite a good comment from a Dean blogger:

http://deaniac83.blogspot.com/2005/05/why-howard-dean-is-right-on-iraq-again.html

Sunday, May 01, 2005

Why Howard Dean is Right on Iraq, Again
There has been a whole lot of buzz in the past weeks about Howard Dean's recent comment that he believes that while the war in Iraq was grossly unjustified, a US pullout right now would be also a mistake. "Now that we're there, we can't get out" said the DNC Chairman.

I want to stress that Howard Dean didn't all of a sudden come up with this position. Throughout his presidential campaign, he has said the exact same thing. He has always maintained that pulling out American troops without either a significant international troop presence or self sufficient Iraqi forces would be tantamount to leaving the Iraqi people in the face of a civil war, which in his judgment would make Iraq and the greater middle east an even grater danger to the United States than it is now. So let's track Dean's position: It was wrong to go in because Iraq wasn't a threat to US safety, that by going in, Bush and Co. have created what is significant security challenge to the US security, that the aforementioned challenge - though created by ourselves - is now here and must be confronted, and that pulling out without International presence or Iraqi self sufficiency will further that security threat in addition to leaving a chaotic civil war in Iraq. This was, and I repeat, always Howard Dean's position on Iraq. He mentioned late in the presidential campaign season that as someone who opposed the war in Iraq, it was (ironically, somewhat) his concern that the US is going to hurry up and pull troops out too quickly. So those who are freshly accusing Dr. Dean of "selling out the anti-war movement", think again. Howard Dean was never the candidate of the rabid anti-war (not just anti-Iraq war but anti-all war) movement, nor has he ever claimed anything different than what he is saying now. His recent statement is a reiteration of his convictions and beliefs, not something he is doing because he is somehow caving into the pro-war faction of the party.

Now that that's out of the way, why is Howard Dean right? I think the first part of his position, that it was wrong to go into Iraq because Iraq was not in fact a security threat to the United States, has been proven over and over and over again. The controversy is around the fact that he believs we can't pull out US troops right now. The fact is, by going in cowboy style, Bush and his cronies have created a serious security danger to the United States. Iraq wasn't a mingling place for terrorists before, but it is now. If we leave now, not only will Iraq disintegrate into chaos of the worst kind, it will also turn into a safe haven for the likes of Al Queda. These are people that have shown the willingness, resourcefulness, and the ability to strike inside the United States. The security danger to the United States that comes from Iraq turning into a safe haven for them is imminent, grave and dire. That threat will be unimaginably greater than the threat terrorists pose to us in Iraq now. This, in a nutshell, is why we can't get out, even though we'd like to. Yes, George Bush's policies increase that danger every day by not seeking an international solution, but you have to realize that Howard Dean is not advocating Bush's policies in Iraq currently. He is simply saying that we can't get out in a vacuum. When he says that he hopes the President's policies are successful, he of course means that forming a democratic, peaceful Iraq capable of taking care of its own defense, law, and order.

(MORE at link above)

[FreedomAngel82]

4. Thanks all

:) I was just wondering about that. :)