Bob Casey Jr. on the war

http://www.bobcasey.com/issues/security/

The Struggle in Iraq

The situation in Iraq has no easy solutions. Our troops are doing an outstanding job in battling insurgent forces. But the administration's misconceived and badly executed strategies have been turning Iraq into a worldwide haven for terrorists and endangering hope for a stable democracy to emerge.

We now know that the Bush administration's rationale for its rush to war was horribly flawed. The supposedly imminent threat posed by the Hussein regime's possession of weapons of mass destruction did not exist. And it has become evident that the administration did not have a real plan for keeping the peace after our military's rout of Hussein and his military forces. Thus our soldiers have suffered more loss of life and limb from terrorist guerilla warfare after the toppling of Hussein's dictatorial regime.

Too many Washington politicians continue to shirk their duty to press the hard and necessary questions about our involvement in Iraq. Bob Casey will push for a clear exit strategy and real plans for the Iraqi forces to take care of their own security, and development of a government structure that is widely seen as legitimate among Iraq's various ethnic groups. This year should be a year of transition for the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own security and governance.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ok, so his not hardcore "GET OUR PEOPLE OUT NOW" but if we can get the democratic party to push for an exit strategy then we know we'll be getting our troops out of there.

take responsibility for their own security and governance."

Sounds reasonable to me.

meaningful but actually having no real meaning, political pablum.

"This year should be a year of transition for the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own security and governance."


kinda like saying "this year should be a year of transition for the sun to appear to shift from the east to the west on a daily basis"

it should say, "at the end of this year, our troops are leaving and the iraqis will have to deal with their own issues" or "no troops come home until the last iraqi is dead". at least then we would know this politician actually stands for something concrete and verifiable.

Msongs
www.msongs.com
batik & digital art
mugs and shirts

And, there ain't no way it's happening, despite all that Murtha, Kerry, Feingold and other leading Dems who are actually in Congress can say.

The best Casey can do is get elected so that he can add his vote next year, and take away a rethug vote, so that maybe we can get our troops out next year.

I don't care how he massages and nuances his position to make it palatable to PA voters so that they pick him over Santorum.

(Note I am NOT saying that the Dems in Congress should stop agitating for "Out now" or "Out this year" - which come out to the same thing anyway, in practical terms. I just don't think we should expect guys running for office, who won't take that office until 2007 to be raising hell about something they have no power to effect, and that isn't going to actually happen until we take back Congress.)

I want Santorum out. No way in hell is keeping Santorum better for anyone than electing Casey, no matter what you think of Casey's exact words about Iraq.

Murtha is one of the Western PA democrats that some of us here in the east labelled as "Casey Democrats" because of their strong pro-union but definately anti-choice stance (Yes, John Murtha is very anti-choice). I'm kinda hoping that there will be some sort of bond between these two Western PA democrats and John can take the time to show what he learned about at Walter Reed and why he felt he had to change his mind when it comes to the war

it's a non-statement of a non-position ...

that Casey cannot vote on the issue and has little power to effect meaningful change is NOT the issue ...

some of us are looking for leadership or at least allies; this ain't what it's supposed to look like ... around our house, we refer to statements like this (a Frank Burns line from MASH) as "it's nice to be nice to the nice" ...

you nailed it: Casey's non-statement is political pablum ...

which clearly is NOT what Rick Santorum is doing.

I mean, when you get right down to it isn't this what all potential candidates do - put a page on their website that lists how they feel about issues so that the voter can decide between what Bob thinks and what Rick thinks.

Geez, when Casey made a comment about how he would vote for Alito he was slammed left and right like he was actually going to go to DC that day and cast a vote. I just don'ot understand this crowd.

It's a good stance and if we had more democrats thinking like that in DC perhaps we can end this war and get our troops home.

sometimes in politics - one just has to focus

"Carthage must be destroyed"

I lie the comments about this being the year for transition for Iraq and calling for a clear exit strategy from the administration.

It would have be even better if he would have supported bring the majority of our troops home by years end- Senator Kerry's Resolution 36".
Unfortunately, Casey advisories are probably telling him to proceed with caution with comments about the war.

especially in a state like Pennsylvania where we go from hardcore liberal to hard-core neo-con fundumentalism. One can only hope that it'll be people like Kerry & Murtha that help guide him once he is in DC.

BTW, Casey is NOT DLC