The former U.S. Sen. from North Carolina told reporters America should "make it clear (to Iraqis) we are leaving, and the best way is to start leaving. We should take 40,000 combat troops out now."Edwards, who has said he regretted his vote as a U.S. senator authorizing President Bush to declare war in Iraq, said he would ask the country's military leaders for a strategy "to have the (rest of the) troops out in roughly 12 to 18 months."
"There is no chance other countries in the world will help Iraq as long as we are an occupying force," he said.
John Edwards is being criticized in the media for lacking any experience in foreign affairs. I can see how after having George Bush stumble all over Europe that might be a legitimate concern. But the difference, of course, is that Senator Edwards has a brain!
Plus if he gets Wesley Clark to be his running mate then that issue is solved.
(By the way if the right wing media is bothering to criticize Edwards, it means they fear him. And they should!)
I think the lack of expertise in such a crucial area at this important time is a definite disqualifier. Unfortunate, perhaps, but true. This lack of insight was not only the reason Edwards voted for the IWR, but also why he was actually one of the 16 senators who actually co-sponsered Lieberman's bill. John Kerry may have "voted against it before voting for it," but at least Kerry didn't actually co-sponser Lieberman's bill. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:SJ00046:@@@P:
ReplyDeleteAnd Wes Clark has already stated numerous times that he will not be anyone's Dick Cheney. Hard to blame him since the Bush/Cheney model, where the VP has expertise but the President has none, has failed so spectacularly. So there's no possibility of a Edwards/Clark ticket. And if Edwards wanted to listen to Clark, why didn't he back in 2003? Paul Wellstone and Ted Kennedy both say they voted against the IWR because of Clark's advice. And Clark was desperately lobbying congress not to give Bush a blank check. Edwards didn't listen to Clark, unlike Wellstone and Kennedy.
I really like what Edwards had been doing with domestic issues. But he's not fit for the top spot, unfortunately, though I hope he'll have a spot in the next administration of a president who actually has the credentials and experience to get us out of this international mess.
Pissed all over my cornflakes didn't you?
ReplyDeleteWell gee thanks.
Gryphen,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that you are talking about a potential future president for 2009. The poster is obviously a Clarkie who sez no. Clarkies often smack Edwards for not being in the military and they perceive someone who has military experience can fix our messes abroad. I would argue that it is diplomats who fix problems, with generals to implement. We know our first President, Geo Washington, was a general, but a hero of the Revolution, but it was Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin who secured funding and more supplies to help win the Revolution.
I happen to know that Edwards has grown his foreign policy portfolio since he has been out of the senate. He's been invited to visit or speak (or both) in Dubai, India, Britain, Israel, Brussels, and later this year, he is going to China. In each case, he has met with the top officials thus far.
What the Clarkie didn't say is what experience does Clark have on the domestic front. Zip. Edwards hits home runs on that one, and it will be as big as an issue, if not larger, in 2008.
Clark is not the only one with the required foreign policy experience. Gore qualifies as well. But Edwards does not. Clark has domestic policy experence in an executive capacity. From schools to hospitals to repairing potholes in roads. Clark also has considerable diplomatic experience in negotiations and treaties. Edwards is far behind Clark and Gore, and host of other people. It doesn't have to be Clark, but it surely shouldn't be Edwards. Edwards has already demonstrated his weakness of judgment on international affairs. And if you're looking domestic experence, you're better off with a governor who has executive expertise. Right now, Clark seems to have the best mix of foreign policy, diplomatic (endorsed by 55 ambassadors), executive domestic expertise. But I could go for many others besides Clark. Just not Edwards, not after he co-sponsored the Iraq War. Even Kerry didn't do that.
ReplyDeleteHe said he was sorry!
ReplyDeleteThis is not about being sorry or not, but about competency. If Bush said he was sorry, does that mean you would trust his competency again?
ReplyDeleteFurther, Edwards said he was sorry he voted for the war. But he hasn't said a peep about the fact that he was one of the 16 co-sponsors, hoping to downplay that and that people will forget. And the way Edwards went about apologizing, after 3 years was cowardly as well. He had his wife float some stuff about regretting the vote, so that he could distance himself from his wife's position if the reception was lukewarm. Then he had his supporters flood messageboards, urging people to congratulate his wife, telling them that if they supported her, they might convince John Edwards to make a similiar statement. Hardly a courageous and bold move when you need to use your wife to test the waters 3 years after the fact.