Responses to President Bush’s speech on Iraq from Colorado’s congressional delegation *:
Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-Golden:
“Tonight the president will announce he will possibly withdraw up to 30,000 troops from Iraq by July of 2008, which would leave 130,000 troops in Iraq. This is no change from the end of 2006, when we had 130,000 troops in Iraq. The American people sent a clear message in November that they wanted a reduction from that 130,000 troop level. Instead, in 2007, the President raised the troop level to 160,000 with his surge, and now thinks a reduction to the same pre-surge levels is progress. That is unacceptable. The American people will not be fooled by these smoke and mirror tactics.
Four years ago, the president said “mission accomplished” when Saddam Hussein was deposed. Yet we remained in Iraq. In January, the president indicated the surge would last for six months. Yet, by the President’s current timeline, the surge will last for at least18 months. This is not a new direction in Iraq. It is more of the same.
The president said the surge was intended to provide time for the Iraqis to make political progress, yet all it has done is give President Bush more time. The Iraqis have only met 3 of the 18 benchmarks for success, and there has been no improvement in the political situation. Enough is enough.
We cannot continue to move the goalposts of success. It is unfair to our brave men and women serving in our military who have done everything we have asked them to do.
It is time for a real change in direction. It is time to redeploy our troops home and to nearby bases in the Middle East, including to Afghanistan, in an orderly, methodical, strategic and safe manner.
In the coming weeks, Republicans in Congress will have to decide whether they will continue to rubberstamp the president’s Iraq policy, or join Democrats and the vast majority of Americans demanding a new direction in Iraq and refocusing America’s efforts on fighting the real threats of terrorism around the world and capturing Osama Bin Laden.”
-Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Littleton:
“The reduction in violence and the improved capabilities of the Iraqi Army are encouraging. This progress, as the president noted, will enable us to begin disengaging, to hand more control to the Iraqi’s and to bring some of our troops home. I am hopeful that this progress will continue and that the President’s benchmark for transferring security responsibility in all of Iraq’s provinces to the Iraqis by November will be met.
The president is correct in identifying the battle in Iraq as critical to our future. Unfortunately, however, the president continues to neglect and ignore our perilously porous borders, which pose a serious threat to national security.”
Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Denver:
“While I am encouraged that President Bush will redeploy a limited number of U.S. troops from Iraq, the president continues to ignore the need to establish concrete timelines and benchmarks to successfully withdraw all of our troops and end this misguided war. The president’s redeployment plan merely reduces our troops to pre-surge levels – troop levels that were unacceptable at the end of 2006, and are again unacceptable now.
“Gen. David Petraeus’ progress report illustrates that the ‘surge’ has produced unbalanced results. While the U.S. military continues to do the heavy lifting, the Iraqi Government has not made any significant political progress. General Petraeus conceded that violence remains too high and an independent report found that the Iraqi Government is far from taking over security responsibilities.
“The clock is running out on the president’s failed war strategy. Having opposed giving the President the original authorization to go to war in 2002, I cannot support any plan that weakens our commitment to timelines and benchmarks that will bring our troops home and end this war quickly and responsibly.”
Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Fort Morgan:
“I want to see the Iraqi military provide their own security and begin providing relief for our troops. Our mission needs to transition away from being a frontline force to a supporting role. Gen. Petraeus outlined how the increased U.S. military support this summer delivered a more secure Iraq, so over the coming months as we begin to pare down they need to step up, and do so in a big way.”
Rep. Mark Udall, D-Eldorado Springs:
“The fundamental question we face as a nation is whether our military presence in Iraq is making us safer. I do not believe that the president can credibly argue that we are safer. Not while our Army is stretched and the cost of the war in lives and treasure continues to mount. Tonight, the President wrapped himself tightly around Gen. Petraeus’ recommendations before the House Armed Services Committee earlier this week. As the lone Colorado member of the committee, I heard the general deliver three messages: We are making military progress, but it will take more time to meet necessary political objectives in Iraq; meanwhile, our strategy won’t change – we’ll continue focusing on a counterinsurgency mission; and in the course of the next year, we’ll cut troops back to the levels they were at the beginning of this year.
“Despite the skill of Gen. Patraeus and the bravery of our troops, I do not believe this represents strategic progress. While the General and our troops have done their best, the President has failed to match their bravery with a diplomatic or political strategy. Nor can I agree that leaving as many as 130,000 troops in Iraq until the end of the Bush presidency is in our country’s best interest, particularly when it means losing more American lives, maiming many thousands more brave soldiers, spending further billions of dollars, and diverting limited resources from a more effective war on terror.
“In January, when President Bush last spoke to the nation to promote a ‘surge’ in U.S. troops, he vowed that ‘America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.’ Yet just last week, the General Accounting Office concluded that the Iraqi government has largely failed to meet Congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress.
“The president has taken our country down a dark path that was tragically avoidable. His remarks tonight suggest he is still in denial about the need for a dramatic shift in strategy. I believe that we must shift strategy – not just tactics. And I continue to believe we need a bipartisan approach focused on a phased withdrawal of American forces, a responsible redeployment plan, and a ‘diplomatic surge’ that will help contain a wider regional war.”
* Not all members had responded by press time
