Archive for February, 2007

Statement: Edwards said that he would consider pursuing a non-aggression pact between the US and Iran. This statement came in answer to a voter’s question at a morning house party. Asked about it later in an interview with ABC News, Edwards confirmed that he views such a treaty in which the US would promise not to attack Iran as “a possibility down the road.” He emphasized that the Iranian government would first have to change its behavior in several areas. For full article click here

Read Full Post »

Article: “Clinton To Anti-War Voters: Bring It On,” by Amy Goodman. click here

Read Full Post »

Statement: Richardson spoke against Complex 2030 and the RRW program. He said he is in favor of restoring treaties and agreements to prevent spread of nukes and that he wants U.S. troops home quickly – within a calendar year, using economic-based diplomacy as the carrot to stop the bloodshed.

Read Full Post »

Question: Biden was asked if he would reduce our nuclear weapons stockpile from ten thousand to one thousand.

Answer: Biden replied that he would.

Read Full Post »

Question: Biden was asked if he would continue to develop and build nuclear weapons, especially the Reliable Replacement Warhead.

Answer: Biden replied that he is opposed to any new nuclear weapons systems including the missile defense system and stated that reducing the arsenal would save billions.

Read Full Post »

Clinton introduces the Iraq Troop Reduction and Protection Act of 2007. Clinton renewed her call on President Bush to reverse course and endorse the plan she outlined several weeks ago that would cap the level of U.S. troops in Iraq at the number prior to his escalation plan, and begin the long overdue phased redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq beginning in 90 days. Clinton outlined her plan when she returned last month from her third trip to Iraq and is formally introduced the legislation yesterday. The Iraq Troop Protection and Reduction Act of 2007 presents a comprehensive approach to Iraq that halts the President’s escalation policy and provides an alternative strategy in Iraq with the goal of stabilizing the country so American troops can redeploy out of Iraq. Senator Clinton’s legislation puts real pressure on the Iraqi government, requiring the Iraqis to make political progress or lose funding for their military and reconstruction, and requiring the Bush Administration to begin a phased redeployment and convene an international conference within 90 days unless a new Congressional authorization to remain in Iraq was issued. Finally, the legislation would prohibit the use of funds to send troops to Iraq unless they have the proper equipment and training. If the President were to follow the provisions in this legislation then the United States should be able to complete a redeployment of troops out of Iraq by the end of his term. To read the text of S.670, click here

Read Full Post »

Question: Obama was told that we appreciated his coming out against the war but that we really want him to vote against the supplemental funding for Iraq.

Answer: He’s introduced legislation that, if passed, would have our troops redeployed by March 2008. He needs to look at the supplemental funding. He says there is the possibility that the Administration could call Congress’ “bluff” if Congress voted to cut off funding, and that he doesn’t want to leave troops stranded without armor, etc. (To that I replied that they wouldn’t have to hitchhike home, and that there’ s plenty of money in the Pentagon coffers.) He didn’t respond to that. He also said they (the Democrats) think their chances are better with legislation than defunding the war. (amiller)

Question: “Will you commit to not signing funding for Complex 2030 and the Reliable Replacement Warheads?”

Answer: No commitment. His responses indicated that he has not really thought yet about particular proposals. The Senator also discussed our lack of congruency in our commitment to the NPT and said that we cannot claim the “moral high ground” and require other countries to adhere to NPT if we are not doing the same. Obama voiced his belief that we have “too many” nuclear weapons. He also discussed how he has been involved with “this issue” for quite some time and believes that we need to “secure” our weapons. Senator Obama said that we needed to determine what a “safe level” of nuclear weapons would look like – did not denounce the use of nuclear weapons. (eplacey)

From the New Hampshire Peace Action Questionnaire

Question: Do you oppose the two major new administration proposals called the Reliable Replacement Warhead and Complex 2030?
Answer: “Before introducing totally new and untested design into the arsenal, we have to caarefully study factors such as how it would impact our ability to reduce stockpiles, the impact on would-be proliferators, and the science behind stockpile aging. In this context, I oppose the Complex 2030 and Reliable Replacement Warhead programs. As I wrote in foreign Affairs, “America must not rush to produce a new generation of nuclear warheads.”

Question: Do you believe that the US shoudl abide by our NPT commitment and, if so, how will you do so as President of the United States?
Answer: “We need to get back onh the road that leads to fewer nuclear weapons and ultimately to a world from which their dark shadow has been completely lifted. As President, I will make sure that, every step along the way, our security interests will guide our actions. Over the long term, we must reduce the salience of nuclear weapons in international politics by articulating a clear vision of the nuclear future others will follow–one in which there are fewer and fewer nuclear weapons in the world.”

Question: Do you support the Bush Administration’s approach to the threat of terrorism?
Answer: “We need to use all the tools of American power against violent extremism, including economic, diplomatic, and military means. As we prosecute the war on terror, we need both to destroy and disrupt terrorist organizations from gaining more followers over the longer term. That requires that we bring all our power to bear on this war. Finally, we must recognize that there is nothing inconsistent about fighting the war on terror and respecting civil liberties; the two are not mutually exclusive. That’s why I believe that we should close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and restore the centuries-old protection of habeas corpus.”

Question: Will you call for all US combat and non-combat troops to be removed from Iraq during the first one hundred days of your administration in such a way that minimizes the potential violence, and for the US to commit to financing reconstruction and redevelopment.
Answer: “I support a phased redeployment of US troops form Iraq with the goal of removing all combat brigades by March 31, 2008. In this civil war where no military solution exists, this redeployment remains our best leverage to pressure the Iraqi governmenh to achieve the political settlement between its warring factions that can reduce violence and promote stability. The Iraq War De-escalation Act that I introduced in January 2007 allows for a limited number of US troops to remain in Iraq for force protection, to engage in counter-terrorism, and to continue the training of Iraqi securityh forces. In addition, we will redeploy our troops to other locations in the region, reassuring our allies that we will stay engaged in the Middle East.

Question: Are you willing to take the “nuclear option” off the table with Iran?
Answer: “As president, I will never take the military option off the table. But our first ine of offense must be sustained, direct, and aggressive diplomacy–the kind that the Bush Administration has been unwilliing to conduct. Lastly, I will make certain that the current UN Security Council resolutions–and sanctions–are enforced vigorously, and if Iran persists, press for tougher sanctions leading, if necessary, to Iran’s total isolation.”

Question: As President, will you forswear any preventive military attakc on or use of force to achieve regime change in Iran?

Answer: “Our first measure with respect to Iran must be sustained, direct and aggressive diplomacy–the kind that the Bush Administration has been unwilling to use.”

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »