*Iraq "is not a place where the United States should be occupying for a long period of time."
*"[A]l-Qaida and the Taliban should have been targets of efforts in the region, instead of the concentration on invading Iraq."
*We need "a strong diplomatic surge that would bring the countries in the region together to buy into a long-term solution" to Iraq and to terrorism.
*He says he's "met frequently with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, but that she did not accept his foreign policy views."
*"Fairness to everyone is a key concern in a variety of areas, he said, including jobs and the economy, especially as companies close plants and move jobs overseas."
*Webb will not sign any trade agreement "that does not have in the main body an agreement for the protection of American labor."
*He has "no plans to endorse a presidential candidate before the Virginia primary on Feb. 12," and has "not been contacted by any of the candidates as a possible vice presidential candidate."
Speaking of Iraq, I see my friend (and fellow Webb supporter) John Bruhns has a new article in the Huffington Post which asks, "On Iraq: Will LBJ's War Become Nixon's War?" To my mind, Bruhns sounds a lot like Jim Webb:
Aside from the bloody human casualties we face the possibilities of a recession and an economic breakdown due to military spending for a war that is running up our national debt to astronomical numbers that our grandchildren will be paying off.Leaving 165,000 troops sitting stationary in Iraq is doing nothing whatsoever to fight terror cells throughout the world who are plotting to attack us here not there. It is a total setback from the real war on terror.
In addition, our politicians in Washington are wasting our tax dollars and all of their political energy on the war. It totally inhibits their ability to address the real issues that matter most to the American people -- jobs, education, poverty, economic prosperity, global warming, etc.
Word! Hey, maybe we should start a "Draft John Bruhns" movement? :)
Short of that, Mr. Bruhn is correct - we will continue to face bloody human casulaties, recession and economic breakdown due to out of control military spending in Iraq that does nothing to fight those terror cells throughout the world. The economy is crumbling - jobs are being lost - are way of life cannot be sustained if money keeps being flushed down the Tigris River.
When will the Dems stop the insanity? Not until the people demand it and force them to. And I guess everything will have to go to hell in this country before that happens.
V/R
John Bruhns
We need more people like him in the Senate.
I just don't think the second session of the 110th Congress is going to be any better, since the political tactic seems to be working for the Republicans at America's expense .... literally.
On Tuesday, December 18, 2007, conservatives in the U.S. Senate set a modern-day record 1 for obstruction. They forced the 62nd cloture vote to move beyond a filibuster. The previous record was 61 cloture votes, reached during the 107 th Congress in 2002. The conservatives of 2007 surpassed that mark, in only the first session of the 110 th. The record vote came in a dispute over funding for military action Iraq. The $516 billion budget package for 2008 had already passed the House of Representatives, providing funding for nearly every federal agency. Conservative senators threatened to filibuster the entire package unless it added $20 billion in war funding to the House bill, and removed language intended to bring the troops home. A review of the 110 th Congress reveals that this performance was typical. Although the Democrats achieved several goals - student loans, an increase in the minimum wage, an increase in automotive fuel efficiency standards - many people remain frustrated. The first session of Congress was more marked by conservative obstruction than by progressive gains.
Check out the entire report at: www.ourfuture.org