Skip to main content

The Bill Richardson for President Campaign has just launched a new website, along with a very good informational video at Get Our Troops Out.

More beyond the fold...

This is by far the boldest statement of any of the candidates...

This site is about ending this war before 2009, and is interactive.  It also includes a table which clearly illustrates the candidates' positions on residual troops and their plans for troop withdrawl.  Only Richardson says no residual forces.

Yes, that is right, all the other major candidates have plans that leave behind troops.  Don't let them fool you.  Edwards, Obama, Clinton, Dodd and Biden all would leave residual forces behind for an indefinate period of time.  All of them. Only Bill Richardson would remove all troops, so that there can be reconciliation in Iraq.

Helping to bring this cause to the foreground of netroots political interest and activism are three of the nation's most prominent and respected bloggers:

Chris Bowers was a full-time editor at MyDD from May 2004 until June 2007.  He now writes for  Some of his projects have included the creation of the Liberal Blog Advertising Network, the first scientifically random poll of progressive netroots activists , and the nation's most accurate forecast of Democratic house pickups in 2006.  He is also the treasurer of BlogPac, a fellow at the Commonweal Institute, on the advisory board of The Democratic Strategist , and has a seat on the Pennsylvania State Democratic Committee. Bowers also works as a netroots consultant for progressive candidates and organizations including SEIU, Media Matters, and Congressman Brad Miller's 2006 re-election campaign.

Christina Siun O'Connell lives in Chicago and is the mother of two grown children. Politically active since the early '60s, she writes about Iraq at and serves as the press secretary for this leading progressive blog. During the day, Christina is the director of North American business for an international firm providing sustainability and corporate responsibility reporting tools for leading corporations.

Matt Stoller is a a DC-based political activist and consultant, and blogs at the new strategy site   He is also the President of Blogpac, a political action committee that funds progressive blogs.  He is also a fellow at the New Organizing Institute. Over the past four years, Matt has worked at the Democratic National Convention, and served as the campaign blogger for Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey and Simon Rosenberg for DNC Chair.

One of the coolest features of this site is a map where you can add your voice to the rest of ours, calling for the end to the war with no troops left behind.  Again, this is right on the front page of Get Our Troops Out.  Go now and help make the call for no residual forces even louder!

Originally posted to liberaltruthsayer on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:27 AM PDT.


How many troops should the US leave in Iraq?

3%2 votes
0%0 votes
1%1 votes
5%3 votes
3%2 votes
0%0 votes
84%43 votes

| 51 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip jar... (9+ / 0-)

    send our troops home.  

    Richardson Brings Hope...and Hope is the American Dream

    by liberaltruthsayer on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:21:16 AM PDT

  •  Richardson says what everyone thinks. (5+ / 0-)

    Tell me, again, why I should not support Richardson? Oh yeah, he's made a few blunders because he has an opinion ... just what we need as a leader.

    "Using church pews as precincts, Rove turned religion into a weapon of political combat" --- Bill Moyers

    by Spoonfulofsugar on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:30:34 AM PDT

  •  I LIKE Bill Richardson (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp, Morgan Sandlin

    I suspect that he would get no invitation to be on the VP slot of any of the top three Dem contenders.

    John Edwards might be the only one who would make such an offer, but I have personally heard Bill say he would just as soon stay Governor of New Mexico.

    Damn shame really... the DC 'Dem' Leadersheep really hate having somebody with such a record of accomplishment making their judgement look as bad as it does.


    "There is a time for compromise, and it is called 'Later'!"

    by LeftyLimblog on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:39:07 AM PDT

    •  I would have thought that HRC might pick him (0+ / 0-)

      But I caution you that "Fourth Branch" must end.  The VP slot must go back to being a parking place for a politician for 8 years, not a position of unenforced/unenforcable checks and balances.

      Bill has a lot of time to find his role if he hasn't got it already.  I don't especially like him, but I certainly don't HATE him.

      Happy little moron, Lucky little man. I wish I was a moron, My God! Perhaps I am! -Spike Milligan

      by polecat on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:51:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bill has said already and repeatedly (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        that his Vice President will be a part of the executive branch.  

        Richardson Brings Hope...and Hope is the American Dream

        by liberaltruthsayer on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:52:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So much for the Constitution (0+ / 0-)

          that ONLY has a role for the VP in the legislative branch UNLESS and UNTIL the President is incapable.

          I think that if the VP is to have any portfolio outside of his Senate duties that he should have to be confirmed for each of those jobs by the Senate.

          The same with Presidential Spouses.

          Happy little moron, Lucky little man. I wish I was a moron, My God! Perhaps I am! -Spike Milligan

          by polecat on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:54:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hill-and-Bill Make NO PROMISES to the Base (0+ / 0-)

            We're just supposed to dummy up and hand over the ATM cards.

            Well, I am donating my money to Dem challegers of my own choosing.


            "There is a time for compromise, and it is called 'Later'!"

            by LeftyLimblog on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 06:29:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Don't have all the numbers handy... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    but I hear that Richardson is making nice progress in New Hampshire and Iowa.

    He is definitely the most blunt and agressive regarding getting our troops out of Iraq.

  •  Richardson misrepresents Edwards... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    polecat, peace voter, TomP

    with regard to the issue of residual forces.

    Edwards said this in his speech at Pace University on September 7:

    Rethinking our approach to terrorism also means rethinking our approach country by country, cell by cell. And in each place where terrorism has taken root, there is a lot more we can do.

       We must begin with one of the greatest generators of terrorism in the world today: Iraq. George Bush's failed management of the war in Iraq has made the problem of terrorism worse. The war provided Al Qaeda with a powerful tool for recruiting terrorists. It gave them a battlefield for training. It gave them an attractive target, in American troops. And it diverted the resources of the U.S. military, weakening our force structure in the process.

       Even though the presence of U.S. troops has served as an attractive target for terrorists, our eventual withdrawal will not remove the threat. As president, I will redeploy troops into Quick Reaction Forces outside of Iraq, to perform targeted missions against Al Qaeda cells and to prevent a genocide or regional spillover of a civil war.

    Richardson's web site has been changed, but it recently said this:

       "While all American troops in Iraq must be removed, we need to maintain a military presence in the region, in countries like Kuwait where they are welcome. We must always have the capacity to use air power, special forces and other means to strike Al Qaeda anywhere. We do not need American troops in Iraq to perform this essential task."

    Others have talked of residual forces IN Iraq, but not Edwards.  See his interview with Josh Marshall:  

    Will Richardson say anything to get elected?  

    •  Get it straight Citizen (0+ / 0-)

      John Edwards only proposes removing COMBAT troops, leaving an estimated residual non-combat force (I have to wonder how long they would remain non-combat) of up to 90K.

      He proposes leaving them there for an indefinate period of time.

      Richardson Brings Hope...and Hope is the American Dream

      by liberaltruthsayer on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 11:55:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That is factually wrong... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        peace voter, TomP

        He wants to remove 50,000 immediately and the rest within 9-12 months.

        He wants no residual force inside Iraq, just enough forces to protect the Embassy.  That is clearly stated above and in the interview with Josh Marchall.

        I find it interesting that Richardson took out the language quoted above, about a residual force in Kuwait.

        Perhaps you and Richardson should get your facts straight.  He has overstated the case with regard to Edwards.

    •  Oh, and HOW? (0+ / 0-)

      Please, rather than just accuse, tell me where he misrepresents Edwards.

      Richardson Brings Hope...and Hope is the American Dream

      by liberaltruthsayer on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 12:02:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Citzen, how many troops will Edwards leave? (0+ / 0-)

      GIve me a number, and a link.

      Richardson Brings Hope...and Hope is the American Dream

      by liberaltruthsayer on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 12:04:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Edwards lacks the confidence to pull ALL U.S. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      troop out of Iraq.

      Edwards has said he didn't listen to himself and his own concerns but was guided by others when he voted to authorize Bush to invade.

      Why do you believe Edwards will ignore the voices of the political and military establishment saying to leave Iraq flirts with disaster?  

      Edwards can't speak straight on Iraq.  He says one thing on his website and another thing when the TV cameras are on and he's speaking in the debates.  Last week at the Democratic debate in Davenport, Iowa, Judy Woodruff asked the candidates if they were elected how many U.S. troops would remain in Iraq after their first year in office.

      Biden said it depends on how Bush leaves Iraq.  Edwards agreed with Biden, claiming "it’s impossible to say."  Clinton echoed Biden’s view, vaguely offering "a reasonable and prudent plan" to get our troops out.  Dodd objected to speaking about 2010 and said Congress should not wait that long to act.

      Only Richardson provided a direct and unambiguous answer:  

      Zero troops! . . .  Without getting our troops out you can not have a political settlement. . . . I would take all of our troops out.  We need to end this war now.

      Here is the video of the most significant exchange to date in the debates among the candidates in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination:

      Richardson understands that by the U.S. remaining in Iraq, we unwittingly perpetuate the war.  Our troops have become the targets in a civil war.  The Iraqi government, in turn, is dependent on the U.S. for security that the Iraqis themselves should provide.  Richardson notes: "The Iraqis won't take the necessary steps toward political reconciliation until the U.S. makes it clear that it will leave the country for good."

      Bill Richardson on CNN 8 days before war: "What's the rush, really? .[Iraq] is a threat, but it's not an immediate threat. .Let's be calm. Let's be patient."

      by Stephen Cassidy on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 12:41:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I like Richardson despite the "gaffes" (0+ / 0-)

    and I like what he's putting out right now about ending the war.  However I do have to say, a tad cynically, that he can afford to take a stronger progressive position exactly because he is NOT in the first tier.  That is, since it is long, long odds that he will be POTUS anytime soon, he can afford to make bold, principled statements.

    Anyone who ACTUALLY occupies the White House in 2009 will have a much sadder, uglier reality, in that they will not and cannot get us out.  Those permanent bases are going to be garrisoned come hell or high water, and anyone who makes campaign promises otherwise will have egg on their face.  Hence the extreme rhetorical caution we hear from Clinton/Edwards/Obama.  

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 12:00:40 PM PDT

  •  We've got to stop Hillary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    She'll continue this war for another 8 years. If it wasn't for her husband's third way Republican enabling bullshit, we wouldn't be in this fucking mess.

    "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - George W Bush

    by jfern on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 12:08:38 PM PDT

  •  The question needs to be answered (2+ / 0-)

    If Edwards - or Clinton and Obama - want to clarify their position on residual troops they should answer the question: How many residual troops and for how long? They duck it every time it's raised - and then their supporters ask us to trust them.

    That's not how our candidates should answer to us - we deserve real answers - How many? How long?

    As one of the bloggers in the video, I can say that we made it clear that we are not endorsing candidates - but we are endorsing the Governor's call for all the candidates to answer and we're supporting his call for no residual troops in Iraq.

    We've asked the other candidates multiple times to give us a figure - and the silence is deafening. So, if you support another candidate, tell them to answer. Voters deserve to know.

    Press Secretary to Firedoglake

    by siun on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 12:26:25 PM PDT

  •  Ending the war means ending the occupation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Morgan Sandlin

    It's amazing how the top Democratic candidates for President claim they'll "end this war" but have no intention of ending the U.S. military intervention in Iraq.  

    Does anyone think the extremists and other forces in Iraq are going to stop shooting at U.S. forces because a future President claims the war is over, but keeps thousands of troops in Iraq?

    Until all of our troops are brought home, American soldiers will continue to die in Iraq.

    Bill Richardson on CNN 8 days before war: "What's the rush, really? .[Iraq] is a threat, but it's not an immediate threat. .Let's be calm. Let's be patient."

    by Stephen Cassidy on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 12:32:52 PM PDT

  •  I saw Richardson on C-SPAN yesterday (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Morgan Sandlin

    In response to a question about public financing of political campaigns, he said that he spends 50% of his time campaigning in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and that he spends the other half of his time fund raising for his campaign.


    Should he return his governor's paycheck to the people of New Mexico

    or should we send him to a remedial math class?



  •  Richardson on PBS News Hour yesterday (0+ / 0-)

    Worth listening to (or reading the transcript):

    Bill Richardson on CNN 8 days before war: "What's the rush, really? .[Iraq] is a threat, but it's not an immediate threat. .Let's be calm. Let's be patient."

    by Stephen Cassidy on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 09:59:23 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site