"I do not support the president's decision to send additional troops to fight a war in Afghanistan that is no longer in our national security interest. It's an expensive gamble to undertake armed nation-building on behalf of a corrupt government of questionable legitimacy. Sending more troops could further destabilize Afghanistan and, more importantly, Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state where al Qaeda is headquartered. While I appreciate that the president made clear we won't be in Afghanistan forever, I am disappointed by his decision not to offer a timetable for ending our military presence there. I will work with members of both parties and both houses of Congress to push for a flexible timetable to reduce our troop levels in Afghanistan, as part of a comprehensive strategy to combat al Qaeda in the region and around the world.
Earlier today, Senator Feingold was joined by Representatives Jim McGovern (D-MA), Walter Jones (R-NC) and Barbara Lee (D-CA) in voicing opposition to a troop increase for Afghanistan. Video of Senator Feingold's remarks is available at http://www.youtube.com/senrussfeingold#p/u/0/nmFRe1qesSg.
###
Specter Comments on the President's Afghanistan Address
Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) tonight issued the following statement after President Obama'sremarks on Afghanistan and Pakistan:
"I oppose sending 30,000 additional
American troops to Afghanistan because I am not persuaded that it is
indispensable in our fight against Al Qaeda. If it was, I would support
an increase because we have to do whatever it takes to defeat Al Qaeda since
they're out to annihilate us. But if Al Qaeda can operate out of Yemen or
Somalia, why fight in Afghanistan where no one has succeeded?
"I disagree with the President's two key assumptions: that we can transfer responsibility to Afghanistan after 18 months and that our NATO allies will make a significant contribution. It is unrealistic to expect the United States to be out in 18 months so there is really no exit strategy. This venture is not worth so many American lives or the billions it will add to our deficit.
* * *Joe Sestak Voices Support for President Obama's Commitment to Eliminating Al Qaeda
MEDIA,
PA - Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Congressman Joe Sestak voiced
support for President Obama's new strategy for Afghanistan and
Pakistan. For months, Sestak, drawing from his firsthand experience
with counterterrorism efforts in Afghanistan as head of the Navy's
anti-terrorism unit, has called for a renewed commitment to the crucial
mission of eradicating Al Qaeda and its safe haven in Pakistan.
"President Obama has presented a plan that will allow us to finally
complete a mission that is as indispensable today as it was eight years
ago: the elimination of the Al Qaeda terrorists who struck us on 9/11,"
said Joe Sestak. "It is a difficult decision. After years of war and
with economic challenges at home, the American people are justified in
their concern about an increased commitment in Afghanistan. But the
President has made the right call. If we leave Al Qaeda behind in a
safe haven and are struck again, what can we ever say to those we swore
to protect?
"From the outset of this debate, I have called for a strategy that is
focused on Al Qaeda in Pakistan, is not overly dependent on
nation-building in Afghanistan and is not open-ended. The President
stated similar goals. But, while I support the President's overall
approach, I will be looking for further details. First, the clear
emphasis of our overall goal must remain focused on eliminating the
safe haven in Pakistan. And second, we should measure our progress not
by a fixed timetable, but by benchmarks of achieving America's
security. We therefore must be provided those benchmarks of success
and/or failure that trigger an exit or alternative strategy."
* * *
Rep. Doggett: The Path to Peace and Security Cannot Be Found Through a Wider War in Afghanistan
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).