IRAQ

In this election year probably the most important issue affecting the nation is the war in Iraq. I opposed the rush to war and invasion of Iraq because the Bush administration went to war under a false pretext. 

Claims that Saddam Hussein was aligned with Al Queda, was rebuilding his nuclear weapons program, was stockpiling and preparing to unleash weapons of mass destruction, and was an imminent danger to the United States were suspect from the outset, and have been thoroughly discredited. In reality, the Bush administration went to war in Iraq because of two main reasons: oil and Iraq's strategic location in the Middle East.

My opponent has stood by the Bush administration's decision for war since the very beginning, and he continues to base his support on charges that Saddam was actively rebuilding his nuclear weapons program, charges that have been thoroughly discredited.

As a member of the majority leadership of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, my opponent is clearly implicated in the failure to provide responsible and intelligent oversight in this critical area. Hoping to distract the voters in our district from realizing that he is indeed a real part of the problem, he continues to employ the scare tactic of repeating the Bush administration's now infamous line, "We cannot wait for the smoking gun to appear in the form of a mushroom cloud."

As for the Bush position in favor of "staying the course in Iraq", which my opponent fully endorses, I don't think that is really giving us an answer on how to solve the problem for the people there. I think we should encourage other Arab nations to have an active role and not try to do this all by ourselves. Our persistence in having so many troops there is only antagonizing the problem.

Prolonging U.S. involvement indefinitely, as the President proposes, is going to be costly to this nation in terms of lives and funds. It's just not a clear exit plan. I think we should be transferring power to a more international arrangement, more of a shared power structure, rather than the way we have been doing it.

I would support a multinational approach.  Involving Arab and Muslim countries is  essential to developing trust.  We must welcome them in as partners with the Iraqis in a step by step process.  The focus should  be on rebuilding infrastructure and a functional commercial  sector.  American ground troops, guards and reserves should be  withdrawn, gradually ceding our large military presence to local control.  I fully support the need to transfer power to the Iraqis, but it still seems as if the U.S. is imposing its will on Iraq; I wish the people of Iraq would have a more active role in determining their future.

I would take an inventory of the housing situation to determine what could be done to repair areas destroyed during the invasion and occupation.  Developing a skills base, identifying what people can do, and setting up employment regimens that put Iraqis  back to work is critical.  I would return the industrial sector back to functional operations,  starting  with  basic food, shelter and water.  Electrical capacity must be reliable.  Cement factories, sanitation  and hospital facilities need to be made operational.

Commerce, health and education must be restored.  Children and  needs of the elderly must have top priority.  I would have Iraqi troops guarding and defending construction sites, building living quarters for tradesman, providing safety for transport of  materials.

###