April 30th, 2007 by alex
By Nick Katers
One of the cornerstones of your presidential campaign is opposition to the Iraq War and the recent troop surge. You mention the use of “aggressive and skilled diplomacy” as part of the follow up to withdrawal. What does this mean exactly?
First off, you concentrate on bringing people together. Let’s take Iraq. We won’t get help from anybody because we are a superpower and we are arrogant. Whether it is personal or payback, Iraqis are not willing to help us. They are willing to sit on the sidelines and let us bleed.
If we take out our troops, now they have a different equation. We then initiate meetings with Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, even Israel—all those who have a stake in the stability of the Middle East.
Secondly, I would knock off these sanctions. Sanctions don’t work. We have been sanctioning North Korea for 56 years, 26 years for Iran. All it does is strengthen the hand of the tyrant, because all they do is blame those conducting the sanctions. That’s aggressive diplomacy to counteract the stupid diplomacy we have been using so far.
Would you support a three-state solution in Iraq?
I support what the Iraqis want. What we have done is engineered an oil agreement with their government which satisfies our corporate interests, and it’s an abomination. We went in for oil, we are there to maintain control over oil, and we are going to leave enough troops there to enforce the oil agreements we already have and to sustain some type of activity to buy people off.
Make no mistake about it, money comes through our coffers before it gets to the Iraqi people.
Support this site: Buy a print
In your Senate career, you fought vigorously against the extension of the military draft and for the publication of the Pentagon Papers. If you were in the Senate today, could you have done the same things as you did in the 1970s?
Very much. There are few times I would wish to be back in the Senate, but I wish I had been there on the 11th of October, 2002. I would have filibustered that bill