The Washington Times: on War & Peace

Tom Del Beccaro: Nuke deal solidifies Iran conventional military gains

A decade ago, while the borders of the Middle East were relatively secure, Iran's ambition to be the dominant power in the Middle East was perhaps best served by obtaining a nuclear weapon. Today, Iran has troops in Iraq, its long-time foe. It has sent troops and aid to support rebels in Yemen allied with Iran.

That's why the deal is great for Iran--and a bad deal for everyone else. An ascendant Iran on the ground in the Middle East threatens all of its neighbors in ways well beyond the threat of a nuclear weapon. Each country will now have to enter a conventional arms race in addition to considering acquiring nuclear weapons.

Tom Del Beccaro: Mideast was more stable with U.S. troops in Iraq

Today, there is quite a different story. Iraq is a war zone with fungible borders. The same can be said of Yemen and Syria. All three countries may still appear on the map, but full control within their historic borders does not belong to their governments. Of course, we cannot forget that the Islamic State, or ISIS, has militarily created its own state within the region at the expense of some of those other states--and the ISIS state borders also are ill-defined and changing.

Donald Trump: Take $1.5T in oil from Iraq to pay for US victims

Rob Sobhani: Decouple Iran from Palestine; free Iran then Palestine state

The road map to a Palestinian state is simple. First, Washington must unequivocally support the aspirations of the Iranian people for a new beginning free of the clerics who have robbed them of life, liberty and economic prosperity. A democratic Iran at peace with Israel is a fundamental prerequisite for the creation of a Palestinian state. Second, a blueprint for rebuilding a new Palestinian state must be adopted. A Marshall Plan for Palestine can be led by Saudi Arabia.

Jim Gilmore: No timeline for withdrawal from Iraq

Mark Warner: Withdraw from Iraq but no arbitrary timeline

Mark Warner: Redeploy troops to Afghanistan; focus on Pakistan & Iran

Bruce Guthrie: Iraq is in civil war; bring the troops home

McGAVICK: We have got to win the war against radical Islamic terrorism. To suddenly withdraw from Iraq would give our enemy heart, and would give them a staging ground for terrorism against us.

GUTHRIE: Currently in Iraq we have a civil war. The Sunnis and the Shiites are battling each other in a blood feud. Saddam’s dictatorship prevented that before. The only thing we can do to prevent that civil war from continuing is to set up a repressive regime that’s almost as bad as the one we took out. The Iraqis want to control their own country. Our brave soldiers are doing their best, but we need to bring them home as quickly as is consistent with their safety.

CANTWELL: We do need to change the course in Iraq. To say that we’re going to stay there as long as it takes, or even indicate that we’re going to have permanent bases, is the wrong message to the Iraqi government.

Maria Cantwell: Change the course in Iraq; we can’t stay indefinitely

McGAVICK: We have got to win the war against radical Islamic terrorism. To suddenly withdraw from Iraq would give our enemy heart & would give them a staging ground for terrorism against us.

GUTHRIE: Currently we have a civil war. Our brave soldiers are doing their best, but we need to bring them home as quickly as is consistent with their safety.

CANTWELL: We do need to change the course in Iraq. To say that we’re going to stay there as long as it takes, or have permanent bases, is the wrong message. We do need a plan, which includes these things:

1. We need the rest of the international community to step up political support for the new Iraqi government.
2. We need to send to the Iraqi people the message that we’re not going to stay there indefinitely. They have to take charge of their security.
3. We need to set a Dayton Accord summit to resolve issues like oil that keep the Shiites & Sunnis battling each other.

Mike McGavick: Cannot give Iraq to the terrorists or they’ll follow us here

McGAVICK: We have got to win the war against radical Islamic terrorism. Sen. Cantwell voted for the war, and she was a strong supporter of the war. As the election has gone on, we’ve heard more about troop withdrawals. To suddenly withdraw from Iraq would give our enemy heart, and would give them a staging ground for terrorism against us. Now, I’m not satisfied with the progress we’re making. We need a select bipartisan group of Senators to develop alternative ways forward, to prevent creating a vacuum that would give Iraq to terrorists and allow them to follow us here.

GUTHRIE: Currently in Iraq we have a civil war. Our brave soldiers are doing their best, but we need to bring them home as quickly as is consistent with their safety.

CANTWELL: We do need to change the course in Iraq. To say that we’re going to stay there as long as it takes, or even indicate that we’re going to have permanent bases, is the wrong message.

Colin Powell: Rejects Kofi Annan’s assertion that Iraq war is illegal

Lamar Alexander: Ground troops ok