|
Rahm Emanuel on War & Peace
Democratic Rep. (IL-5); Chief of Staff-Designee
|
|
Israel/Palestine framework deal easier than a final deal
Q: What do you think went wrong at the beginning of the administration with the Obama-Netanyahu relationship? How optimistic are you about a peace deal?EMANUEL: I am uncharacteristically optimistic, just on the optimism side of 50%.
Q: Why now?
EMANUEL: I think it is a framework deal, which is different and easier than a final deal. And I think the parties have enough in common about the framework, which they have known for ten years.
Q: But why is there the will now?
EMANUEL:
Hamas is as weak as it's going to be. Abbas is ready to work with Israel. Israel has a security concern involving geography. But geography does not have the same value it did in 1967. And I want to say that there is nothing I just said that major
figures in the national security apparatus of the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] and Israel haven't said publicly. Nothing! It is not my business. I don't really care. But Israel's national security apparatus has concluded what I have observed.
Source: The New Republic 2014 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls
, Apr 6, 2014
2006: Petraeus deserves Nobel Prize for creative statistics
When General Petraeus came back to Washington, he had some good news [from Iraq]. The left-wing group MoveOn.org, however, was determined to smear Petraeus. It ran a full-page ad in the New York Times accusing him of treason and lying to
Congress. The ad's headline read: "General Petraeus or General Betray Us? Cooking the Books for the White House." Accusing a decorated military leader of treason was an incendiary charge. MoveOn went on to attach
Petraeus as "a military man constantly at war with the facts" and argued "the surge strategy has failed."Congressman Rahm Emanuel echoed MoveOn's attack by saying Petraeus's written report to Congress deserved "the Nobel
Prize for creative statistics or the Pulitzer for fiction." But Petraeus, while careful not to paint a "rosy scenario," documented significant, and in some cases stunning, political and military progress in Iraq.
Source: Courage and Consequence, by Karl Rove, p.482
, Mar 9, 2010
Iraq stretched our troops thin too thin for Afghan success
Iraq stretched our forces so thin that soldiers, members of the Guard, and Reservists carried a load far beyond that they had signed up for. The administration jeopardized the success of our mission in
Afghanistan by shifting troops to Iraq because it didn't have enough to go all out in both places. Osama bin Laden got away at Tora Bora in part because we didn't have the personnel to pursue him.
Source: The Plan, by Rahm Emanuel, p.150-151
, Jan 5, 2009
Voted YES on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq.
OnTheIssues.org Explanation: This vote is on referring the impeachment resolution to a Congressional Committee to decide further action (not on impeachment itself).Congressional Summary: Resolved, That President George W. Bush be impeached for committing the following abuses of power:
- Article I--Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign To Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq
- Article VI & VIII--Invading Iraq in Violation of H.J. Res. 114, the U.N. Charter and International Criminal Law
- Article X--Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes
- Article XI--Establishment of Permanent US Military Bases in Iraq
- Article XII--Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources
- Article XVII--Detaining Indefinitely and Without Charge Persons Both US Citizens and Foreign Captives
- Article XXIV--Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the
Fourth Amendment
- Article XXVI--Announcing the Intent To Violate Laws With Signing Statements, and Violating Those Laws
Proponents' arguments for voting YEA: Rep. Kucinich: Now is the time for this Congress to examine the actions that led us into this war, just as we must work to bring our troops home. This resolution is a very serious matter and I urge the Committee on Judiciary to investigate and carefully consider this resolution.Rep. Wasserman-Schultz: Impeachment is a lengthy process which would divide Congress and this nation even more deeply than we are divided right now. Referring this resolution to the House Judiciary Committee is the constitutionally appropriate process that should be pursued.
Rep. Ron Paul: I rise, reluctantly, in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration, which essentially directs the committee to examine the issue more closely than it has done to this point.
Reference: The Kucinich Privilege Resolution;
Bill H.RES.1258
; vote number 2008-401
on Jun 11, 2008
Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days.
To provide for the redeployment of US Armed Forces and defense contractors from Iraq. Requires within 90 days to commence the redeployment; and to complete such redeployment within 180 days after its commencement. Prohibits the use of DOD funds to increase the number of US forces serving in Iraq in excess of the number serving in Iraq as of January 1, 2007, unless specifically authorized by Congress. Authorizes retaining in Iraq US forces for providing security for diplomatic missions; for targeting al-Qaeda; and for training Iraqi Security Forces. Requires the President to transfer to the government of Iraq all interest held by the US in any military facility in Iraq. Proponents support voting YES because:
This war is a terrible tragedy, and it is time to bring it to an end. This is a straightforward bill to redeploy our military forces from Iraq and to end the war in Iraq. This bill does not walk away from the Iraqi people.
It specifically continues diplomatic, social, economic, and reconstruction aid. Finally, this bill leaves all the decisions on the locations outside of Iraq to which our troops will be redeployed wholly in the hands of our military commanders.
Opponents support voting NO because:
This legislation embraces surrender and defeat. This legislation undermines our troops and the authority of the President as commander in chief. Opponents express concern about the effects of an ill-conceived military withdrawal, and about any legislation that places military decisions in the hands of politicians rather than the military commanders in the field. The enemy we face in Iraq view this bill as a sign of weakness. Now is not the time to signal retreat and surrender. It is absolutely essential that America, the last remaining superpower on earth, continue to be a voice for peace and a beacon for freedom in our shrinking world.
Reference: Out of Iraq Caucus bill;
Bill H R 2237
; vote number 2007-330
on May 10, 2007
Voted NO on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date.
Voting YES would support the following resolution (excerpted): - Whereas the United States and its allies are engaged in a Global War on Terror, a long and demanding struggle against an adversary that is driven by hatred of American values and that is committed to imposing, by the use of terror, its repressive ideology throughout the world;
- Whereas the terrorists have declared Iraq to be the central front in their war against all who oppose their ideology;
- Whereas the United States and its Coalition partners will continue to support Iraq as part of the Global War on Terror:
Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives--- Honors all those Americans who have taken an active part in the Global War on Terror;
- Declares that it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq;
- Declares that the United States is committed to the completion of
the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq;
- Declares that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror, the noble struggle to protect freedom from the terrorist adversary.
Reference: Resolution on Prevailing in the Global War on Terror;
Bill HRES 861
; vote number 2006-288
on Jun 12, 2006
Voted YES on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops.
States that the House of Representatives: - affirms that the United States and the world have been made safer with the removal of Saddam Hussein and his regime from power in Iraq;
- commends the Iraqi people for their courage in the face of unspeakable oppression and brutality inflicted on them by Saddam Hussein's regime;
- commends the Iraqi people on the adoption of Iraq's interim constitution; and
- commends the members of the U.S. Armed Forces and Coalition forces for liberating Iraq and expresses its gratitude for their valiant service.
Reference: War in Iraq Anniversary resolution;
Bill H Res 557
; vote number 2004-64
on Mar 17, 2004
Page last updated: Sep 01, 2021