|
Lincoln Chafee on War & Peace
Independent RI Governor; previously Republican Senator (1999-2007)
|
|
|
Only Republican vote against Iraq War
I had cast the only Republican vote against the war in Iraq. Like every American, I looked at the facts and reached my own conclusion on whether Pres. Bush and V.P. Cheney knew, before they ordered our troops into Iraq, that
Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. Behind the scenes, I think, key figures in the administration had a variety of reasons for wanting to topple the dictator.
But none were willing to suggest to the American people that their sons and daughters should fight and die for any of these reasons. Instead, the
White House marketed the war on chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons and the threat of "the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."
Source: Against the Tide, by Sen. Lincoln Chafee, p.164&203
, Apr 1, 2008
Deny future Bin Ladens recruitment propaganda tools
In September 2001 those of us who wanted to know what drove bin Laden's rage against us were looked upon with suspicion. Bin Laden had talked extensively about 3 grievances:-
American military bases the holy sites of Mecca and Medina, in his native Saudi Arabia;
- the plight of the Palestinians under Israeli occupation in Gaza and the West Bank;
- and the misery of the Iraqi people living under UN sanctions.
As I read the materials my staff gathered, I felt we had to define two missions ahead: to pursue bin Laden with every ounce of vigor and bring him to justice, and to deny future
bin Ladens the propaganda tools that had recruited the 19 men who brought down our airliners in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania.
Source: Against the Tide, by Sen. Lincoln Chafee, p. 69-70
, Apr 1, 2008
2002: War authorization just ratchets up the hatred
In October of 2002, how could any Republican senator vote to send his country over the precipice again based on party loyalty? How could any Democratic senator follow suit out of political cowardice? When the president declared that Saddam was
an imminent threat to America from 7,000 miles away, veteran lawmakers in both parties failed to fight back. They let the administration go unchallenged when it sent up witnesses who did their best to get us into the war the president wanted.
On October 9, roughly 36 hours before the vote, I went to the Senate floor to say that the war authorization would serve those who believe in "ratcheting up the hatred."
In the end, even a majority of Senate Democrats voted for war. Only 23 senators voted to check a reckless president. I was the lone Republican among them.
Source: Against the Tide, by Sen. Lincoln Chafee, p. 91-92
, Apr 1, 2008
Support a timetable if diplomacy does not work
Q: You have both spoken out against any timetables for the withdrawal of American troops. How would you bring this fight to a successful conclusion?CHAFEE: That’s the biggest issue facing this country, what we do in the Middle East and particularly in
Iraq. We have to work with those countries around Iraq. There’re six countries that share a border with Iraq. And they all have a vested interest. A couple of them our adversary, Syria and Iran, we need their help in stabilizing what’s happening in Iraq.
If we can’t work with those countries, I would support a timetable.
LAFFEY: The plan is this?we told people of the world that we would make Iraq a stable place. By stable, we really mean it’s a place that’s no threat to itself. No threat to the
neighboring countries and no threat to the US. That means taking troops in Iraq, Iraqi troops and taking them to Europe to train them and bring them back. We have to train those troops so that we can get them to stand up so eventually we can stand down.
Source: 2006 R.I. Republican Senate Primary debate on WPRI
, Aug 24, 2006
Only Republican to vote against Iraq war?but keep Rumsfeld
Q: What about Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld?LAFFEY: I have called for the resignation of Rumsfeld. We took the worst case scenario to go to war but then we use one of the rosiest cases to win the war. I come from the business world and we have
to hold people accountable so my opponent has complained about the war and called Rumsfeld arrogant but wants to keep him around. I think he should leave. I think we should re-energize that.
CHAFEE: Laffey criticized me for not calling for
Rumsfeld’s resignation as he has, and by saying that job is not going well in Iraq and Rumsfeld should step down, that maybe that vindicates my vote against the war in Iraq. The only Republican to vote against the war in Iraq.
Laffey is very critical of me when I cast that vote as we traveled around the state at joint appearances. Very, very critical of Chafee’s vote against the war. I suppose now you might say that was a good vote.
Source: 2006 R.I. Republican Senate Primary debate (x-ref Laffey)
, Aug 24, 2006
Pressure Israel firmly, even when it looks like non-support
Chafee, chairman of the Senate subcommittee that oversees the Middle East, is among a handful of senators who often dissent from measures calling for support of Israel and sanctions against its enemies. Supporters call Chafee a courageous voice of
independence from the pro-Israel lobby who is willing to prod Israel to take difficult actions needed for peace. They praise Chafee for having warned that a U.S. failure to press Israel firmly enough toward peace would risk the election of
Hamas -- a party advocating Israel’s destruction -- to lead the Palestinian Authority. Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections in January.
Critics say Chafee’s record puts him outside the mainstream of strong U.S. support for Israel. The senator replied last week that his “dogged” support of the peace process is in Israel’s long-term best interests.
Source: John E. Mulligan, Providence Journal, “Differ on Mideast”
, Apr 17, 2006
Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007.
Voting YEA on this amendment would establish a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Voting NAY would keep the current situation without a timetable. The amendment states: - The President shall redeploy, commencing in 2006, US forces from Iraq by July 1, 2007, leaving only the minimal number of forces that are critical to completing the mission of standing up Iraqi security forces and conducting specialized counterterrorism operations.
- The President should maintain an over-the-horizon troop presence to prosecute the war on terror and protect regional security interests.
- Within 30 days, the administration shall submit to Congress a report that sets forth the strategy for the redeployment of US forces from Iraq by July 1, 2007.
Opponents of the Resolution say: - This amendment would withdraw American forces from Iraq without regard to the real conditions on the ground.
- The consequences of an American retreat would be terrible for the security of the
American people at home.
- Our commitment is not open-ended. It is conditional on the Iraqis moving toward self-government and self-defense.
Supporters of the Resolution say: - Congress talks almost incessantly about the situation in Iraq as if on 9/11 the situation involved Iraq. Of course, it didn't. We were attacked by al-Qaida operating out of Afghanistan on 9/11.
- One of the theories we hear is that somehow staying in Iraq is necessary because all the terrorists will come into Iraq, and then they wouldn't be able to attack us anywhere else. Some call this the roach-motel theory. The fact is, al-Qaida is operating in 60 to 80 countries. Yet our resources are only heavily focused on this Iraq situation.
- In terms of differences from other Iraq amendments: This is binding, not just a sense of the Senate.
- Secondly, we have a date; other amendments are open-ended.
- Thirdly, this has an over-the-horizon force specifically to protect our security interests.
Reference: Kerry Amendment to National Defense Authorization Act;
Bill S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766
; vote number 2006-181
on Jun 22, 2006
Voted YES on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan.
To establish a special committee of the Senate to investigate the awarding and carrying out of contracts to conduct activities in Afghanistan and Iraq and to fight the war on terrorism. Voting YES would: create Senate special committee to investigate war contracts, taking into consideration: bidding, methods of contracting, subcontracting, oversight procedures, allegations of wasteful practices, accountability and lessons learned in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Reference: Committee to Investigate War Contracts;
Bill S Amdt 2476 to S 1042
; vote number 2005-316
on Nov 10, 2005
Voted YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding.
Amendment to express the sense of the Senate on future requests for funding for military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. A YES vote would: - Request all future funding for ongoing military operations overseas, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq, be included in the President's annual fiscal year budget proposal
- Call for the President to submit to Congress by Sept. 1, 2005, an amendment to his annual fiscal budget, that details estimated costs for ongoing military operations overseas.
- Ask that all future funding requests for ongoing military operations overseas appear in the appropriation bills in which such expenditures are normally included.
Reference: Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act;
Bill S.AMDT.464 to H.R.1268
; vote number 2005-96
on Apr 20, 2005
Voted YES on $86 billion for military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan.
Vote to pass a bill that would appropriate $86.5 billion in supplemental spending for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan, in Fiscal 2004. The bill would provide $10.3 billion as a grant to rebuild Iraq. This includes:- $5.1 billion for security
- $5.2 billion for reconstruction costs
- $65.6 billion for military operations and maintenance
- $1.3 billion for veterans medical care
- $10 billion as a loan that would be converted to a grant if 90% of all bilateral debt incurred by the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein, would have to be forgiven by other countries.
Reference: FY04 Emergency Supplemental for Iraq and Afghanistan;
Bill S1689
; vote number 2003-400
on Oct 17, 2003
Voted NO on authorizing use of military force against Iraq.
H.J.Res. 114; Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. The administration would be required to report to Congress that diplomatic options have been exhausted before, or within 48 hours after military action has started. Every 60 days the president would also be required to submit a progress report to Congress.
Reference:
Bill H.J.RES.114
; vote number 2002-237
on Oct 11, 2002
Supports $48 billion in new spending for anti-terrorism.
Chafee adopted the Republican Main Street Partnership issue stance:
The Republican Main Street Partnership (RMSP), the largest group of moderate GOP elected officials in the nation, applauds President Bush's call for $48 Billion in new defense spending to win the war on terrorism, provide for homeland defense and modernize the U.S. military.
Main Street Moderates, also offer support for the President's "Homeland Defense" initiative that strengthens border security ($2.1 Billion Increase), bulks up INS and Customs inspectors and agents (focusing on the northern border), and proposes a 500% increase in "Bio-Terrorism" spending.
These were part of the RMSP Anti-Terrorism Policy proposed by key Main Street members Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT) and others shortly after Sept. 11th. Sen. Snowe called "the President's proposals to boost funding for the Coast Guard, border security and customs right on target." "By focusing on these issues (Defense and Homeland Security), he's clearly in touch with what's most important to the American people," said fellow Main Street member Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY).
Source: Republican Main Street Partnership press release 01-RMSP5 on Jan 30, 2002
Page last updated: Nov 29, 2014
