John Hickenlooper on War & Peace Democratic Presidential Challenger (withdrew, Aug. 2019); CO Governor

Veterans deserve priority in help to re-enter civilian life

Don't turn our backs on Afghanistan by withdrawing US troops

BUTTIGIEG: We will withdraw. We have to.

Q: Gov. Hickenlooper, you disagree? You've said that you're open to keeping some servicemembers in Afghanistan beyond your first term.

HICKENLOOPER: I look at it as a humanitarian issue. If we completely pull our troops out of there, you're going to see a humanitarian disaster. We have troops in over 400 different locations around the world. Most of them are small, they're peacekeeping, they're not greatly at risk. We're going to have to be in Afghanistan. Look at the progress that has happened in that country. We're going to turn our backs and walk away from people that have risked their lives to help us and build a different future for Afghanistan and that part of the world?

Bring the troops home from post-9-11 wars

EIGHT CANDIDATES HAVE SIMILAR VIEWS: John Delaney; Tulsi Gabbard; Kirsten Gillibrand; Kamala Harris; Jay Inslee; Beto O`Rourke; Bernard Sanders; Elizabeth Warren.

Many Democratic candidates have called for bringing U.S. troops home from America's post-9/11 wars without delay.

Pro-Israel, according to CC survey.

The Christian Coalition inferred whether candidates agree or disagree with the statement, 'The US Should Continue to Support and Stand with the Nation of Israel Against Her Enemies?' Self-description by Christian Coalition of America: "These guides help give voters a clear understanding of where candidates stand on important pro-family issues" for all Senate and Presidential candidates.

Sponsored resolution to repeal 2002 AUMF against Iraq.

Resolution excerpts:
• Whereas the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 1991 and 2002 currently remain valid law;
• Whereas, since 2014, U.S. military forces have operated in Iraq at the request of the Government of Iraq for the sole purpose of supporting its efforts to combat ISIS;
• Whereas authorizations for the use of military force that are no longer necessary should have a clear political and legal ending:
• Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States [that]
• The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq is hereby repealed.

Politico.com in OPPOSITION, 3/25/21: Republicans who opposed repealing the 2002 authorization said that it should be replaced because Iraq is still home to terror groups that threaten the United States. Rep. Michael McCaul called for consultations with first in order to craft a replacement. `Real AUMF reform requires Congress and the administration working together on actual text to replace the aging 2001 and 2002 AUMFs to provide authorities needed to keep the American people, and, most importantly, our deployed troops, safe from terrorists,` McCaul said.

Heritage Foundation in SUPPORT (1/6/20): There has been an open and vibrant debate about whether the 2001 AUMF covers ISIS, a terrorist organization that did not even exist when the 2001 statute was passed and has disavowed and formally broken away from al-Qaeda, the group that is covered by the 2001 AUMF. Yet both the Obama and Trump Administrations claim that the 2001 AUMF covers ISIS and associated forces. Congress has shied away from the much-needed debate about whether the 2002 Iraq AUMF is no longer necessary.

Legislative Outcome: Passed House 268-161-2 on H.R.256 on 6/17/2021 (rollcall 172; no vote on S.J.R.10 nor H.R.3261 in 2021)