|
Seth Moulton on War & Peace
Democratic Presidential Challenger (withdrawn); MA Rep.
|
|
|
Rejoin Iran nuclear deal; strengthen and extend it
The best and most durable way to prevent Iran from becoming nuclear-armed is through a diplomatic agreement with verification and monitoring, which we had before President Trump unilaterally withdrew from it. Our goal should be rejoining the
Iran deal and strengthening it, focused on extending the timelines for the specific provisions that have sunset clauses. We should also conclude separate agreements addressing issues such as ballistic missiles.
The longer-term goal should be to move Iran towards less belligerent behavior in the region, where Iran is not threatening our allies or our interests. Neither of these goals can be achieved by simply backing Iran into a corner with no escape.
We need to use sanctions, open a direct dialogue with Iran, and give them a path forward that does not include outright war.
Source: Council on Foreign Relations on 2020 presidential primary
, Jul 30, 2019
Interim agreement with North Korea would be step forward
Given that North Korea has a progressing nuclear program, we must work toward an interim agreement that halts North Korea's program in exchange for limited sanctions relief. We don't yet know whether the North Koreans would agree to any deal that
dismantles their nuclear program in exchange for significant economic incentives. We need to test that proposition while halting Pyongyang's progress, and an interim agreement would do just that.
Source: Council on Foreign Relations on 2020 presidential primary
, Jul 30, 2019
Provide lethal aid to Ukraine; strengthen NATO
The United States needs to hold Russia accountable for its ongoing aggression against Ukraine. We should do so by increasing sanctions to impose costs on the Russian government and by continuing to provide lethal aid to Ukraine. The actions we take must
also be part of a broader strategy to counter Moscow's malign behavior. That means strengthening NATO's military capabilities and modernizing it to counter cyberattacks with the same resolve we've used to stop tanks from rolling into Europ
Source: Council on Foreign Relations on 2020 presidential primary
, Jul 30, 2019
Work to be done in Afghanistan after bringing troops home
The goal is to bring our troops home from Afghanistan but when we do, to bring them home for good. That means keeping enough troops there long enough to execute on a narrowly defined, achievable counterterrorism mission. We should do this by maintaining
our counterterrorism capabilities, increasing our civilian support for the Afghan government through diplomacy and development, and staying engaged in the ongoing train and equip mission for the Afghan military as required.
Source: Council on Foreign Relations on 2020 presidential primary
, Jul 30, 2019
Keep the troops deployed abroad
Moulton on Overseas Deployments: Keep the troops deployed.EIGHT CANDIDATES HAVE SIMILAR VIEWS: Michael Bennet; Joseph Biden, Jr.; Cory Booker; Peter Buttigieg; Amy Klobuchar; Tim Ryan; Eric Swalwell; Andrew Yang.
Other candidates have urged restraint, warning that allies in nations such as Afghanistan and Iraq still need American military support. Withdrawing all U.S. troops, they assert, could be a grave mistake and only make the situation worse.
Source: Politico "2020Dems on the Issues"
, Jul 17, 2019
AdWatch: Don't send troops back to Iraq
[OnTheIssues transcription of TV ad]:- Who is this Seth Moulton?
- Four tours in Iraq--a war he opposed but didn't want another to go in his place.
- And he doesn't want to send troops back there now.
- Running for Congress, unafraid to take
on the radicals who threaten to shut down our government.
- He'll stand up to them, to protect Social Security, Medicare, and the rights of women.
- And no one will fight harder for our veterans.
- Seth Moulton: His fight is for our values.
Source: OnTheIssues.org AdWatch: 2020 Democratic primary
, Jul 10, 2019
We've got to abandon nation-building in Afghanistan
Q: Would there be American troops in Afghanistan at the end of your first term? A: "I'm sorry, but we've got to abandon nation-building in Afghanistan."
Q: Do you think Israel meets international standards of human rights?
Source: 2019 "Meet the Candidates" (NY Times.com)
, Jun 18, 2019
Against pushing us into war with Iran
The parallels between how the Bush administration pushed us into war with Iraq and how the Trump administration is pushing us into war with Iran are uncanny. But I also think there's a parallel here with Vietnam, where what Bolton and Pompeo
are trying to do is put enough troops in the Gulf, that there's just a good chance there will be a Gulf of Tonkin-type incident. It's been very clear from things that the secretary of state in particular has said that that's what he hopes happens.
Source: CNN SOTU 2019 interview of presidential hopefuls
, Jun 2, 2019
A mistake for those who voted for Iraq war
Q: Was it a mistake to vote to go to war in Iraq?A: It was a mistake, because we should have been a lot more careful about going into Iraq.
We should have questioned the intelligence. We should have made sure that we exhausted every opportunity before we put young American lives in danger.
Source: CNN SOTU 2019 interview of presidential hopefuls
, Jun 2, 2019
Trump's "Chicken hawks" pushing us towards war in Iran
The parallels between how the Bush administration pushed us into war with Iraq and how the Trump administration, under a draft-dodging commander in chief, is pushing us into war with Iran are uncanny. But I also think there's a parallel here with
Vietnam, where Bolton and Pompeo are trying to put enough troops in the Gulf that will set off war with Iran. We have a commander in chief who's not tough enough, who doesn't have the credibility to stand up to these chicken hawks.
Source: CNN State of the Union 2019 interview
, Jun 2, 2019
Stand for national interests, but know end-game
"You won't find a stronger advocate for having very clear missions and an end-game that troops know they can achieve to get home," he told
Defense One. "But you also won't find a stronger advocate for making clear to the rest of the world that America is a strong country and we will stand up for our national interests and our allies around the globe."
Source: Axios.com "What you need to know about 2020"
, Apr 22, 2019
No military force against Iran without Congress approval.
Moulton voted YEA the Iran War Powers Resolution
Axios.com summary: The House passed a symbolic war powers resolution directing President Trump to halt the use of military force against Iran unless he obtains approval from Congress.
The big picture: A classified briefing on the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani [by the US military] left Democrats and even some Republicans deeply skeptical, with many claiming that officials did not provide evidence that there was an "imminent" threat from Iran. Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rand Paul (R-KY) said they will vote in favor of a similar resolution in the Senate [S J Res 68].
What opponents are saying: Former national security adviser and notorious Iran hawk John Bolton tweeted: "The 1973 War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional. It reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Constitution allocated foreign affairs authority between the President and Congress. The Resolution should be repealed." Pres. Trump quote tweeted
Bolton and added: "Smart analysis, I fully agree!"
What supporters are saying: Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) was one of the few Republicans to vote in favor of the resolution, stating on the House floor: "Killing Soleimani was the right decision, but engaging in another forever war in the Middle East would be the wrong decision." Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced legislation that would block funding for offensive military force against Iran without congressional authorization. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) is also seeking to repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which has been used repeatedly to justify war in the Middle East in the wake of 9/11. Lee was the only member of Congress to vote against the AUMF in 2001, criticizing it as a "blank check."
Legislative outcome: H Con Res 83 Passed House 224-194-13 on 1/9/20; S J Res 68 passed Senate 55-45-0 on 2/13/20. Vetoed 5/6; Senate veto override failed 5/7/20.
Source: Supreme Court case 20-SCR33 argued on Jan 9, 2020
Page last updated: Jun 13, 2020