• ABOUT WFW

• LOCAL WFW

  • Arizona
  • Florida
  • Illinois
  • Iowa
    • IA Action
    • IA News
    • IA Events
    • Iowa Special Election
  • New Hampshire
    • NH Healthcare Information
      • 2010 Healthcare Benefits
    • NH - About our Program
    • NH Photo Gallery
    • NH Events
    • NH Action
      • NH Elected Officials
      • Vounteer in NH
    • NH News
    • Learn More
    • An Afternoon With Howard Dean
  • Ohio

• OUR ISSUES

• TAKE ACTION

• AMERICAN PRIORITIES BIRDDOGGED

  • Bird-dog Reporting Form

• OCCUPY WALL STREET SOLIDARITY

More NM Resources

• NM Action
• NM News
• NM Events
• Campaign Toolkit

New Mexico News

Views on the War
Posted by () on May 22 2008 at 12:36 PM
NM News >>

     The two Republicans who want to replace Pete Domenici in the U.S. Senate both say there are important signs of security improvements in Iraq, where more than 4,000 U.S. service members have died since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
     But Reps. Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce, seeking their party's nomination for the Senate in the June 3 primary election, have thoughts about Iraq beyond that fundamental agreement.
     Wilson says the United States has not focused enough on training and equipping Iraq's own security forces.
     Pearce says Iraq would become an exporter of violence if the United States simply walked away.
     Read more about what the two U.S. Senate candidates have to say about the future of the war in Iraq.
     The Journal asked Republican U.S. Senate candidates Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce to discuss key questions about U.S. involvement in Iraq, starting with: At what point should the Iraqi government take responsibility for the majority of security problems in the country?
 

Heather Wilson
 

     Wilson said that, area-wise, the Iraqis already have taken that responsibility— though she maintains the U.S. from the beginning hasn't placed adequate emphasis on readying Iraq's own forces.
     "The key to reducing U.S. forces, in part, is to continue to accelerate the training and equipping of Iraqi security forces, so they can take over increasing responsibilities. I don't think it has been happening fast enough. (Changing that) is not something that a single person can do. What I've tried to do is continue to put focus on it."
     War planners "will say, with some truth, they've made tremendous progress," Wilson said. "But that progress needs to be accelerated.
     "The United States needs to focus on our vital national interests in Iraq. First and foremost, Iraq cannot be allowed to become a safe haven for al-Qaida. And it can't be a source of instability in the region. Sometimes, our role in Iraq is described in lofty terms relating to the goals and dreams of the Iraqi people. Iraqi people have to build their own dreams.
     "We've made substantial progress over the past 15 months, particularly in denying al-Qaida safe haven ... We have helped salt the earth for al-Qaida."
     When asked whether she envisions calling for a specific withdrawal timeline if progress were to stop, Wilson said:
     "The question that should be asked is, what are America's vital national interests in Iraq and how can we best pursue those interests?"
 

Steve Pearce
 

     Pearce's short answer on when the Iraqis should take responsibility for their own security was: "when they're able."
     "When I was there in early 2007, I said, 'The American people are not going to be totally patient. We're going to need to see some movement.'
     "I don't think there's an open-ended patience," Pearce said. "But we must understand— (Iraq) is going to be an exporter of violence if we simply walk away.
     "In my mind, we are (seeing progress). We see a lot of benchmarks that are somewhat positive."
     So what should be done if the progress stops?
     "I don't think I have an answer to that. I don't think you do, and I don't think anyone does. The answer is, what is the heart and the will of the people? When do you say it's too painful to be free?"
     Pearce was not yet serving in Congress when it authorized the use of military force in Iraq, but he said he would have voted in favor of the authorization.
     "I would have been on the 'yes' side— 'Let's go,' '' Pearce said.
     "The question of stability began to be the key for me, and it is still the key. I don't think I ever said anything about democracy. I don't think I ever said anything about freedom. Iran is definitely exporting instability. North Korea, their loud, boisterous talk scares the world. And Iraq is also in that zone of being an unstable piece in the entire world. Today, I still see the same necessity."
 

Back

Comments