At Tuesday’s Republican presidential debate, one of the most memorable questions came from Erin Flanagan, whose brother died in Iraq last year. She asked what the candidates would do to end the war in Iraq:

As a member of an American family who has suffered so greatly at the choices made by the current administration, I desperately would like to know what you as commander in chief would do, both in the halls of the American government, to bring the parties together, as well as on the desert sands of the Middle East to bring this conflict to a point in which we can safely bring our troops home.

On NBC News this morning, Flanagan said that none of the candidates actually answered her question. “Obviously, I know it’s a tough one, and I knew when I asked it,” Flanagan said. “But I think — I truly believe that’s what the American public wants to know: how we can work together to get out.” Watch it:

Not only did no one answer her question, many gave glowing reviews of the Bush administration and advocated staying in Iraq longer:

John McCain: I believe we have a fine general. I believe we have a strategy which can succeed.

Rudy Giuliani: [Going to war was] absolutely the right thing to do. … I believe that what we’re doing in Iraq, if we can get it right, is going to help reduce the risk for this country.

Mitt Romney: And at this stage, the right thing for us to do is to see if we could possibly stabilize the central government in Iraq. … Not to do that adds an enormous potential risk that the whole region could be embroiled in a regional conflict.

Duncan Hunter: So what I would do, and what we need to do right now, and we are doing, is standing up the Iraqi army.

Flanagan is right. Sixty-three percent of the American public wants the United States to set a date for withdrawing troops from Iraq by 2008.

Transcript: Read more

Iraq war supporters have repeatedly claimed that U.S. troops are harmed when Congress debates alternatives to the Bush administration’s failed policies in Iraq. “Think about the message we have sent them,” House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) said recently. “We have undermined their efforts, lowered their morale, and clearly sent the wrong message.” Vice President Cheney said the war debate was “detrimental to our troops.”

Today, however, Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, President Bush’s proposed “war czar,” disregarded these claims.

“I don’t believe it undercuts their morale,” Lute told the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing. U.S. soldiers “understand the democratic process,” he said, “and, in fact, that’s what we’ve sworn to protect and defend.”

Watch it:

Lute is by no means alone in disagreeing with the administration’s rhetoric. In testimony before the House Armed services committee both Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Peter Pace and Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed arguments similar to Lute’s:

Pace: As long as this Congress continues to do what it has done, which is to provide the resources for the mission, the dialogue will be the dialogue, and the troops will feel supported.

Gates: I think they’re [the troops are] sophisticated enough to understand that that’s what the debate’s really about.

Those who claim to be defending the morale of U.S. troops are really just using them to deflect substantive criticism of their own policies. Very courageous.

– Ryan Powers

Transcript: Read more

During Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) trip to Iraq two weeks ago, McClatchy published an article highlighting how several soldiers who met with Lieberman had wanted to ask him, “When are we going to get out of here?” Others told McClatchy, “We’re waiting to get blown up,” and “We’re not making any progress,” but said they didn’t feel comfortable telling Lieberman their true feelings. One said he thought he would be demoted if he spoke openly.

This morning on CNN, Lieberman was asked about the article and appeared to blame the soldiers for not being honest with him. “I was really upset about it,” he said, because “I sat at a table with a bunch of our soldiers there” and “was asking them to speak to me from their heart.” Watch it:

Lieberman, who has called for a “truce in the political war” over Bush’s course in Iraq, has indicated he’s not interested in having an open debate. Moreover, Lieberman fails to understand that by stubbornly claiming “our troops must stay” in Iraq, he is communicating that he’s not interested in listening to soldiers who believe it’s time to leave.

Also on CNN, Lieberman claimed the “surge strategy…has worked” because it has “reduced sectarian deaths, particularly in Baghdad where we’re focused.” But sectarian deaths in Baghdad spiked 70 percent in May, beyond pre-escalation levels. Lieberman said this was a sign of success. “[O]ur enemies, the insurgents and Al Qaida — insurgents particularly supported by Iran — see us winning, and they’re doing desperate things,” he said.

Digg It!

Transcript: Read more