September 30th, 2007
08:46 AM ET
7 years ago

Dodd: So-called leading Dems have 'stunning' view on Iraq

Dodd took issue with the positions of some of his rivals on Iraq.

STORM LAKE, Iowa (CNN) – At a campaign stop in rural Iowa Saturday Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, said he was stunned by the fact that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and former Sen. John Edwards, D-North Carolina, would not commit to having all U.S. combat troops out of Iraq by 2013.

In an interview with CNN Dodd said, "The idea that the so-called leading candidates for the Democratic nomination would not say categorically that six or seven years from today–four years after [assuming] the presidency–we would not be out of Iraq I found rather stunning."

Dodd was referring to comments the three made at Wednesday's Democratic debate broadcast on MSNBC. Dodd said when he heard their responses on that stage he could "hardly breathe" because he was "so angry."

When asked if he were to become president and combat troops were still in Iraq, how long it would be until they were out Dodd said, "I want to effectuate that now. I don't want to wait until 2009."

He continued, "But if I'm unable to achieve that–which we ought to be able to do–then I would begin that redeployment process immediately. I'd depend upon my military planners on the timing of it, but they tell me they can move a brigade and a half out each month. So my goal would be, depending upon the level of troops there at that time, to begin that redeployment immediately."

-CNN Iowa Producer Chris Welch


Filed under: Chris Dodd • Iowa
soundoff (46 Responses)
  1. mikro southern nh

    He has a point. He'd make a bigger point if he'd ask them where they are going to get recruits out to 2013.

    September 29, 2007 09:44 pm at 9:44 pm |
  2. mitch, nashville tn

    Kinda easy to to pull the troops out when you really don't have to worry about winning the election.

    September 29, 2007 10:41 pm at 10:41 pm |
  3. Chris, Middletown, CT

    If he thought it would help – he'd tell everyone the moon was made of cheese. Dodd is one example of why Washington is broken....and why when he comes up for election that we shake our heads in disgust because nobody can name anything he has done recently – yet – they vote for this moron....(well..other than pandering to the labor unions for a photo op) – Dodd...leave the race....and let Hillary win....even your own party hates her....slam dunk for us!! Rudy 08!

    September 29, 2007 11:17 pm at 11:17 pm |
  4. John Starnes Tampa Florida

    He is right.Plus some of our top military commanders THERE in Iraq have said that our occupation of THOSE people's country is the CAUSE of the "insurgency", just as we would fight back against, say, an invading Chinese force that toppled our government and killed vast numbers of our family members and friends and nieghbors. There is very little moral difference between the Bush/Cheney invasion and occupation of Iraq and Nazi Germany's unprovoked invasions of Poland and Austria....no WONDER Bush tucked into that spending bill a HIDDEN ( typical of this "brave" draft dodging president) clause retroactively protecting him and his cronies and handlers from any and all charges of war crimes. Impeach Cheney and Bush NOW, hand them over to the Hague and World Court, and leave Iraq NOW. How sad and frustrating to be a citizen of the world's worst and most dangerous "rogue nation".

    September 29, 2007 11:18 pm at 11:18 pm |
  5. OB, Lake Forest, Ca.

    Bring the Troops home now, today,

    RON PAUL For President

    Ron Paul For President,

    save America , while there is still time.

    September 29, 2007 11:21 pm at 11:21 pm |
  6. James

    I would love to hear ANY of the candidates state that they will completely disband the U.S. Military complex, and enforce the Constitution. This would mean IMMEDIATE withdrawal of the U.S. Military from those countries that do not wish our presence (the Republic of South Korea does want us there, the Republic of Japan sees us as an occupying force). We should not be the World's Police Force as we signed onto a Treaty that gave the United Nations that task. We have many problems here at home these candidates need to address, like the over 200 deaths in the deserts of Arizona by Illegal Entrants and what they intend to do about this situation, and not systematic amenesty, which only encourages others to try this, resulting in further pain and agony.

    September 29, 2007 11:53 pm at 11:53 pm |
  7. Matt, Kansas City, MO

    I find it interesting that at the time of the last major election cycle, the Dems swept out the Republicans mainly on the promise of getting out of Iraq pretty much immediately. Now, the major Democratic candidates backtrack on this. Kudos to Dodd for sticking to his guns and being one of the few with a consistent Iraq position. I think the Dems need to realize they got voted in because people were dissatisifed with Bush's handling of Iraq, not really on their own merits, it was a "lesser of two evils" vote by the American people. What happened to all the talk of getting out of Iraq ASAP? Interesting how after they won many seats that talk died down real fast.

    September 30, 2007 12:08 am at 12:08 am |
  8. Jeff Spangler, Arlington, VA

    It might be most important to elect the Democratic President who is most likely _not_ to oppose a post-election Congress-with-courage which winds down this monumental mistake, and that is not the otherwise unelectable Hawk Hillary nor the former frontrunner novice Obama. Edwards is looking more "evitable" and the rest of the field is already out of the running.

    September 30, 2007 12:09 am at 12:09 am |
  9. Hal, Lakeville, MN

    It's good to see that people are waking up to the fact that the Democrats are just about as bad as the Republicans in getting the US out of Iraq. As a veteran myself, I would personally like to invite all you disappointed Democrats into the Ron Paul Revolution. Rep. Paul has been disagreeing with this war from the beginning and said in 2002 that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. Which one of the Dems can stand on a record like that? They can't because at that time they all believed Bush!

    September 30, 2007 12:24 am at 12:24 am |
  10. Jacque Bauer, Los Angeles, CA

    This guy is a poor, pathetic little pimple on a donkey's backside. Deperate, but completely irrelevent. Why is this even being reported, as if it meant something. Who gives a whit about this guy, dodd? Can anyone even remember his first name without looking it up? Please go away – NOW.

    September 30, 2007 01:20 am at 1:20 am |
  11. alan St Louis Mo

    OH boy get ready for the DRAFT. Military commanders say they can not maintain the numbers only using the current active duty millitary. There gona have to draft or do 2 year deployments with 6 months of rest in states. The reserves soilder can only be tapped for 2 years of his 8 year enlistment. which means there pretty much no reserve unit left for deploying. And just having active duty to pull it. There not enuf active duty. Active duty designed for small conflicts ,not for arge scale and never ending deployments. Well guess we can make active duty pull long deployemts of almost 2 years and less then 1 yearback at the states. I think the active military will breack down to the point we will not be ale to hold off a cuba invasion.

    September 30, 2007 01:46 am at 1:46 am |
  12. Jon Fort Hood, TX

    Dodd's response was the response of a child running for his high school class president what he should have said is sure let me tell you what you want to here, but on another note many people wine and complaining of the coward type actions of president bush, well here is just a small thought, how cowardly is abandoning a country that was wrecked by the United States, led by the President which the people of this country voted for. So why don't we all ask all these presidential candidates instead of running from OIF what are other possible solutions.

    September 30, 2007 01:58 am at 1:58 am |
  13. ty, phoenix, az

    Get informed people. Ron Paul. Spread the knowledge, spread the word, get involved instead of just blogging.

    September 30, 2007 02:02 am at 2:02 am |
  14. Rod, NYC

    Honestly CNN, why do you waste your time with stooges like Dodd? Ron Paul just raised more money in 5 days than this Dodd character did probably all last quarter, and you give this guy more coverage.

    Fire Wolf Blitzer, give Ron Paul more coverage, and get in touch with the American people. The only thing you guys have going for your network right now is Lou Dobbs and the occasional Larry King episode.

    September 30, 2007 02:37 am at 2:37 am |
  15. Dom

    Just wondering did Dodd vote for the Iraq war? I know Hilary Clinton did, and Obama clearly is on record for being against it from the beginning.

    September 30, 2007 03:55 am at 3:55 am |
  16. tina4566

    Businessman should know the new things, such as btob platform, you know http://www.cycbiz.com is a good and free platform for their company.Free promotion and trade match service you'll get just after register it.You can gooogle it for more information.

    September 30, 2007 04:53 am at 4:53 am |
  17. Michael - Gallatin, TN

    Clinton/Dodd is my preferred ticket and the more I hear from both, the more I like the combination.

    September 30, 2007 05:31 am at 5:31 am |
  18. Ray, Rochester

    Here's a better idea for you Dodd...why not promise to get all of our troops out of Iraq within one month AND give every newborn baby a $10,000 bond.

    If you Dems keep coming up with idiotic promises that you will never keep, you won't win the white house until NEXT century.

    Here's a guy that is so far down in the polls that he will say and do anything to get publicity. Like Biden, Dodd has zero chance of winning.

    Dodd and Biden both criticize Rudy for his lack of experience, yet neither of these clowns can make themselves a legitimate candidate in the minds of Democrats because they have done nothing of consequence in all of the years they have been in the senate.

    Give it a rest clowns. Most of us know you both are trying to position yourselves for a VP slot. It won't matter though because the Dems will sheepily nominate Hillary and then scratch their heads when the Republican nominee slaughters her and their party in the election.

    September 30, 2007 06:30 am at 6:30 am |
  19. Ray, Rochester

    By the way...can all of you Ron Paul idiots please shut up. Your guy is a moron.

    I received an envelope from the Ron Paul organization in Rochester full of crap like a pamphlet with the "truths" about 9/11, i.e. the US caused it because there was never any plane wreckage found at the pentagon crash site.

    This guy is a KOOK. He can't handle interviews of any substance. I have seen him give one on one interviews where he looks totally flustered and lost.

    RON PAUL IS A MORON!!!

    September 30, 2007 06:34 am at 6:34 am |
  20. ThirstyJon, Freedomville, IL

    This makes him the scariest of them all.

    Hillary Clinton spews forth such intense rhetoric against Bush and the war (in spite of her original strong support for it), but I doubt she would actually do anything truly different there if elected. She knows we cannot just pull out. She is just playing the politcs game.

    Dodd sounds like he might actually pull out. Stay away from him!

    ThirstyJon
    freedomthirst.com

    September 30, 2007 06:35 am at 6:35 am |
  21. ns, new york

    Any leader who will give you a 100% ironclad guarantee of what he will do 6 years down the road is a fool or a liar. Circumstances can change drastically and in totally unforeseen ways.

    September 30, 2007 08:26 am at 8:26 am |
  22. Matt Sutton, Central Point Oregon.

    Dodd is being false with respect to Obama.

    Senator Obama's plan would have all COMBAT troops out by 2013. It is the non-combat troops, ie. gaurding the embassy, etc. that will take longer he said

    September 30, 2007 08:35 am at 8:35 am |
  23. Nathan, Cincinnati, Ohio

    How can any one, on either side, make a firm statement that we will be out of Iraq by 2013? Let's say it's 2010, we've got 90% of our troops out (1.5 brigades a month starting in 2008). Now let's say some radical Iraqi leader – probably sponsored by Iran, assumes power and makes Sadam look like Santa Claus. Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, are right next door. Israel is a stone's throw away, and because of all that we have $300 a barrel oil and Israel sending nuke missles into Tehran and Bagdad.... Why do these idiot politicians make such stupid committments? No new taxes, never, ever, ever, never, ever. Read my lips.

    September 30, 2007 08:49 am at 8:49 am |
  24. Matt Sutton, Central Point, Oregon

    Obama was also asked about his exit policy in Iraq after he wouldn't guarantee at Wednesday's debate that all troops, under his watch, would be out by Jan. 2013, the end of the next presidential term. He said his answer was misrepresented.

    "You would have basically all our combat forces out in a about a year," Obama said. "The question then was wouldn't that still leave some troops, and what I said was . . . I would leave enough troops to protect our embassy, to protect our civilian or humanitarian forces . . . and I would have enough troops to engage in counter-terrorism activities, although they might not be housed in Iraq. They might be in Kuwait or somewhere in the region. . . . The relevant question is do you have combat troops who are patrolling Baghdad or engaging in firefights in Anbar Province? That is not something we will see under an Obama presidency."

    http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070930/FRONTPAGE/709300302

    September 30, 2007 09:24 am at 9:24 am |
  25. Phil Muse, Stone Mountain GA

    Senator Dodd was right to be "stunned" by his fellow candidates' reluctance to commit to bringing the troops home by 2013, a conservative estimate that is ten years too late in the opinion of most Americans. Democrats don't need to play into the administration's hand on this issue. Bush counted on the public to passively accept the Iraq War because the risks were being taken by other people's sons, fathers and husbands. He miscalculated by making so much use of the reserves -guys known to everyone on Main Street. Now the outrage has caught up with him. The Dems need to really exploit that anger.

    September 30, 2007 09:28 am at 9:28 am |
1 2

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.