McConnell on CNN "Late Edition"
February 18, 2007
The funding vote is 'very dangerous turf' for Democrats, McConnell says
LOUISVILLE – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell appeared on CNN’s “Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer” this morning. The following are excerpts from the program:
On the consequences of retreat in Iraq:
“Iraq has ended up being much tougher than we had anticipated. But the question is, is our reaction to it getting tougher to give up and go home and thereby invite the terrorists, as Gen. Abizaid said a year or so ago, to follow us back here again? Or do we want to stay on offense, give the new Iraqi government a chance to succeed, continue to go after the terrorists in Anbar province and engage them on the other side of the world so we don't have to deal with them again here in America?”
On Sen. Reid calling Iraq the “worst foreign policy blunder in American history”:
“I was a little amazed. I'm sure he's not complaining that we haven't been attacked again since 9/11 here at home. I mean the fundamental decision after 9/11 that the President made, and the Congress initially overwhelmingly supported was to get on offense, go after the terrorists in Afghanistan, initially, then we widened it to Iraq. The result of that, of course, has been 100 percent protection here at home.”
On the debate in the Senate over the last two weeks:
“We wanted to have at least one proposal of our choosing, and the proposal was, of course, the Judd Gregg amendment, which would indicate whether or not we supported funding for the troops. I don't know why the Democrats don't want to have that vote. But they insisted on having just one proposal before the Senate.”
“[S]ooner or later we're going to get a vote on funding the troops. I think Congressman Murtha is onto something. Where are they going next? Murtha indicated that this vote is not the real vote. Where they're going is to try to cut off funds for the troops. It’s very dangerous turf for them. Two thirds of the American people support funding for the troops. Sixty percent of the American people support funding for the additional troops that the President's sending, even though they're skeptical about the mission. I think the Democrats need to remember they confirmed Gen. Petraeus 81 to nothing to go out and try to succeed in this mission. We ought to give him a chance to succeed.”
“But we want to have a real debate on the Iraq war. Not just some resolution that the majority crafts with no alternatives. I mean, as I said earlier, even the New York Times, almost never aligns with the Republicans, thought that the Democratic procedure in the Senate was inappropriate, given the magnitude of this issue. We'll have other Iraq debates, and at whatever point we turn to Iraq again, I guarantee you, Wolf, Senate Republicans are going to want to vote on funding the troops.”
On Democrat divisions on the Iraq debate:
“You know, one thing people are not talking about is how many Democratic differences there are. Sen. Feingold thinks we ought to get out very rapidly. Senator Dodd the other day said that this whole vote that we were going through was basically a, I’m paraphrasing, but kind of a waste of time. So there are differences on the Democratic side, too. Many of them think that we ought to be getting out immediately—and not funding the troops.”
On Iran and North Korea:
“You're talking about Iranians inside Iraq trying to hurt American soldiers. Of course we're going to -- we're going to deal with those people if they come after American soldiers inside Iraq, any foreigners in there, whether they're al Qaeda foreigners, or Iranian foreigners inside Iraq trying to hurt American troops, of course we're going to deal with them.”
“We're working on the Iran nuclear problem multilaterally. The administration, I think, had a rather significant success with North Korea. We'll have to test it and see if it's going to ultimately work, with multilateral -- with a multilateral approach to the North Koreans that involved countries like the Chinese and Russians that are also very important in a multilateral effort to try to make sure that Iran doesn't get nuclear weapons, either.”
“I think if they believe the deal is verifiable, and the briefing I had the other day work indicates that this could well work. I think if we can keep North Korea non-nuclear, I think that's something the American people would applaud. And of course, the Chinese and the Japanese are now fully engaged, and that's the reason that this -- this deal has a chance of working. Back during the Clinton administration, it was a one-on-one arrangement between the U.S., And the North Koreans. We gave them money, they cheated. Now, as a result of the administration's approach, which includes the Russians, the Chinese, the South Koreans and the Japanese, the neighbors are involved. It will be much more difficult for the North Koreans to renege on this deal. But we'll see. You know, it goes in several different steps toward the ultimate conclusion of a non-nuclear North Korea.”
30
LOUISVILLE – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell appeared on CNN’s “Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer” this morning. The following are excerpts from the program:
On the consequences of retreat in Iraq:
“Iraq has ended up being much tougher than we had anticipated. But the question is, is our reaction to it getting tougher to give up and go home and thereby invite the terrorists, as Gen. Abizaid said a year or so ago, to follow us back here again? Or do we want to stay on offense, give the new Iraqi government a chance to succeed, continue to go after the terrorists in Anbar province and engage them on the other side of the world so we don't have to deal with them again here in America?”
On Sen. Reid calling Iraq the “worst foreign policy blunder in American history”:
“I was a little amazed. I'm sure he's not complaining that we haven't been attacked again since 9/11 here at home. I mean the fundamental decision after 9/11 that the President made, and the Congress initially overwhelmingly supported was to get on offense, go after the terrorists in Afghanistan, initially, then we widened it to Iraq. The result of that, of course, has been 100 percent protection here at home.”
On the debate in the Senate over the last two weeks:
“We wanted to have at least one proposal of our choosing, and the proposal was, of course, the Judd Gregg amendment, which would indicate whether or not we supported funding for the troops. I don't know why the Democrats don't want to have that vote. But they insisted on having just one proposal before the Senate.”
“[S]ooner or later we're going to get a vote on funding the troops. I think Congressman Murtha is onto something. Where are they going next? Murtha indicated that this vote is not the real vote. Where they're going is to try to cut off funds for the troops. It’s very dangerous turf for them. Two thirds of the American people support funding for the troops. Sixty percent of the American people support funding for the additional troops that the President's sending, even though they're skeptical about the mission. I think the Democrats need to remember they confirmed Gen. Petraeus 81 to nothing to go out and try to succeed in this mission. We ought to give him a chance to succeed.”
“But we want to have a real debate on the Iraq war. Not just some resolution that the majority crafts with no alternatives. I mean, as I said earlier, even the New York Times, almost never aligns with the Republicans, thought that the Democratic procedure in the Senate was inappropriate, given the magnitude of this issue. We'll have other Iraq debates, and at whatever point we turn to Iraq again, I guarantee you, Wolf, Senate Republicans are going to want to vote on funding the troops.”
On Democrat divisions on the Iraq debate:
“You know, one thing people are not talking about is how many Democratic differences there are. Sen. Feingold thinks we ought to get out very rapidly. Senator Dodd the other day said that this whole vote that we were going through was basically a, I’m paraphrasing, but kind of a waste of time. So there are differences on the Democratic side, too. Many of them think that we ought to be getting out immediately—and not funding the troops.”
On Iran and North Korea:
“You're talking about Iranians inside Iraq trying to hurt American soldiers. Of course we're going to -- we're going to deal with those people if they come after American soldiers inside Iraq, any foreigners in there, whether they're al Qaeda foreigners, or Iranian foreigners inside Iraq trying to hurt American troops, of course we're going to deal with them.”
“We're working on the Iran nuclear problem multilaterally. The administration, I think, had a rather significant success with North Korea. We'll have to test it and see if it's going to ultimately work, with multilateral -- with a multilateral approach to the North Koreans that involved countries like the Chinese and Russians that are also very important in a multilateral effort to try to make sure that Iran doesn't get nuclear weapons, either.”
“I think if they believe the deal is verifiable, and the briefing I had the other day work indicates that this could well work. I think if we can keep North Korea non-nuclear, I think that's something the American people would applaud. And of course, the Chinese and the Japanese are now fully engaged, and that's the reason that this -- this deal has a chance of working. Back during the Clinton administration, it was a one-on-one arrangement between the U.S., And the North Koreans. We gave them money, they cheated. Now, as a result of the administration's approach, which includes the Russians, the Chinese, the South Koreans and the Japanese, the neighbors are involved. It will be much more difficult for the North Koreans to renege on this deal. But we'll see. You know, it goes in several different steps toward the ultimate conclusion of a non-nuclear North Korea.”
30
