It is hard hitting with about as blunt an attack on iraq policy as I have heard at one time by a national figure.
"But the certainty of winning the war placed the most solemn obligation on the civilian leadership of this country, to make certain that we had a plan to win the peace."
This is one of the best speeches I have read in a while...
"The Army Chief of Staff General Shinseki told Congress we would need several hundred thousand American troops to win the peace and do the job properly. His candor was rewarded with early retirement and his advice ignored, sending a chilling message through the ranks of the professional military.
By dismissing the State Department's plan for post-war Iraq and proceeding unilaterally, the civilian leadership simply did not put the mechanism in place to secure the country. They were unprepared for the looting, insecurity, and insurgency that burst out with the fall of Saddam's regime.
They failed to secure Iraq's borders, and so allowed thousands of foreign terrorists, Islamist militants, and intelligence agents to penetrate and destabilize post-war Iraq.
Amazingly, they had no real plan for post-war political transition. All of this happened despite clear and precise, bipartisan, warnings from Congress, and regional experts.
Then, as the challenge grew around our troops, the civilian leadership failed to respond adequately; failed to share responsibility with NATO or the UN, which offered assistance; failed to share reconstruction or decision-making, as a way of inviting others to shoulder the burden; and failed to provide the security on the ground necessary for post-war reconstruction.
They rushed and short-changed the training and equipment of the Iraqi police; they failed to recruit enough experts in the language and culture of the region and used those they had ineffectively.
The civilian leadership disbanded the Iraqi military completely so there was no internal structure to maintain order; chose consciously to put an American, instead of an international face on the occupation; failed to prepare for a large number of prisoners; and most significantly, failed even to guard nuclear waste and ammunition storage sites, despite the fact that weapons of mass destruction was their fundamental reason for the war. And some of the weapons we didn't guard are the very weapons being targeted at our troops today.
As a result, today terrorists have secured havens in Iraq that were not there before. And we have been forced to reach accommodation with those who have repeatedly attacked our troops. Violence has spread in Iraq; Iran has expanded its influence; and extremism has gained momentum.
President Bush now admits he miscalculated in Iraq. In truth, his miscalculation was ignoring the advice that was given to him, including the best advice of America's own military.
So when the president says we have the same position on Iraq, I have to respectfully disagree. Our differences couldn't be plainer. And I have set them out consistently. When it comes to Iraq, it's not that I would have done one thing differently, I would've done almost everything differently.
I would have relied on American troops in Tora Bora when we had Bin Laden in our sights. I never would have diverted resources so quickly from Afghanistan before finishing the job.
I would've given the inspectors the time they needed to do the job.
I wouldn't have ignored my senior military advisors.
I would've made sure that every soldier put in harm's way had the equipment and body armor they needed.
I would have built a strong, broad coalition of our allies around the world.
And, if there's one thing I learned from my service, I would never have gone to war without a plan to win the peace.
The bottom line is that if I don't believe we had to be shouldering nearly the entire financial cost of this war - more than $200 billion - and shortchanging investments in education, health care, and our safety at home.
But the question now is not just what we should have done, but what we can and must do now in Iraq. We do not need what President Bush has called "catastrophic success." We need real success.
We need to bring our allies to our side, share the burdens, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, and reduce the risk to American soldiers. And together, we need to more rapidly train Iraqi police and military to take over the job of protecting their country. That's what I'll do as Commander-in-Chief - because that's the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.
In an interview two days ago, the President said we can't win the war on terror. I absolutely disagree. With the right policies, this is a war we can win, this is a war we must win, and this is a war we will win. We're the can do people, and there's nothing we can't do if we put our mind and muscle into it. In the end, the terrorists will lose, and we will win. The future doesn't belong to fear, it belongs to freedom.
To win the war on terror, we will add 40,000 active duty troops - not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended, and under pressure. We will double our special forces to conduct anti-terrorist operations. We will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives - and win the battle. And we will end the backdoor draft of National Guard and reservists.
To win the war on terror, we also need to know who the terrorists are, where they're hiding and plotting, what they're planning, and be able to go get them before they get us. Now how do you do that?"
For the whole speech.....
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0901.html