On the issues: CD5 Republicans, Part 1

Last week, PolitickerAZ.com sent out a questionaire asking the Republican candidates in the 5th Congressional District about their takes on some key questions currently facing Congress and the nation. Now, the results are in.

With the exception of recently-identified Lee Adam Gentry, whose very existence was the source of speculation until today, and David Schweikert, who has chosen not to participate, all Republicans running to face Rep. Harry Mitchell in November responded, and gave their views on issues ranging from a national gay marriage amendment to the Iraq War to global climate change.

Here, then, is the first installment of On the Issues: CD5 Republicans, with a focus on Iraq.

QUESTION:

Should U.S. troops be withdrawn from Iraq as soon as possible?  If not, what conditions must be satisfied that would enable U.S. forces to leave the country? 

Mark Anderson:

Whether it was wise to go into Iraq in the first place is a matter of debate. However, we are there now and the critical issues is what we do now. We cannot just pack up and leave without accomplishing the mission of stabilizing that nation with a democratic republican form of government. To withdraw all troops immediately would plunge the nation into chaos and mass killing that would be tragic on a human scale and bad for the United States in terms of our standing in the world community. U.S. forces should leave Iraq as soon as the mission is complete.

Laura Knaperek:

In 2006, Democrats swept to power claiming they would end our involvement in Iraq. Facing another election, just two years later, Democrats are again claiming if you elect them, they will end U.S. involvement in the war. American foreign policy and specifically, military policy during a time of war is not a political campaign issue. The stakes are too high.

Make no mistake, I want combat troops home as soon as possible. The timing of the withdrawal should not precipitate instability nor impair U.S. strategic positioning in the region.  An immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops is an ill-advised policy.    

Jim Ogsbury:

Immediate withdrawal of our troops would lead to greater instability in the Middle East.  The United States should maintain a troop presence that declines as Iraqi military and political competence increases.  Recent Iraqi-led military initiatives in Basra and Sadr City provide encouraging signs that Iraqi dependence on the U.S. military for internal security is on the wane. 

Strategic decisions, such as those involving troop deployments and withdrawal timelines, are appropriately the province of generals in the field, not politicians on Capitol Hill.   The U.S. military, led by General David Petraeus and Lieutenant General Ray Odierno, have achieved some measure of success with the troop surge in Iraq.  Though Iraq is becoming more stable, more must be done before all of our troops can come home.  

As a Member of Congress, my responsibility would be to support the troops in the field by providing them with the resources they require to get the job done.  I would support withdrawal of our troops based upon National Intelligence Estimates and the best counsel of our military commanders in the field.

Susan Bitter Smith:

U.S. troops should not be withdrawn until the government of Iraq is able to govern itself and protect its population with its own security force. The only way to secure long term peace in the region is to help the government of Iraq battle those that support radical Islam and are attempting to stop a developing democracy thereby insuring that Iraq becomes a failed nation and a haven for terrorists.