Joe Sestak outlines his position on ending the Iraq War

Joe is already working on his bill which has us redeployed out of Iraq by December 31st of this year, with no more money for Iraq.  He will not put the lives of our sons and daughters in danger.  The safe vote for Joe would have been to vote against the bill, but the safe vote for the troops was to vote for the bill

Op-Ed by Joe Sestak - Delco Daily Times

Last week, Congress voted on an emergency supplemental bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. It was not what I wanted - it did not contain a date certain for redeployment that I had previously voted for and President Bush had vetoed.  But it provided the resources our troops needed to be safe until September. I could not deprive the men and women of our armed forces those funds required for their security until they redeploy.

I saw combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. The first was a just war; the second, a tragic misadventure.  And since the day I announced for Congress, I have never deviated from what I said that day: a date certain to redeploy from Iraq within a year is the only viable strategy that will change the incentives for the political leaders of Iraq - along with Iran's and Syria's - to change their behavior and work for stability and an unfailed Iraqi state.

But I've run the Navy's $67 billion annual warfare program, and I know that annual defense money is only so fungible between defense funding accounts, and the account called "operations" will run out in July.  The practical result is an America unable to then provide its servicemen and women what they need to defend themselves in Iraq or Afghanistan. I also know that redeploying out of an area of conflict is the most challenging of military operations, and to do it safely for our 140,000 military personnel - and the thousands of US civilians in Iraq - will take at least six months.

After 31 years of military service, I will never place at risk the lives of those America has sent overseas to fight for us. They are our sons and daughters, whose safety is our paramount concern. I therefore voted to ensure they had the means for their security, while we continue to work to end this conflict by a date certain. I will never vote to have our service members' safety be caught between Congress and a President who we might hope will blink. "Hope" is not a strategy.

This war is not President Bush's war; it is America's war, true whenever its sons and daughters are fighting overseas. I therefore have great faith that Americans across the political spectrum will increasingly come together after this vote and work for an end date of what can no longer be an open ended commitment in Iraq  - not just for our service members' security, but for America's.

I have worked, and will continue to work, in Congress for a date certain to redeploy within the year. I have never deviated from this strategy, not even in this vote to ensure our sons and daughters are safe until then.  This is because an established end date where the United States will no longer be in Iraq is the only remaining U.S. leverage to force the Iraqis to assume responsibility for their nation, and make the difficult political compromises that will stop the civil war we are currently refereeing.

There is no military solution to this civil war... it will take the reality that we will no longer be there to contain the worst of instability in order for Iran and Syria to stop their destructive efforts, fearful that instability will then flow over their borders. And it is this reality of our redeployment that will force the Iraqis to stop pursuing their personal fiefdoms in their government ministries while we provide them political and military cover, rather than their working for political solutions.

I know; when Senator Hagel and I spoke with Prime Minister Maliki and other Shia and Kurd leaders, we heard them disparage the proposed re-Baathification legislation to permit the Sunnis to be a more viable part of the government - just after our Ambassador, Ryan Crocker, and General Petraeus stated it was of the utmost importance. Perhaps of even greater importance, redeployment changes Iran's and Syria's incentives to work toward stability: they do not want to face the flow of 4 million refugees dislocated in Iraq coming across their borders, or to be in a proxy war in Iraq between what are now two "allied" nations, one primarily Sunni (Syria) and the other Shia (Iran). 

There is another strategy to bring about a stable Iraq, one where we will not be in Iraq and where we can begin to address our other security concerns that have been negatively impacted abroad and at home by our involvement in Iraq, beginning in Afghanistan.  It is a date certain which begins a true exit strategy so we can begin to apply our resources elsewhere in the world: where terrorists are and where emerging nations, such as in the Western Pacific, have growing political and economic interests, and therefore influence, that may challenge ours. And it begins to repair our army at home, where not one unit is of sufficient readiness to deploy elsewhere in the world if a conflict were to erupt.

This is why I remain committed to working on a date certain for redeployment and why I submitted legislation within weeks of being sworn-in that called for a date certain by the end of this year, with no funding thereafter for U.S. forces within Iraq- but it must be a redeployment where we ensure that our troops can get home safely. Therefore, my vote had to do with their safety and we must now work to have the next vote be about America's security.

Joe Sestak is the Democratic U.S. Rep. from the 7th Congressional District in Pennsylvania.