War Until 2013, Or Not. It's Your Choice.

Last night's NH debate was a watershed moment for the Democratic Party in this election. The question posed to the candidates was simple: can you promise that at the end of your first term as president all US troops will be out of Iraq? The answers--from Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards--were stunning.

They all said, "No."

I promised a long time ago on this blog that I would not "go negative" on any other candidate in this primary race, and I still won't. But I will tell you when Bill Richardson's position is starkly different than his chief rivals for the nomination, and there could be no more crystal clear example of such a difference than in his answer to that question: one year. The troops will be home within one year of him taking office. Not 2013, which, by the way, is five and one-half years from now--longer than this war has already been going on. One year.

And this is not a simple numbers game of one year versus many more. It's a difference in basic philosophy regarding the best way to end the Iraq War. There are the naysayers that quibble with Bill Richardson, telling him that one year is an unrealistically short period of time, and that troop withdrawal will take longer than that. To them, I say, "So what?" The critical point is not the precise length of time, but, rather, the commitment of the candidate to get our troops home as fast as possible, so the real process of peace and reconciliation can begin. The 2013 crowd is on the other side of that divide. They do not have the same commitment to bring our troops home as soon as possible. Instead, their plan has no end-goal in sight.

This choice isn't complicated. Yes, withdrawing troops from a war zone is complicated, but that will be true whenever it occurs. What is not complicated is deciding on which side of a simple divide you stand: should we bring the troops home as soon as possible, with a goal of no more than one year for the arrival of the last troop home, or should we keep an open-ended commitment to stay in Iraq much longer than that? If you choose the former course of action, you should have an equally uncomplicated task in choosing a candidate from among the top four candidates seeking the Democratic nomination because Bill Richardson is the only candidate who agrees with your position on Iraq. So go vote for him. Make him the nominee, and let's end this war--quickly and responsibly.

Vote Bill Richardson for president.