FOREIGN POLICY: COMPARING SENATOR SCOTT BROWN AND ELIZABETH WARREN
5 October 2012
Compiled by Paul Emile Anders
Compiled by Paul Emile Anders
Do considerations of national security incline us to
vote for Elizabeth Warren or Scott Brown? I have tried to give their views on the military and foreign
policy and a few other topics that might have a bearing on them. Where feasible their views are placed
in adjacent columns. Topics are arranged
alphabetically.
CONTENTS
Sources
Some dates
Warren's overview
Afghanistan
China
DEATH PENALTY, BROWN’S POSITION ON
ECONOMIC POWER AND FOREIGN POLICY: WARREN’S VIEW
FOREIGN AID
FOREIGN
AID: SUMMARY OF DIFFEN.COM
FOREIGN POLICY
FOREIGN
POLICY: SUMMARY OF DIFFEN.COM
GUN CONTROL: BROWN’S POSITION
IRAN
SENATORS’ IRAN LETTER AND FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON
NATIONAL LEGISLATION [FCNL]
IRAQ WAR: FIRST QUESTION
IRAQ WAR: SECOND QUESTION
View
on the Iraq War
ISRAEL AND JERUSALEM
Warren
on the U.S.-Israel Relationship and Middle East Peace
MEXICO
NATIONAL SECURITY
NATIONAL
SECURITY: BROWN
NATIONAL
SECURITY: DEFENSE INDUSTRY IN MASSACHUSETTS AND BROWN
CUTTING
OUR DEFENSE BUDGET
NORTH KOREA
NORTH
KOREA (from Warren’s website)
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
OBAMA’S TOUR
RUSSIA
SYRIA
SYRIA: WARREN’S AND BROWN’S VIEWS FROM: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown
TERRORISM
BROWN
ON TERRORISM
TERRORISM:
WARREN ON AL QAEDA
TERRORISM:
OSAMA BIN LADEN
WATERBOARDING: BROWN’S POSITION ON
sources
[[abbreviations follow in
double brackets]]:
Bierman, Noah, “Brown, Warren offer different ideas on
deficit,” Boston Globe,
11 July 2012.
Brown, Scott, Against All Odds: My
Life of Hardship, Fast Breaks, and Second Chances. Harper Collins, 2011 [[
SBA]].
Brown, Scott. His web site http://www.scottbrown.com/issues/
Boeri,
David, “Brown And Warren Both Centrists On Foreign Policy
Issues,” WBUR transcript, August 16, 2012 [http://www.wbur.org/2012/08/16/brown-warren-foreign-policy,
retrieved 23 September 2012] [[BOERI]]
Council for a Livable World, “U.S. Senate Vote
Scorecard—111th Congress,” 2011. http://preview.livableworld.org/SenateApril2011.pdf?window_id=4. [[CLW]] See also http://livableworld.org/elections/2012/candidates/senate/ewarren/.
Levenson, Michael, “Brown, Warren share centrist view on
many foreign policy matters,” Boston
Globe, 27 Sept. 2012. [http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/09/27/foreignpolicy/0H2qM7RF4dMLSyFYnfCfEI/story.html] Levenson writes, “Brown, a Republican,
and Warren, a Democrat, have barely mentioned foreign policy on the campaign
stump. But in written responses to questions from the Globe about Syria,
Russia, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and other areas, Brown and
Warren provided a broader picture of their views on some of the thorniest
foreign policy questions facing the United States… Leslie H. Gelb, a former president of
the Council on Foreign Relations…reviewed the responses from Brown and Warren.”
Massachusetts Peace Action, "2012 Massachusetts Senate PEACE VOTER GUIDE,"
http://masspeaceaction.org/home/files/MAPA%20Senate%20voter%20guide%202012%20v1a.pdf
Massachusetts Peace Action (http://masspeaceaction.org). Selected Candidate Statements. Click on "Peace Voter," Then in the Voter Guides section click on Selected Senate Candidates’ Statements.
Massachusetts Peace Action, "2012 Massachusetts Senate PEACE VOTER GUIDE,"
http://masspeaceaction.org/home/files/MAPA%20Senate%20voter%20guide%202012%20v1a.pdf
Massachusetts Peace Action (http://masspeaceaction.org). Selected Candidate Statements. Click on "Peace Voter," Then in the Voter Guides section click on Selected Senate Candidates’ Statements.
Ring, Dan,“Sen. Scott
Brown and Elizabeth Warren mark positions on Afghanistan, China and other
foreign policies.” The Republican
[The Republican is a politically
independent newspaper based in Springfield, Massachusetts], Sunday, July 08,
2012.
[[MASSLIVE]]
In his introductory
remarks, Ring wrote "The Republican and Masslive composed ten questions on
the issue to U.S. Sen. Scott P. Brown, the Republican incumbent, and Elizabeth
Warren, the Democratic challenger and a Harvard law professor. Each candidate provided written
answers…"
Warren, Elizabeth, Veterans, Military Families & National Security, a page at her website http://elizabethwarren.com/issues/foreign-policy. Retrieved 16 September 2012]
SOME DATES
25 Aug 2009. Senator Edward Kennedy dies [SBA p. 242].
12 Sept 2009.
Scott Brown announces his candidacy for the U.S. Senate [SBA, p. 249].
8 Dec 2009.
Primary election [SBA p. 242].
19 Jan 2010. Brown wins the Senate special election.
4 Feb 2012.
Brown is sworn in as U.S. Senator [SBA, p. 291].
13 Sept 2012. Final night of the Democratic National
Convention
Four televised
debates, 2012:
•
“September 20: WBZ-TV's studio and air live on WBZ and WBZ Newsradio 1030 from 7 to 8 pm.[110] Moderated by the
station's political reporter Jon Keller[111]
•
October 1: UMASS Lowell. Co-hosted by the
university and the Boston Herald and moderated by David Gregory[112]
•
October 10: Springfield's Symphony Hall, hosted by a
Western Massachusetts consortium,[113] moderated by WGBY-TV's Jim Madigan.[114]
October
30: WGBH-TV's studio, hosted by a
Boston mediaB consortium.[115]” [Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts,_2012#Debates].
WARREN’S OVERVIEW
“We live in a constantly changing, increasingly
interconnected world. It is essential that America remain engaged in the world
to protect our national security and to support a stable international system
based on the values of human rights and democracy. Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton has called for "Smart Power" - the use of defense, diplomacy,
development, and other tools to advance U.S. interests in the world. As a
Senator, I will pursue a foreign policy that is smart, tough, and pragmatic,
and that uses every tool available. We owe nothing less to our citizens and to
those we would put in harm's way to protect us.”
AFGHANISTAN
Background:
The United States plans to hand over security to Afghanistan in 2014, but it
will have some military presence in Afghanistan until 2024 according to an
agreement reached on 22 April 2012 [http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3164a16e-8c9f-11e1-9758-00144feab49a.html#axzz26vZ822YV.
Retrieved 19 Sept. 2012].
OVERVIEW
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“I believe it is time for our service members
to come home from Afghanistan. We need to get out as quickly as possible,
consistent with the safety of our troops and with a transition to Afghan
control. Ultimately, it is the Afghans who must take responsibility for their
own future.”
“Elizabeth Warren wants to see American troops
exit Afghanistan ‘as fast as possible,’ a spokesman said noting that the
first-time candidate believes the Obama administration's three-year timetable
could be accelerated. ‘Elizabeth thinks we need to get out of Afghanistan as
fast as possible, but we must do so in a way that maintains the safety of our
troops and allows a handoff to the Afghans,’ said the campaign spokesman.
‘She believes that this can be done faster than the current
timeline.’" [http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Elizabeth_Warren_War_+_Peace.htm,
which gives as a source Boston
Herald, "Troop Withdrawal" , Dec 4, 2011
|
“Regarding
Afghanistan, I supported President Obama’s troop surge and his plan to bring
down those troop levels, but we must constantly monitor the situation and be
careful not to sacrifice the security gains we have made. Preventing
Afghanistan from becoming a safe-haven for terrorist groups seeking to attack
our country is critical to America’s national security. We need to
continually re-evaluate our progress there based on reports from commanders
and conditions on the ground. Last summer, I completed my annual National
Guard training requirements in Afghanistan, which gave me an additional
perspective about the conditions on the ground. I am continually impressed by
the dedication of the men and women of our military serving on the frontlines
to keep our country safe. They deserve the highest levels of gratitude and
respect of all Americans.”
[http://www.scottbrown.com/issues/National-Security/,
retrieved 17 Sept 2012]
|
Response to a question from the Boston Globe about Afghanistan, published 27 September 2012.
“Brown and Warren are also at odds over Obama’s timeline for
withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by 2014. Brown, a longtime National Guard
member, backs that deadline.
“’I’m concerned less with the precise pace of the withdrawal
in Afghanistan than I am with doing it responsibly, defeating the enemy,
rooting out corruption, and improving the Afghan military and police forces so
that we can leave Afghanistan in a better position than when we arrived,’ he
wrote.
“Warren said she wants a withdrawal ‘as quickly as possible,
consistent with the safety of our troops.’
“’We need to transition to Afghan control because,
ultimately, it is the Afghans who must take responsibility for their own
future,’ she wrote.” Levenson, Michael, “Brown, Warren share centrist view on
many foreign policy matters,” Boston
Globe, 27 Sept. 2012. [http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/09/27/foreignpolicy/0H2qM7RF4dMLSyFYnfCfEI/story.html]
QUESTION: “Should we get out of
Afghanistan as soon as possible? Or should we make sure the situation is
stabilized first? President Obama has set a withdrawal date of 2014. There are
about 80,000 troops in Afghanistan now after a surge of troops approved by
Obama in 2009. Do you support Obama’s withdrawal plans? Or should we withdraw
more quickly?” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
For more than a decade, our country has been
engaged in wars abroad - wars that stretched our military, our families, and
our finances. We should always exhaust all other options before going to war,
and we must never again put wars on a credit card for our grandchildren to
pay for. If a war is unavoidable and in our national interest, then we should
be willing to pay for it as we fight it. Either all of us go to war, or none
of us go to war.
“We need to get out as quickly as possible, consistent with
the safety of our troops and with a transition to Afghan control. Our brave
service members have done all that we could have asked them for and more in
Afghanistan, but it is time for them to come home. Ultimately, it is the
Afghans who must take responsibility for their own future. [MASSLIVE]
|
First,
I’m exceptionally proud of our men and women in uniform for their enduring
display of resolve to accomplish the mission.
“I
supported President Obama’s troop surge and I support the current plan to
drawdown the troops in the region according to
the Strategic Partnership Agreement. However, I have concerns with making the
withdrawal date public, because I do not believe we should be telling our
enemies our strategy when it comes to exit plans. I’m focused on ensuring we
capitalize on the gains we’ve made while responsibly withdrawing our forces,
building the capacity of the Afghan security forces and improving
Afghanistan’s governmental institutions to fill in the gaps once we’re gone.
As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I will continue to
monitor the situation. The last thing any of us want is for Afghanistan to be
a haven for terrorists to launch attacks on our country.”
(Note:
Brown has served 32 years in the Army National Guard and served in
Afghanistan fulfilling his yearly military training duty. He was there for
nearly 2 weeks in 2011.)
[MASSLIVE]
|
See
also Fact Sheet: “The U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement
The White House,” Office of the Press Secretary, May 01,
2012 [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/fact-sheet-us-afghanistan-strategic-partnership-agreement. Retrieved 19 September 2012].
The text of the agreement: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/2012.06.01u.s.-afghanistanspasignedtext.pdf. Retrieved 19 September 2012.
|
|
CHINA
“What can be done about abuses of
human rights in China, an incredibly valued trade partner? According to certain
organizations, issues include the use of capital punishment, the one-child
policy, the political status of Tibet and a lack of freedoms in the press and
religion and a lack of legal rights.” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
”China’s rise over the last generation has been incredibly
important. Today, our economies and security are in many ways intertwined, as we work
together on issues ranging from nuclear proliferation to piracy. The United
States must continue to stand up for the universal values this country was
founded on, including free speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of
movement. In the short-term, this position will inevitably introduce some
frictions into our foreign relations. In the longer term, China’s engagement
with global issues – from human rights to global and regional security
challenges to ensuring a level economic playing field – will help sustain a
stable, long-term relationship between our two nations. I support the U.S.
government’s efforts to connect with the Chinese government on these issues,
and I hope that both governments will continue to build those connections in
the future.” [MASSLIVE]
|
“Our country is a model for the world in terms of human rights
and democracy and we should not miss occasions to insist that the Chinese
make serious progress in respect for its citizens. Secretary (of State
Hillary) Clinton has been able to press the Chinese to make progress on human
rights issues. China is heavily reliant on trade with the United States. The
U.S. should continue to use its leverage with China to encourage the country to respect human rights. In
addition, we should continue to support democracies in Taiwan, Japan and
South Korea so that the Chinese people have neighboring examples of democracy
and human rights.” [MASSLIVE]
|
DEATH PENALTY,
BROWN’S POSITION ON
“I believe there are some crimes that are so heinous
that they deserve capital punishment. Our Government should have the ability to
impose the death penalty in cases where it is justified“
[http://www.scottbrown.com/issues/death-penalty/. Retrieved 20 September 2012]. Uploaded 7
October 2009. [Retrieved 20
September 2012]. [See also http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHkjlT7QL1k].
ECONOMIC POWER
AND FOREIGN POLICY: WARREN’S VIEW
“Our
economic power at home is linked to our strength around the world. A strong
economy at home enables us to have the best-trained and most advanced military
in the world - and the standing in the world such that we don't always need to
use it. A strong economy at home enables us to export goods to foreign
customers. A strong economy at home gives us influence over events occurring
all around the world. And a strong economy at home enables us to spread the
values of democracy and human rights. We are one of the most powerful countries
in the history of the world precisely because we are one of the strongest
economies in the history of the world.
As
a Senator, I will never forget the link between our economic power and our
global power, and I will fight to make sure we build a strong economy, so we
can remain a powerful force for good around the world.” [http://elizabethwarren.com/issues/foreign-policy. Retrieved 16 September
2012]
FOREIGN AID
QUESTION “With the
deficit crisis in the U.S., do you support cutting the State Department’s
budget and federal foreign aid? Would you cut the Peace Corps, disaster aid and
food assistance to Africa, for example?” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“Our
foreign policy should be smart, tough, and pragmatic, using every tool in the
toolbox, including using defense, diplomacy, development, and other tools to
advance U.S. interests in the world.
We
must remember that diplomacy and development can, in many cases,
prevent the need to engage in far more costly wars – costly in lives and in
money. Development and diplomacy can help countries from drifting into
instability, where terror, criminal networks, and lawlessness can take hold.
Development and diplomacy can help create economic growth that enables people
to lift themselves from poverty – and grow markets for U.S. companies. And
development and diplomacy can advance democracy and human rights, while fighting
disease and hunger. These are important benefits – particularly given that
international development and diplomacy is only 1% of the federal budget.
“At
a time when the federal debt is more than $15 trillion, we need to be smart
about the budget and about where and how to cut. A budget is about finance
and economics, but it is also about our values. We need to cut the tax breaks
to the oil and gas industry, the loopholes for hedge fund managers, and the
special deals that allow some multinational companies to pay nothing in
federal income taxes. That’s where we should start.” [MASSLIVE]
|
“I’m
the second-most bipartisan senator in Congress. Believe me when I tell you
that the only way we’re going to fix our debt and deficit problem is by working
together. As you know people are hurting in our own country and we must focus
our efforts domestically. We need a bipartisan approach to secure a long-term
deficit reduction plan.
“Foreign
aid is important for humanitarian reasons, and to help give us leverage in
negotiations involving our own national security. But, while it is a
relatively small portion of our budget, we ought not spend a penny more than
is necessary to accomplish these vital goals.
Moreover,
what’s clear is that Washington does not have a revenue problem, it has a
spending problem.
“No
government function should be held completely immune from cuts, and foreign
aid is no exception. However, smart investments in diplomacy now can help
prevent more costly foreign policy problems later.
“The
Congressional Budget Office’s annual long-term budget forecast is evidence
that our exploding debt and deficits will cripple us if we fail to make tough
choices. For example, CBO found that since 2008, U.S. debt has gone from 40
percent of GDP to more than 70 percent, the highest since WWII.” [MASSLIVE]
|
FOREIGN AID:
SUMMARY OF DIFFEN.COM
“Neither Brown nor Warren seemed to be
in favor of cutting foreign aid: Warren said budget cuts should start with tax
breaks for the oil and gas industry, loopholes for hedge fund managers and
special deals that allow some multinational companies to pay no federal income
taxes. Brown said foreign aid is important for humanitarian purposes and
provides leverage in negotiations involving national security for the U.S. The
aid is a relatively small portion of the federal budget, but the nation should
not spend anything more than necessary to accomplish those goals, Brown wrote.”
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown
FOREIGN POLICY
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
"America remain engaged in the
world to protect our national security and to support a stable international
system based on the values of human rights and democracy." [From http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown. accessed
Sept. 2012]
|
"I believe in peace through
strength and that a strong American military is crucial to safety and
security, both at home and around the globe." [From http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown. accessed
Sept. 2012]
|
FOREIGN
POLICY: SUMMARY OF DIFFEN.COM
Differences in
Foreign Policy
“In
written responses to The Republican and MassLive, the candidates offered their views on foreign policy issues, which
were largely similar but differed in tone and emphasis.” http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown
GUN CONTROL:
BROWN’S POSITION
“In a letter of 3 November 2011, Brown wrote to
Boston’s mayor Thomas Menino that he would vote no on the proposed National
Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act: "As you know, I support the individual
right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution," Brown wrote. "I also believe that individual states
should be allowed to decide what constitutes safe and responsible gun ownership
so long as it does not violate that basic constitutional right.
"’Under the proposed
House legislation, a national concealed carry reciprocity amendment would
obligate states like Massachusetts to recognize that concealed carry permits of
other states, even if the bearer of that permit does not meet the requirements
established by Massachusetts to receive such a concealed carry permit. I
believe that the people of Massachusetts are best positioned to decide what is
best for Massachusetts. Therefore, if H.R. 822 or similar legislation comes
before the Senate, I will vote no.’" [The entire letter is reproduced at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/07/scott-brown-nra-national-rifle-association_n_1080707.html
(accessed 15 Sept. 2012).
IRAN
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“In the Middle East, the facts on the
ground are changing rapidly. The United States and the European Union are
imposing some of the toughest sanctions ever on Iran - including sanctions
against Iran's central bank. In March 2012, a group of global powers,
including the United States, agreed to resume talks with Iran on the nuclear
issue. In April, they met for talks in Istanbul, and they met to continue
talks in Baghdad in May.
I support the approach President Obama - joined by
a bipartisan consensus in Congress - has taken in working to prevent Iran
from obtaining a nuclear weapon. A nuclear Iran would be a threat to the
United States, our allies, the region, and the world. I support strong
economic sanctions in conjunction with other countries that have placed
serious political pressure on Iran, as well as vigorous diplomacy to try to
resolve the situation through negotiations. Like the President, I believe
that careless talk of rushing to war is unhelpful, and, like the President, I
believe the United States must take the necessary steps to prevent Iran from
acquiring a nuclear weapon.
”
|
“I have sponsored legislation to … toughen sanctions on Iran …
I believe America must be clear and unmistakable in its position that Iran
must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.”
[http://www.scottbrown.com/issues/National-Security/,
retrieved 17 Sept 2012]
|
“Supports sanctions to stop Iran from building nuclear
weapons and believes Iran should be isolated from the rest of the world until
they give up production of nuclear weapons.” [From
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown]
|
“Supports sanctions to stop Iran from building nuclear
weapons and believes Iran should be isolated from the rest of the world until
they give up production of nuclear weapons.” From
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown
|
SENATORS’ IRAN LETTER AND
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL LEGISLATION [FCNL]
Scott Brown
cosigned a letter opposing unconditional talks with Iran. FCNL opposed the Senators’ letter:
“June 25, 2012
FCNL strongly
opposed the following letter on Iran, addressed to President Barack Obama and
signed by a bipartisan group of 44 senators. The letter warns against continued
talks with Iran, unless Iran agrees in advance to the U.S. demands on its
nuclear program. The letter voices support for "unremitting and crippling
sanctions" and other aggressive measures to make “clear that a credible
military option exists”. See the text of the letter below, and a PDF of the official letter here” [http://fcnl.org/issues/iran/44_senators_sign_anti-diplomacy_letter_on_iran/, retrieved 15 Sept 2012].
“On June 15, as U.S. and Iranian negotiators
prepared to talk in Moscow, 44 senators sent a dangerous, bipartisan letter to
President Obama opposing further talks or concessions with Iran unless that
country first complies with every U.S. demand. If Iran does not agree to these
unrealistic pre-conditions, the letter urged the president to escalate
sanctions.
“The senators’ letter contributed to the lack of
progress made in the Moscow talks. The U.S. and other world powers
refused to offer meaningful concessions to Iran, and the Iranians refused to
meet for one-on-one talks with the United States.
“Your senators can encourage President Obama to
prevent a further breakdown in diplomacy. Please contact your senators in
response to their stances on the Menendez-Blunt letter, and ask them to speak
out in support of diplomacy -- not war -- with Iran, as U.S. and Israeli
security officials have recommended.” [http://www.capwiz.com/fconl/issues/alert/?alertid=61508601&type=ta.
retrieved 15 Sept 2012]
“Do you support restoring
formal diplomatic relations with Iran? What needs to be done so that the U.S.
has formal diplomatic relations with Iran?” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
|
“I support the approach President Obama – joined by a
bipartisan consensus in Congress – has taken in working to prevent Iranian
development of a nuclear weapon. A nuclear Iran would be a threat to the United
States, our allies, the region, and the world. I support economic sanctions
in conjunction with other countries that have placed political pressure on
Iran, as well as vigorous diplomacy to try to resolve the situation through
negotiations. Like the president, I believe the United States must take the
necessary steps to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon – but also
that careless talk of rushing to war is unhelpful.” [MASSLIVE]
|
“We
must prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons capability. There is no
greater threat in the world. There is no room for nuance with Iran. The U.S.
must be clear and unequivocal. Establishing formal relations with Iran while
they continue to thumb their nose at the international community is exactly
the wrong message.
Formal
diplomatic relations with Iran cannot be realized until
the Iranian government has opened its nuclear program fully to international
inspectors, demonstrated without question that its nuclear program is for
civilian purposes only, proven it has ceased its support of terrorist
organizations, and renounced its calls to “wipe Israel off the map.”
Evidence
that Iran is working toward a nuclear weapon continues to emerge. It would be
counterproductive to embrace this dangerous ambition with the full
recognition of the United States government.
I
was a strong supporter and sponsor of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions
legislation, now law, which hinders Iran’s ability to finance its nuclear
program. I was also an original co-sponsor of an amendment to sanction the
Central Bank of Iran which has also been signed into law.” [MASSLIVE]
|
|
IRAQ WAR:
FIRST QUESTION
“Was the War in
Iraq, which ended last year, a worthwhile effort or was it a mistake from the
start? About 4,500 US military members were killed and another 32,000 injured.
What was accomplished in Iraq that made it worthwhile?”
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“With my
three older brothers having served in the military – one career, with 288 combat missions in Vietnam – I
know first-hand how tough, smart, and resourceful our service members are. I
also know how much they and their families contribute to our country. The men
and women of our armed forces who served in Iraq did everything we asked of
them, and no one doubts their courage and fortitude. We should honor and
respect their service, their commitment, and their efforts in ending a brutal
regime. But we also need to learn a larger lesson from the war in Iraq. We
should exhaust all other options before going to war, and we must never again
put wars on a credit card for our grandchildren to pay for. If a war is
unavoidable and in our national interest, then we should be willing to pay
for it as we fight it. If public support is so weak that the American people
are unwilling to pay for the war, then we should not go to war. Either all of
us go to war, or none of us go to war.” [MASSLIVE]
|
“Saddam
Hussein was a murderous dictator who had the blood of Israelis, as well as
hundreds of thousands of Kurds and Shia, on his hands. He was a state sponsor of global terrorism, and
I’ll never forget his missile attacks on Israeli civilian targets in the
first Gulf war. His murderous reign had to be stopped. It was the American
forces that captured Saddam and gave the Iraqi people the chance to chart
their own destiny, voting in free and fair elections for the first time.
While each country is a unique case, I also believe that seeing Iraqis vote
and get a taste of democracy has had a positive ripple effect across the
region. We’ve since seen people in countries like Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and
now Syria demanding an end to autocratic rule.” [MASSLIVE]
|
Warren
“opposed the Iraq War.”
[http://livableworld.org/elections/2012/candidates/senate/ewarren/. Retrieved 4 October 2012]
IRAQ WAR:
SECOND QUESTION
“There are
concerns that violence between major factions in Iraq could erupt into a full-blown
civil war. Is Iraq unraveling? Should we have kept a residual military force in
place instead of withdrawing troops?” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
|
“After years of sacrifice by
America’s armed forces and billions of dollars in spending put on a credit card
for our children and grandchildren to pay, President Obama made the right
decision to end combat operations in Iraq. Now we must build a strong
political and economic partnership with the Iraqi government to promote
stability in the region.” [MASSLIVE]
|
“American
troops did their job. Now, the US government must continue to aid Iraq and
assist in a full transition to a competent, capable and functioning
government and security force so that Al Qaeda cannot reemerge as a
serious threat to our national interests.
“I
supported the surge of forces in Iraq and believe the country has improved in
many ways since then. However, many challenges remain. The security threats
of al Qaeda and affiliated groups still pose a risk to regional stability.
While battered and bruised, al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) maintains a presence in
Iraq and will continue to attempt to stage attacks. Iranian-backed militias,
other violent extremist organizations, and lingering ethnic tensions between
Sunni and Shia and Arabs and Kurds will present challenges to the Iraqi
government in providing critical government services.
“The
next year in Iraq will be critical and marks the final stage of transition in
Iraq from the drawdown of the US military operation to normalized relations
under the Status of Forces Agreement (SFA). We must continue our interaction
with Iraq by building upon the structure in the SFA and improving our
strategic partnerships in areas of defense, education, economics and
diplomacy.” [MASSLIVE]
|
|
View
on the Iraq War
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“Warren has said it's a mistake to ‘put
wars on a credit card for our grandchildren to pay for. If war is unavoidable
and in our national interest, then we should be willing to pay for it as we
fight it.’ [From http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown. Accessed Sept. 2012]
|
Brown said that Saddam Hussein, the
former Iraqi president, was a "murderous dictator" who had to be stopped. [From http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown. accessed
Sept. 2012]
|
ISRAEL AND
JERUSALEM
Response to a question from the Boston Globe about Israel, published 27 September 2012. Levenson,
Michael, “Brown, Warren share centrist view on many foreign policy matters,” Boston Globe, 27 Sept. 2012. [http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/09/27/foreignpolicy/0H2qM7RF4dMLSyFYnfCfEI/story.html]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“Warren offered a more general answer [than Brown], with
no outlines of an agreement, and, like Brown, emphasized that Israel must
remain an ally.
“’The role of US legislators is to make it clear that the
United States will support those who support peace and security for Israelis
and Palestinians,” she wrote, adding that ‘I do not believe that a lasting
peace can be imposed from the outside.’”
|
‘Brown said a two-state
solution must affirm ‘Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the state of Israel,’
among other conditions.”
|
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“Supports a two-state solution but
believes that the US cannot dictate the terms of a mid-east peace plan.
Believes Israel must maintain a "qualitative military edge and
defensible borders". [From http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown. accessed
Sept. 2012]
|
“Supports a two-state solution that
reaffirms Israel’s right to exist and provides the Palestinians with a place
of their own where both sides can live in peace and security. I support the
security barrier erected by Israel.” [From http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown. accessed
Sept. 2012]
|
Warren
on the U.S.-Israel Relationship and Middle East Peace
“Since
its founding more than 60 years ago, Israel and the United States have been
steadfast, trusted, and reliable allies. I unequivocally support the right of a
Jewish, democratic state of Israel to exist, and to be safe and secure. The
U.S.-Israel relationship is rooted in shared values and common interests, based
on a commitment to liberty, pluralism, and the rule of law. These values transcend
time, and they are the basis of our unbreakable bond.
To me, it is a moral
imperative to support and defend Israel, and I am committed to ensuring its
long-term security by maintaining its qualitative military edge. Israel must be
able to defend itself from the serious threats it faces from terrorist
organizations to hostile states, including Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and
others.
I am also a strong proponent of a two-state solution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which I believe to be in the interest of Israel
and the United States, with a Jewish, democratic state of Israel and a state
for the Palestinian people. The U.S. can and should play an active role in
promoting a diplomatic resolution to the conflict that is agreed to by the
parties, but I do not believe that a lasting peace can be imposed from the
outside or that either party should take unilateral steps - such as the
Palestinians' application for UN membership - that move the parties further
away from negotiations.
I am also deeply proud that Israel and Massachusetts
are natural economic allies. Like Massachusetts, Israel has a real commitment
and advantage in high-tech and innovative industries. There are approximately
100 companies in Massachusetts with Israeli founders or based on Israeli
technologies - creating $2.4 billion in value and thousands of jobs for our
economy.
As a United States Senator, I will work to ensure Israel's security
and success, and I will support active American leadership to help bring peace
and security to Israel and the region.”
MEXICO
QUESTION: “What
can be done to weaken the powerful drug cartels in Mexico? Would you support
drone strikes by the United States against the cartel operations if approved by
the Mexican government?” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“The United States must continue to work with the
Mexican government to identify ways to end the escalating violence by drug cartels in Mexico. Mexico and the United States
share a common interest in ending this illicit behavior, and our
responsibilities both start at home. That is why I support the Obama
Administration’s focus on reducing demand from within the United States for
illicit drugs and on working collaboratively with the Mexican government to
find a comprehensive solution to the trafficking of narcotics and weapons.”
[MASSLIVE]
|
”As
a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I have worked with my
Senate colleagues to improve border security and the security of cargo
imported through our ports of entry. However, the violence in Mexico
underscores the importance of strong security along our Southwest border. The
motive for the Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) is short and
simple—it’s about greed. Whoever controls the routes controls the profit.
DTOs seek to create an environment of lawlessness and chaos that they can
freely operate in.
Mexico’s
drug problem does not stop at our border, and nor will the violence, if
serious gains are not made against the problem in the coming years. Greater
emphasis needs to be made on interdiction and disruption of trade routes,
forcing the drug traffickers out of their ‘zones of safety’. Counternarcotics
and intelligence collection and sharing should be prioritized. I don’t
believe drone strikes should be considered at this time. Drone strikes don’t
address the demand side of the problem, as disruption of the networks in
Mexico doesn’t mean disruption of the trade, routes will simply move elsewhere.
Drone strikes that kill civilian bystanders will quickly reverse civilian
sentiment on the war.” [MASSLIVE]
|
NATIONAL
SECURITY: BROWN
“I’m…tough on national security” [SBA, p. 296, par.
3]
“I believe in a strong military that will protect
our interests and ensure security around the world, and in a vigorous homeland
defense” [SBA, p. 306, par 3].
“I believe in peace through strength and that a strong American
military is crucial to safety and security, both at home and around the globe”
[http://www.scottbrown.com/issues/National-Security/,
retrieved 17 Sept 2012].
NATIONAL SECURITY
NATIONAL
SECURITY: DEFENSE INDUSTRY IN MASSACHUSETTS AND BROWN
“Federal reports show employees of the 10 largest
defense companies in Massachusetts and their political action committees have
given more than $90,000 to the Brown campaign.
“Both Marzilli [Chris Marzilli, president of
General Dynamics C4 Systems] of General Dynamics and Anderson [Chris Anderson,
president of the Defense Technology Initiative and the Massachusetts High Tech
Council.] of the Defense Technology Initiative have given to Brown.
“Warren raised just under $5,000 from workers,
and none from the defense company PACs”
[http://www.wbur.org/2012/08/02/senate-series-defense].
July 28, 2012 | By Andrew
Caffrey, Boston Globe Staff
“A General Dynamics military plant in Taunton
will probably avoid having to lay off workers after the Pentagon this week
backed off a plan to cut hundreds of millions of dollars from a project being
developed there. The Defense Department's proposal to chop $334.6 million from
the project — a mobile communications system for military units in the field —
was met with stiff opposition in Congress, particularly from Senator Scott
Brown, a Republican. And after meeting with Brown earlier this week, Pentagon
officials revised the size of the cut down to $54.6 million, his office said
Friday.”
CUTTING OUR
DEFENSE BUDGET
Brown and Warren provided the Boston Globe with “five ideas for bridging the nation’s
$1.2 trillion deficit…Brown and Warren “would also reduce defense spending,
which in Warren’s case would mean an accelerated exit from Afghanistan, for a
savings estimated by the committee [the Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget Project, a bipartisan group] at $36 billion. She did not outline a time
frame. Brown would stick to the current timeline for withdrawal, and would also
cut nonwar defense spending, such as a widely criticized missile system
designed to replace the Patriot missile. His cuts are estimated to save $100
billion over 10 years.”
Noah Bierman, “Brown, Warren offer different ideas on
deficit,” Boston Globe,
11 July 2012. [http://articles.boston.com/2012-07-11/metro/32618305_1_bush-tax-cuts-estate-taxes-budget-deficit,
retrieved 26 September 2012]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“As we wind
down two wars, we can make cuts in our defense budget - smart, targeted cuts
that preserve our national security.” [http://elizabethwarren.com/issues/jobs-and-the-economy. Retrieved 26 September 2012]
|
|
NORTH KOREA
“North Korea
has active nuclear and ballistic missile weapons programs and a terrible record
on human rights that includes labor camps for those who disagree with the
government. What is your strategy for dealing with North Korea?” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“Around the
world, the proliferation of nuclear weapons remains a critical challenge. The
recent leadership transition in North Korea and its failed missile launch in April 2012 are developments that require continued U.S.
monitoring and attention, in addition to close cooperation with our allies
and continued efforts with those in the region. If there is to be progress,
North Korea must first take action to demonstrate good faith including
suspending enrichment, halting missile tests, and allowing international
inspectors into the country.”
[MASSLIVE]
|
“North
Korea is an unpredictable and dangerous threat to regional stability. Given
their track-record, I remain deeply concerned over North Korea’s
proliferation of nuclear weapons technology to state and
non-state actors. We must use all of our diplomatic resources to continue to
be tough with the North Korean government, including working with our allies
in the region to send a united message that a defiant, nuclear-armed North
Korea is unacceptable.
“Our
strategy should include targeted sanctions on the regime, the enforcement of
international restrictions on ballistic missile components, eliminating the
illicit trade networks that keep regime loyalists well-funded, and working
with China to pressure the North to abandon its nuclear program. The real
victims of the North Korean regime are the North Korean people. They are
suffering from famine and extreme poverty. Their repressive government spends
what money it has on its military, its nuclear program and luxury goods for
the ruling elite, rather than providing basic necessities to its own
population. If North Korea cooperates with the international community, food
aid and economic assistance can be restored.” [MASSLIVE]
|
NORTH KOREA (from
Warren’s website)
“In Asia, the recent
leadership transition in North Korea and its failed missile launch in April
2012 are developments that require continued U.S. monitoring and attention, in
addition to close cooperation with our allies and continued efforts with those
in the region. If there is to be progress, North Korea must first take action
to demonstrate good faith including suspending enrichment, halting missile
tests, and allowing international inspectors into the country.
”
NUCLEAR
WEAPONS
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“Around the world,
the proliferation of nuclear weapons remains a critical challenge. Every
additional finger on the nuclear button makes our world and our citizens less
safe. Every new country with nuclear weapons creates the added risk of those
weapons being lost or stolen. Every new nuclear power makes it more likely
their neighbors will seek nuclear weapons as well.” [http://elizabethwarren.com/issues/foreign-policy. Retrieved 16 September
2012]
|
Brown serves on the Senate Armed Services
Committee. A survey of his votes
in the 111th Congress on the New START nuclear reductions treaty
is illuminating. Council for a
Livable World, an advocacy group for nuclear arms control, analyzed some key
votes in the Senate on the New START nuclear reductions treaty; 52 Democratic
Senators voted along the lines suggested by the Council 100% of the time
while 17 Republicans never did so, though Brown got a 60%. (The treaty was ratified by the U.S.
Senate in December 2010.) Brown
voted for amendments which the Council thought would kill the treaty although
he did in the end vote for it.
[CLW]
|
According to Council for a Livable World, “Elizabeth Warren
supports the Kissinger-Shultz-Nunn-Perry vision of moving toward a world free
of nuclear weapons. She strongly backs President Obama’s goal of securing and
retrieving vulnerable nuclear-weapons usable materials worldwide within four
years… She opposed the Iraq War and would If elected to the Senate, Warren
would vote to approve the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.”
[http://livableworld.org/elections/2012/candidates/senate/ewarren/. Retrieved 26 September 2012]
|
OBAMA’S TOUR
“Asked about another Romney argument, that Obama conducted
an ‘apology tour’ early in his term that projected a weak image overseas, Brown
made clear he does not share that view.
“It’ll let the pundits characterize how the president’s
“tone” is perceived abroad,’ Brown wrote. ‘President Obama has had some notable
successes in his foreign policy, including the battle against terrorism around
the world.’
“Warren bashed Romney’s line about an ‘apology tour.’
“’Nothing like that ever happened, and Republicans should be
called out for making false claims,’ she wrote. ‘President Obama has taken a
tough, smart, and pragmatic approach to foreign policy that has not only gotten
results but also repaired our image and leadership around the world.’” [Levenson, Michael, “Brown, Warren
share centrist view on many foreign policy matters,” Boston Globe, 27 Sept. 2012.
[http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/09/27/foreignpolicy/0H2qM7RF4dMLSyFYnfCfEI/story.html]]
RUSSIA
“Asked about Romney’s declaration that Russia is ‘our number
one geopolitical foe,’ Brown said he disagrees with that assessment. He said he
is concerned, however, that Russia is not doing enough to prevent Iran from
obtaining a nuclear weapon.
“Warren said she, too, disagrees with Romney’s view of
Russia and indicated she does not consider the country either friend or foe.
She said the United States must work with Russia to pressure Iran, Syria, and
North Korea, and ‘stand up vigorously’ when Russia tramples its citizens’
rights.
“’In short, we have interests, and they have interests,’ she
wrote. ‘We work together where we can, and we pursue a separate course where it
makes sense for us.’ Levenson, Michael, “Brown, Warren share centrist view on
many foreign policy matters,” Boston
Globe, 27 Sept. 2012. [http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/09/27/foreignpolicy/0H2qM7RF4dMLSyFYnfCfEI/story.html]
SYRIA
Response to a question from the Boston Globe about Syria, published 27 September 2012. Levenson,
Michael, “Brown, Warren share centrist view on many foreign policy matters,” Boston Globe, 27 Sept. 2012. [http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/09/27/foreignpolicy/0H2qM7RF4dMLSyFYnfCfEI/story.html]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“Warren said she supports nonmilitary aid to the rebels
but hedged on arming them and instituting a no-fly zone, saying they ‘must be
carefully considered.’
“’We cannot take such action without a clear sense of
what we are getting into and what we need to do to succeed,’ she wrote. ‘Because
lethal assistance can have complex and unintended consequences, we should not
act unless we are confident that we can do more good than harm and that we
have a clear plan and achievable goals.’”
|
“Brown said he wants to go beyond the nonmilitary and
humanitarian aid the Obama administration is currently providing the rebels.
“’I also believe it is appropriate to identify moderate
elements within the opposition and provide them with weapons so they can
fight back against Assad and the Syrian army,’ Brown wrote.
“’With so many innocent Syrians being slaughtered every
day, we should do what we can to level the playing field,’ he wrote.
‘However, I do not at this time support sending in US ground forces or the
imposition of a no-fly zone.’”
|
“Should the US
be arming the militants in Syria? Why or why not? The Syrian government is
backed by Iran and Hezbollah and is using its Army to kill the opposition and
civilians in the process.” [MASSLIVE]
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
Warren said she supports nonmilitary aid to the rebels but
hedged on arming them and instituting a no-fly zone, saying they “must be
carefully considered.”
“We cannot take such action without a clear sense of what
we are getting into and what we need to do to succeed,” she wrote. “Because
lethal assistance can have complex and unintended consequences, we should not
act unless we are confident that we can do more good than harm and that we
have a clear plan and achievable goals.”
|
“Brown said he wants to go beyond the nonmilitary and
humanitarian aid the Obama administration is currently providing the rebels.
“’I also believe it is appropriate to identify moderate
elements within the opposition and provide them with weapons so they can
fight back against Assad and the Syrian army,’ Brown wrote.
“’With so many innocent Syrians being slaughtered every
day, we should do what we can to level the playing field,’ he wrote.
‘However, I do not at this time support sending in US ground forces or the
imposition of a no-fly zone.’”
|
“The ongoing killing of civilians
in Syria is a terrible tragedy, and Assad has got to go. The unfolding question is how to accomplish those
goals. The President is right to try to work with others in the region and in
the international community to influence Syria. Because assistance can have
complex and unintended consequences, we should not act unless we are confident
that we can do more good than harm and that we have a clear plan and
achievable goals.” [MASSLIVE]
|
“I’m
deeply concerned about the current situation in Syria. With over 10,000
civilians killed by their own government and violence spilling over into Lebanon,
the international community cannot afford to sit idly by as (president Bashar al-)Assad continues down the path of
destruction and mass killings. I strongly support the Syrian people in their
pursuit to oust the oppressive Assad regime.
While
all options should remain on the table, at this time, I do not think we
should be committing any U.S. troops, but I do believe strongly that we have
a responsibility to protect human life. We must work with the international
community to stop the violence and help the opposition, including providing
food and medical supplies, and assisting in training.” [MASSLIVE]
|
SYRIA: WARREN’S AND BROWN’S VIEWS FROM: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown
“Warren and Brown both say the Assad
regime should be ousted but neither is willing to commit US troops to the
cause. They advocate working with other countries and keeping ‘all options on
the table’.
“Both Brown and Warren
oppose committing U.S. troops to Syria.
“’The ongoing killing of civilians in Syria is a
tragedy and Assad has got to go,’ Warren says of the ongoing crisis in Syria.
TERRORISM
BROWN ON TERRORISM
“I have
sponsored legislation to combat global terrorism, toughen sanctions on Iran and
strip domestic terrorists of their American citizenship” [[http://www.scottbrown.com/issues/National-Security/,
retrieved 17 Sept 2012].
(“Warren is also not sure if it's a good idea to
strip ‘homegrown terrorists’ of their citizenship--she hasn't read her
opponent's bill proposing such.”
[http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Elizabeth_Warren_Homeland_Security.htm#2; retrieved 25 Sept. 2012). The source for the quotation cited by
OnTheIssues is AntiWar.com blog, "Bomb, Bomb Iran" , Oct 17, 2011].)
“Railed against criminal trials for terrorism
suspects, accused should be treated enemy combatants and transferred to
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and interrogated by any legal means. Also he says
waterboarding is not torture.” [From
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Elizabeth_Warren_vs_Scott_Brown].
Brown wrote “For months, I had said, ‘In dealing
with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not
lawyers to defend them.’ But
almost the first thing the FBI had done with the waterboard bomber was to read
him his Miranda rights and then get him a lawyer at taxpayer’s expense” [SBA,
p. 267; cf. p. 276].
“I was opposed to trying self-admitted 9/11
mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed with taxpayers’ money in a New York City
civilian court, and I wasn’t afraid of interrogating enemy combatants under all
of our applicable laws in order to discover what other violence they might be
plotting against the United States and American citizens. I have always said that the U.S.
Constitution and American laws are designed to protect our nation, not to give
rights and privileges to people who have not earned these protections, namely
our enemies during wartime” [SBA p. 268].
(Re the underpants bomber, see Underpants bomber
cooperating – no waterboarding required! david | Wed, Feb 3,
2010
[http://bluemassgroup.com/2010/02/underpants-bomber-cooperating-no-waterboarding-required/. Retrieved 15 Sept 2012).
TERRORISM:
WARREN ON AL QAEDA
“As a country, we have
been fortunate to have avoided any devastating attacks since 9/11. It's a
testament to the hard work of our intelligence, law enforcement, homeland
security, and military personnel. As recently as May, these professionals
disrupted an Al Qaeda plot to target civilian aircraft using an explosive
designed in Yemen.
It has now
been more than one year since the death of Osama bin Laden, and the President's
assertive operations have eliminated many of Al Qaeda's senior leadership and
weakened its affiliates. But the threat of terrorism remains, and we must
remain vigilant. We must continue our political, military, economic, and
diplomatic efforts against Al Qaeda and its affiliates, and we need to continue
to support the efforts of our intelligence, law enforcement, homeland security,
and military professionals.”
TERRORISM: OSAMA BIN LADEN
QUESTION: “President Obama
has been criticized for using the raid that killed Osama bin Laden as a way
to boost his re-election campaign. The Associated Press reported that he used
the May 2 anniversary of bin Laden’s death to help maximize a political
narrative that portrays the president as bold and decisive. Is it appropriate
for the president to use the death of bin Laden for his re-election campaign?”
[MASSLIVE]
|
|
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“President Obama displayed strong
leadership with his decision to order the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, and his assertive operations
have eliminated many of al Qaeda’s senior leadership and weakened its
affiliates. We must continue our political, military, economic, and
diplomatic efforts against al Qaeda and its affiliates, and we need to
continue to support the efforts of our intelligence, law enforcement,
homeland security, and military professionals.” [MASSLIVE]
|
“Osama
bin Laden’s death was a victory for the United States and peace loving people
around the world. President Obama deserves credit for
ordering the raid.
However,
I do have concerns about the possibility that the Administration shared
sensitive information about the raid, including the identities of sources and
the tactics and techniques used. Not only did this put American lives at
risk, but also risked the lives of the brave individuals who work and partner
with the United States abroad. The Pakistani doctor that assisted the CIA
with a vaccination clinic that covertly collected DNA from Osama’s Abbottabad
compound, Dr. Shakil Afridi, is now in prison for treason because his
identity was leaked to the New York Times.” [MASSLIVE]
|
WAR
WARREN
|
BROWN
|
“For more than a
decade, our country has been engaged in wars abroad - wars that stretched our
military, our families, and our finances. We should always exhaust all other
options before going to war, and we must never again put wars on a credit
card for our grandchildren to pay for. If a war is unavoidable and in our
national interest, then we should be willing to pay for it as we fight it.
Either all of us go to war, or none of us go to war.
” [http://elizabethwarren.com/issues/foreign-policy. Retrieved 16 September
2012]
|
See above, National Security
|
WATERBOARDING:
BROWN’S POSITION ON
“State Senator Scott Brown, the Republican
candidate for US Senate, endorsed yesterday the use of enhanced interrogation
techniques - including the practice of simulated drowning known as
waterboarding - in questioning terror suspects. The point drew a quick rebuke
from the campaign of his Democratic rival, Attorney General Martha Coakley,
which said she supports President Obama’s ban on waterboarding” [By Brian C. Mooney,
Boston Globe Staff / January 5, 2010 from http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/05/brown_coakley_clash_over_suspected_terrorists_rights/ Retrieved 15 Sept
2012]. See also http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6059557-503544.html
[“FOREIGN POLICY VIEWS: A COMPARISON OF SENATOR SCOTT BROWN AND ELIZABETH WARREN” is
in the following computer file: 20120922 BROWN AND WARREN VIEWS mW2008.]
t h e e n d
