State of Colorado Archives: on War & Peace

John Hickenlooper: Veterans deserve priority in help to re-enter civilian life

Doug Robinson: Trump is right with strong response on Syria

A: I've been happy with some of the things he's done, and concerned about others. I'm especially happy about Neil Gorsuch. I think it's a real coup for Colorado to have a Supreme Court justice. It's been quite a number of years since Byron White. I don't know Neil personally, but I have friends who know him well and who went to school with him, and I think he's a terrific choice. That's the best thing he's done. I also think he's been strong internationally in terms of the response to Syria, and I'm hopeful we're going to have a health care bill that is going to put a better plan forward for working Americans and for other folks.

Darryl Glenn: Nuclear armed Iran poses greatest threat to the U.S.

Darryl Glenn: While radical Islamic terrorism poses a grave danger to our nation and the international community, a nuclear armed Iran poses a greater threat to the U.S. than any other security challenge. Iran is unquestionably pursuing nuclear weapons and has stated unequivocally that it wishes to use them against the U.S. and our close ally Israel.

Darryl Glenn: Iran nuclear deal has made America less safe

Once in the Senate, I will support withdrawal from the treaty, reimposition of tough sanctions, and a tightening of restrictions on senior Iranian leadership.

Jon Keyser: Iranian regime is evil, and cannot be trusted

A: The list of policy differences between my opponent and me is a long one, but here are three important points of differentiation:

• Iran Deal: I strongly disagree with Senator Bennet's support for the Iran deal. As an Intelligence Officer, I know the Iranian regime is evil, and cannot be trusted. The Iran deal makes the US less safe, but also gravely endangers some of our closest allies, like Israel. It virtually guarantees the Iranians will obtain nuclear weapons, probably before my kids are in middle school.
• National Debt: I'll fight to cut our national debt, balance our budget, and get our fiscal house in order. I believe it is immoral for us to mortgage the futures of our kids and grandkids.
• ObamaCare: We would not have ObamaCare today if Senator Bennet voted against it. We need to repeal ObamaCare immediately and replace it with innovative, free-market solutions.

Peg Littleton: Oppose irresponsible and dangerous nuclear deal with Iran

We live in dangerous times, challenged by nuclear proliferation in rogue nations and international terrorism sponsored by rogue dictatorships.

Tim Neville: Iranian nuke deal betrays our strong ally Israel

Michael Bennet: AdWatch: Supports Iranian nuclear deal

Truth Test: CLAIM: "Senator Michael Bennet supports the Iran deal."

VERDICT: TRUE. Sen. Bennet voted in favor of the deal.

CLAIM: "A nuclear Iran is a threat to the entire world" and "Michael Bennet is jeopardizing our safety."

VERDICT: OPINION. Both sides of the debate over the Iran deal have experts who'll argue the merits and detriments of the deal.

THE POLITICS BEHIND THE AD: It's hard to avoid comparisons to the 1964 "daisy ad" from President Johnson's campaign. Both ads feature children, countdowns and nuclear explosions--and both ads were meant to evoke the same emotional response.

Ken Buck: No deadline for withdrawal from Afghanistan

BUCK: Well, I don't think we set artificial deadlines. I think that we set realistic goals, and, and try to accomplish those goals. I don't think we should be nation-building, I don't think we should be staying there over the long-term

Q: What if General Petraeus says, "You know what, it's July 2011, but if we're going to achieve our goals, we can't pull any troops out. May need more troops, may need to surge up again here." Well, you could support that because you don't believe in deadlines?

BUCK: No, I didn't say I could support that. I don't believe in deadlines, I don't believe in telling the enemy when we're going to withdraw. I need to know what he thinks the goals are. And if I agree with those goals, then evaluate at that point.

Michael Bennet: Commit to bring home troops from Afghanistan in July 2011

BENNET: My position is that we ought to begin bringing our troops home in July '11. And there will be troops there, they'll have to leave troops there, and I recognize that. But this is the longest shooting war in our country's history.

Q: But if a significant number of combat forces must remain to achieve US goals, you'd be for it or against it?

BENNET: I would have to look at it then, but what I want to make clear is that I believe the president needs to honor the commitment that he made to begin bringing our troops home. I don't know what "significant" is. I imagine that there will be a substantial number of troops there for the foreseeable future.

Q: And you could support that?

BENNET: I believe what the American people need to see that our commitment there is coming to an end.

Ken Buck: Don't allow Iran to obtain nukes, even via military

Buck challenged Bennet, saying he'd voted against imposing sanctions on companies doing business with Iran, a claim Bennet denied, but Buck insisted was accurate.

Ken Buck: Afghanistan war ok; nation-building not ok

Bennet's view was even briefer, saying U.S. goals in Afghanistan should be to destroy al-Qaida groups on the Pakistan border and then to support the Pakistan military to make certain that country's nuclear weapons are secure from terrorists. Then U.S. troops should be brought home.

Michael Bennet: Afghan exit after al-Qaida groups destroyed in Pakistan

Bennet's view was even briefer, saying U.S. goals in Afghanistan should be to destroy al-Qaida groups on the Pakistan border and then to support the Pakistan military to make certain that country's nuclear weapons are secure from terrorists. Then U.S. troops should be brought home.

Bob Schaffer: Surge is working; but it might take years

SCHAFFER: Hard to say. If they are, I hope that it’s not involved in tactical involvement on a day-to-day basis, but strategic. But I’d hoped that we’d have American troops out even sooner. That definition you read, was before there was a clear indication that the surge has worked. I am optimistic, however, that we are achieving those objectives right now.

Q: [to Udall]: A year ago you said that the surge was a tragic mistake. Were you wrong?

UDALL: It’s time to leave Iraq. It’s time to leave Iraq responsibly.

Q: Were you wrong on the surge?

UDALL: The surge has helped. There are other factors in Iraq that have been helpful.

Mark Udall: Proposed votes against the declaration of war

UDALL: That’s a great narrative, but go back to 2002. You cast votes for a war.

SCHAFFER: You proposed votes against the declaration of war.

UDALL: You cast votes against an energy policy set of proposals that would have us much closer to being energy independent today.

SCHAFFER: I cast votes in favor of an energy policy.

Mark Udall: Surge has helped, but it’s time to leave Iraq

UDALL: It’s time to leave Iraq. It’s time to leave Iraq responsibly.

Q: Were you wrong on the surge?

UDALL: The surge has helped. There are other factors in Iraq that have been helpful. The Al Anbar Awakening, Muqtada al-Sadr’s call for a cease-fire. There’s ethnic cleansing to a great extent now that you don’t hear that story. Sunni and Shia do not live together anymore in places like Baghdad. But whatever the situation was then, it’s now time to leave Iraq in an honorable & responsible way. As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I know how stretched our military is. I also know we haven’t finished the job in Afghanistan and in Pakistan. Bin Laden is still at large. I also know we have no capacity to defend our own country or to respond to any other emergencies all over the world. It’s time to turn Iraq back over to the Iraqis and refocus on a tough and a smart national security policy.

Pete Coors: Support adding more troops, oppose setting a war deadline

Ken Salazar: Bush was not for a Department of Homeland Security

A: I wouldn’t have chosen those same words. The reality of it is that if you look at the time before 9/11, that we knew that we were involved in dealing with the greatest threat that America has seen in modern history, and that’s the whole issue of terrorism. Look at the Hart-Rodman report that came out long before 9/11, and they said we were going to be attacked here at the homeland and that we needed to create a Department of Homeland Security. And yet what happened? The nation slept. Washington slept on that issue. I was in a meeting with Bush and with Secretary Ridge some six months after 9/11 occurred, and they were still in a position that we did not need to have a Department of Homeland Security. Washington has acted with the kind of urgency to deal with the issue of global terrorism in an effective way.

Ken Salazar: We have a mess on our hands in Iraq

COORS: We have an enemy who is a horrific enemy. These are barbaric people who want to destroy our civilization. Every vote, you go with the best intelligence you have. I don’t think it’s appropriate today to second-guess what decision would be made today based on the information we have. I suspect that given what we know today, there would be a much different outcome than we had a couple of years ago.

Pete Coors: Go with the best intelligence you have

COORS: We have an enemy who is a horrific enemy. These are barbaric people who want to destroy our civilization. Every vote, you go with the best intelligence you have. I don’t think it’s appropriate today to second-guess what decision would be made today based on the information we have. I suspect that given what we know today, there would be a much different outcome than we had a couple of years ago.