Explore Candidates → Fred Thompson on Iraq and Foreign Policy
Fred Thompson on Iraq and Foreign Policy
Q: If it's clear that Iran is getting close to getting a nuclear weapon, would it be your policy to support preemption as a means of taking out or wiping out those facilities, considering they've repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the map? THOMPSON: Yes, yes. Q: It would be? THOMPSON: Yes.
Fox News "Hannity & Colmes" interview Jun 6, 2007
There is simply no downside to blaming America, because Americans don't punish their ideological foes. From the UN, we don't even require sanity sometimes. And there might even be an upside to blaming us, since there are Americans who suffer from such ingrained feelings of guilt, they'll support increased aid to both the UN and Sudan. There is a lesson to be learned here, though. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is arguably the most powerful man in the international community today. We know he's unwilling to blame those who actually gave the orders to commit genocide in Darfur. And apparently he's happy to shift the blame for ongoing deaths to those living peaceful, productive lives in the West. Now hopefully we can work toward international cooperation with regard to environmental policies that make sense.
Like most of the other candidates, Thompson has expressed alarm at the possibility of a nuclear Iran and its effect on Israel’s security. "If the world doesn't act to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions, it must be prepared for the consequences of Israel defending itself," he wrote in a May 2007 op-ed for Townhall.com. Also in May 2007, he said the United States should assist any efforts by Iranians to overthrow their government.
"We have a lot of friends in Iran who apparently feel their leader is trying to drive them off of a militant, religious extremism cliff," he said. "Some of these problems might work in our favor especially if we ratcheted the sanctions a bit more. I would think that certainly a blockade would be a possibility if we could get the international cooperation to do that. "I think regime change might be an option . . . but you can't take the military option off the table." Thompson, an actor, answered questions after giving a speech in London.
"Of the dozen or so candidates contesting the nomination, Thompson is among the most supportive of Israel. The former actor, who has also served as a US senator, bucked popular international sentiment by insisting in a hard-hitting editorial column that Israel has been almost too careful in its war on Palestinian terrorism. "Israel is at war," Thompson wrote for the conservative website Townhall.com. And the Jewish state has gone to "incredible lengths to stop the war against them without harming Palestinian non-combatants." Thompson is also on record as supporting an Israeli military strike against Iran should international diplomacy fail to prevent the Islamic Republic from obtaining nuclear arms."
Voted YES on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba.
Conference Report on H.R. 927; Bill H.R. 927 ; vote number 1996-22 on Mar 5, 1996
Voted YES on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion.
H.R. 2606 Conference Report; Bill H.R. 2606 ; vote number 1999-312 on Oct 6, 1999
Voted YES on cutting nuclear weapons below START levels.
Motion to table Kerrey Amdt #395; Bill S. 1059 ; vote number 1999-149 on May 26, 1999
On Iraq, Thompson voted to authorize the invasion in October 2002 and now opposes setting a timetable to withdraw U.S. troops.
Thompson is generally opposed to a fixed timetable to withdraw U.S. troops in Iraq. Shortly after officially entering the race for president, Thompson said on the campaign trail in Iowa in September 2007 that 'the American people don’t want to lose." He said "we’ve got to stay there and do what’s necessary to prevail."
I was encouraged to see that a withdrawal, maybe later this year, maybe next spring, or both was part of what Patraeaus considered to be a plan of success.
Thompson said in a column written for the National Review on Jan. 19, 2007, that he supported Bush's plan to temporarily boost U.S. troop levels in Iraq because "the consequences of an American defeat in Iraq are so great."
We should think about the future and we should think about the kind of world we are going to live in if we pull out of there [Iraq] wholesale, and tell our friends and allies in that part of the world [the Middle East] that we can no longer be reliable, that we're gone, and that we they are trying to figure out what is in their own best interest and who to make a deal with, and what about the energy supply and what's going to happen to that. I think the Sunni nation has decided it wants nuclear weapons and that we have at least stalled that by being in that part of the world.
I think we've got to take the next step, and that is wait and see.
Hannity and Colmes, Fox News Channel, 6/6/07