For example, I heard Senator Clinton say on Sunday that she wants to continue combat missions in Iraq. To me, that's a continuation of the war. I do not think we should continue combat missions in Iraq, and when I'm on a stage with the Republican nominee come the fall of 2008, I'm going to make it clear that I'm for ending the war.
Edwards on September 7:
Even though the presence of U.S. troops has served as an attractive target for terrorists, our eventual withdrawal will not remove the threat. As president, I will redeploy troops into Quick Reaction Forces outside of Iraq, to perform targeted missions against Al Qaeda cells and to prevent a genocide or regional spillover of a civil war.
That's exactly what Clinton proposes, unless Edwards means that his Quick Reaction Forces would NEVER set foot in Iraq again... which begs the question as to how they'd prevent a genocide if they were encamped in the mountains of Kurdistan or the sands of Saudi Arabia.
Update: Edwards spokesman Eric Schultz sends along this response:
"Senator Clinton keeps combat troops in Iraq. That means she continues the war. John Edwards will end the war. Being just a little bit better than the Republicans is not a good enough reason to be President of the United States