What is the Democratic Party Plan of Action in Iraq Anyway?

[adios]

Kerry and Biden to name a few Democrats were touting the U.N. and NATO more or less during the 2004 election campaign. I think it's fairly clear that the members of the security council want little to do with the situation in Iraq. That seemd clear during the election campaign and as I've stated before, Kerry's meely mouth, vague statements about Iraq IMO cost him the election more or less. Kerry had no credible policy regarding Iraq. The Democrats still don't have one. All they're doing no is playing politics (as are the Republicans). I think Rummy should be canned and I don't think he deserves Bush's loyalty but that has nothing to do with the Democratics proposed policy for conducting the Iraq war. They don't have a policy and therefore I think it's fair to say that what they really want is to embarass Bush as much as they can to gain politically. They don't have a plan and they don't have a vision and my conclusion is that establishing a "democratic" form of government in Iraq isn't very important to the Democrats. That's shameful IMO.

BTW -- Hope is not a plan.

[SycoFrogg]

I wouldn't say Bush /botched/ the job in Iraq. First of all, no one in the mainstream media, or most Democrates have helped the situation in any way. If not making it worse. A perfect example is your Washington Post link.

We are at war. It's unpredictable, it's ugly, and time and time again through history, necessary. Now, I can agree the war is being fought poorly, as in saying not aggressive enough. Were playing politics with it, playing with lives. Pussy-footing around even.

Now. You ask me, all politicians are crooks. Democrate, Republican, doesn't matter. Their the same, in my opinion it doesn't matter who was in office, Saddam was going to be removed any ways. He was undercutting the world market in oil sales to Russia, China, France, and Germany. Well, the U.S, being buddy buddy with the Saudi's, yes Clinton was to, couldn't let this continue. It's the powers that be, people. The powers that be said, "it's time to get rid of this guy. Lets get the man in office to do it," so they did.

The 120 most richest families in the world don't get together once a year to play poker.

Great post.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't say Bush /botched/ the job in Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]

The major mistake was going to war. Of course when you make a poor decision to enter a pot (to which you know you will be pot committed to, at that) many missteps often follow.

He did make many mistakes in the execution of the post shock and awe stage -- mostly because he had no plan and ignored the experts (the state department) in favour of the neocon types.

All in all, a pretty poor job.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
We are at war. It's unpredictable, it's ugly, and time and time again through history, necessary. Now, I can agree the war is being fought poorly, as in saying not aggressive enough. Were playing politics with it, playing with lives. Pussy-footing around even.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a great post. The real lesson of Vietnam was that you can't slowly escalate a conflict which allows the enemy to slowly gather strength. You have to pound them big from the start. And sure it would be nice if this was like Kuwait where we liberate a country where 100% of the citizens are glad to see us come. But it is clear that the Sunni insurgency is allied with Al-Queada who is our mortal enemy, and we cannot allow them to have a safe haven in Iraq after mostly destroying it in Afghanistan.

The democrat plan is nothing other than politicing the issue and not taking effective action if they were in charge. Same as the european leaders who appeased Hitler and allowed him to become an even more serious threat. Same as the euro leaders who fiddled for years while thousands of Bosnians were being killed and brutalized, being willing to take action only when news of the most heinous atrocities leaked out. It's always better to pay the price now than pay a greater one later.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
No one in the mainstream media, or most Democrats has helped the situation in any way.

[/ QUOTE ] You must be thinking of another planet. The mainstream media and almost all Democrats were falling all over themselves to get labelled as "patriots" and "above politics". Those embedded reporters were feeding us the Pentagon line; a far cry from the Vietnam days, when the media was all over every military claim.

[ QUOTE ]
We are at war. It's unpredictable, it's ugly, and time and time again through history, necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, this is not a war in the literal sense, for America. There has been no war in continental America for more than a century.

9/11 was a serious terrorist attack but not an act of war. People who have not known real war are prone to exaggerate like this. A Soviet citizen, for example, who has known real war (i.e. WW2) would never characterize as war the attacks from Chechens on Moscow's civilian buildings.

For the Iraqis, of course, it most certainly was a war, a real war -- and now it's an occupation, both literally and legally.

America is at "war" against terror -- though it's a very different kind of war, different than any war that went before. The term "war" can be used to make a point. The usual epithets about war do not apply.

And, just thought I'd mention it: The war against Iraq has nothing to do with the "war" against terror. It's important to remember this.

[ QUOTE ]
The war [in Iraq] is being fought poorly, as in saying not aggressive enough. We're playing politics with it, playing with lives. Pussy-footing around even.

[/ QUOTE ] Oh you want more Iraqi blood? How much more?

[ QUOTE ]
Saddam was going to be removed any ways. He was undercutting the world market in oil sales to Russia, China, France, and Germany. Well, the U.S, being buddy buddy with the Saudi's, yes Clinton was to, couldn't let this continue.

[/ QUOTE ] Nope. Try again.

When Bush came on and started rattling sabres against Saddam, the price of crude was already on the march upwards. And that kind of upwards march NOBODY wanted, not the Saudis, not the Europeans and not the Americans. (The Russians - maybe.) The Saudis are perfectly happy with crude around $25-35 per barrel. The western economies can withstand that level but above that they get sick -- and the Saudi petrodollars have all been invested in the West.

[ QUOTE ]
The 120 richest families in the world don't get together once a year to play poker.

[/ QUOTE ] Is you a conspiracy nut? Because if you think that the whole thing is "rigged" and "pre-planned" by Bildeberg or the Elders of Zion, I have just wasted bandwidth to write this post!

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW -- Hope is not a plan.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is often the plan of the fish!

Oh, and see the answer to your question here .

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
Kerry's meely mouth, vague statements about Iraq IMO cost him the election more or less.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the evidence supported this. Kerry did well with voters who identified Iraq as one of their most important issues. If Kerry took a hit on foreign policy, it was about more general issues concerning his ability to conduct the war on terror.

[ QUOTE ]
They don't have a policy

[/ QUOTE ]

I basically agree. Two things are important to consider, though. First, Bush has botched the situation so badly that there simply are no good policy options. Second, laying out a big alternative vision of foreign policy is not something people do in the year after an election year. Kerry didn't have an alternative solution last year really. But I don't think its surprising that the Dems right now are not going out on a limb to propose something radically different.

[ QUOTE ]

and therefore I think it's fair to say that what they really want is to embarass Bush as much as they can to gain politically.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously. This is politics after all.

[ QUOTE ]
They don't have a plan and they don't have a vision

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, and this is why they are still in trouble. Even when the other guy's plan and vision are demonstrably terrible, as is the case with Bush, it's hard to win without some proposal of your own.

[ QUOTE ]
my conclusion is that establishing a "democratic" form of government in Iraq isn't very important to the Democrats. That's shameful IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the Bush administration seems so likely to fail in this endeavor anyway, opposing the administration doesn't seem so shameful to me.