NEXT DEM BATTLEFRONT: IRAQ

[Carolab]

NEXT DEM BATTLEFRONT: IRAQ

By Arianna Huffington

Now that the Democrats have won the battle over the nuclear option (or, at least, come away with a tie), they need to turn their attention to what it's going to take to become more than a minority party that wins a battle every now and then. They have been surprisingly successful at battling Bush's domestic agenda, but if they're going to broaden their appeal they first have to broaden their battlefronts to include Iraq.

After John Kerry lost in November, the conventional wisdom was that he hadn't been "me-too" enough about Iraq. Actually, the truth is the exact opposite.

This war is a quagmire, and if the Democrats don't know it, the American people do -- 57 percent don't believe the Iraq war was worth it.

Tuesday (May 24) the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), a British think tank, released its "2004/2005 Strategic Survey." The report, a well-respected annual assessment of the security situation worldwide, cites a number of positive developments in the Middle East.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[Inland]

1. "Nice pivot, Tim. Yes, by all means, let's stay on Dean's rhetoric

rather than on the insignificant fact that our country is less safe as a result of our invasion of Iraq."
Well done, Arianna.

[welshTerrier2]

2. out of the mouths of babes

welshTerrier2 from an earlier post today: "still, as long as the Party continues to cower from bush's foreign policy, we can never truly seize majority power ..."

huffington: "They have been surprisingly successful at battling Bush's domestic agenda, but if they're going to broaden their appeal they first have to broaden their battlefronts to include Iraq."

are we on the same page or what ???? of course my page is here and she's getting paid for hers ... hmmmmmmmmmmm ...

[Hailtothechimp]

3. Try asking these 3 questions of the 'support the troops' crowd...

1. Name the "Runaway Bride" (Jennifer Something or Other is close enough)

2. Name 1 of the 1568 U.S. Troops who have died in Iraq.

3. How exactly are you "supporting the troops"?

[WilliamPitt]

5. 1,568? Try 1,649.

http://icasualties.org/oif/

[WilliamPitt]

4. GODDAM RIGHT

Read: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/052505X.shtml

[Moderator]

6. Please be aware of DU's copyright rules below.

Copyright issues and Bandwidth Theft

Do not post entire copyrighted articles. If you wish to reference an article, provide a brief excerpt and include a link to the original source. Generally, excerpts should not exceed three or four paragraphs.....


Wherever possible, please make an effort to link directly to the original source of an article, instead of linking to sites that have re-published someone else's content.


Please do not post articles in their entirety in the future.

Thank you.

[Carolab]

7. Oops, sorry, forgot.

Will remember in future.

[Carolab]

8. And if I may just remind folks that this is, indeed, what Dean said.

"From al Qaeda's point of view, Bush's Iraq policies have arguably produced a confluence of propitious circumstances"..." hated by much of the Islamic world and regarded warily even by its allies"..."The upsurge in violence in April and May indicates that neither the U.S. military nor the nascent Iraq security forces have managed to increase their capacity to control the country"..."Such illegal practices (detainee abuses) made the achievement of any broad international coalition in Iraq even more difficult than it already was, and strengthened the cause of the insurgents."

For all those who jumped on him a while back.