It's way too early to open up on Democrats for the tenor of their Iraq opposition

[bigtree]

These folks will have to craft some sort of resolution which will almost certainly be vetoed if it's more strident than Congress' moderates' positions. We do need the unapologetic calls for an immediate exit from Iraq, but that position won't go anywhere legislatively. If we are to effectively begin any substantial withdrawal of troops from Iraq it will have to come in the form of some sort of compromise. For our side of that compromise to carry weight, Democrats will need time to pressure republicans on the other things they want legislatively.

That won't be as transparent an effort as a resolution approach. It may appear like Democrats are focusing away from the Iraq issue, but they will have to pressure the republicans by controlling the access of their initiatives and proposals with the levers of their new majority, in committee and on the floor to get them to bend their way on Iraq. This will take time.



Bush's 'Tried and Failed' Plan For Iraq
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[madfloridian]

1. I agree. I was just reading some Google news stuff on this.

Sounds like they are doing some serious planning in various areas. Bush has assumed such total control, and he has his people in place...that it is going to be hard. I could say coup.

[dos pelos]

2. what is the difference between republican and democrat then?

We must wait,petition,ask for crumbs from these people who have stripped the Bill Of Rights?These Republican and Democrat legislators who voted in the Military Commissions Act?These legislators who voted for the Iraq War?These legislators who are too timid to demand the war stop?We must wait patiently,continue to send our sons off to die in this war?Send our taxes to support it?This Blood-for-Oil resource grab for benefit of Oil companies?We must wait while milquetoast vacillating quisling scum in the pay of corporate lobbyists decide to answer the demands of the electorate?The popular vote for the democrat party,this time,was predicated on a sense that democrats would do something.It is obvious the Republicans have become a proto fascist party of reaction and war.The Democrats hold themselves as a party of the peoples interests.The peoples interests are PEACE AND PROSPERITY.If the democrats fail the people,if they weasel out,as they are likely to do,a third party
vote looms.Do the Lieberman thing too obviously,make it too clear you are the paid whores of the folks pulling the strings in this war,people will turn away.

[madfloridian]

3. Leave the troops stranded? Not a good idea.

They are working to do something, but it is not going to be easy. Just because everyone shouts get out now....doesn't mean they can fix it right now.

[dos pelos]

4. Abandonment is republican rhetoric,Lieberman rhetoric

McCain rhetoric.Corporatist Republicrat rhetoric.It is past time to withdraw the troops,call off our part in the war.Stop doing the Oil companies resource grabbing for them.A noble Democratic goal.

[madfloridian]

5. I'm glad the answer is so simple. Don't accuse me of Lieberman rhetoric, please.

I have been adamantly against him.

Dems for Joe, a large group of powerful Democrats
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/451

What Joe Lieberman is doing is hurting all of us.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/453

Lieberman lets his Republican side shine through, GOP Joe.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/517

It is just not as simple as not funding the troops and the war. We have a possible dictator on our hands named Little Boots. He has power he has granted himself.

For now I will trust them to do what they can. It is not as easy as some here think.

[bigtree]

6. political reality

that is what is lacking from some of the criticism of the Democrats' cautious approach to challenging Bush on Iraq. Certainly the leaders of our party and other members have been sharply critical of Bush's Iraq policy as it's been implemented, but, they lack an effective legislative vehicle to carry out their goal of stifling Bush's ambitions.

Some sort of resolution which intends to restrict Bush's authority to deploy the troops may yet emerge, but, such an effort has to be mindful of the 2/3 majority needed to overturn an almost certain presidential veto which our party doesn't have.

I'm personally not going to be satisfied by some strident effort to shove Bush's Iraq policy back down his throat if it is crafted in such a way that it would be nothing more than a protest effort in the end. Try telling the families of soldiers deployed in Iraq that they need to wait for their soldier to come home because we wouldn't compromise and wanted to wait until we got the unconditional withdrawal that we favor.

There is real value in an approach which has the promise of beginning to draw down the force in Iraq and start bringing some of these soldiers home and preventing the re-deployment of others. That type of effort will require the sorts of compromises that many in our opposition don't seem to realize will be necessary to get a bill past the republicans and have it arrive on Bush's desk with the support needed to sustain it in Congress after Bush knocks it down.