Where are the Dems on the issue of Iran?

[Orlandodem]

We have a huge opportunity to appear credible on defense and foreign policy right now. We need to lead on Iran, somehow. Until people find us credible on national defense we won't be a majority party.

[BillZBubb]

1. What exactly do you mean? Beat the war drums on Iran?

Are you suggesting to be credible on defense we have to out macho the Repugs on threatening war with Iran?

Why not be credible on defense by telling Americans the truth: Iran is no more a threat to us now than Iraq was when the Chimperor attacked them? Why not be credible by standing against the propaganda onslaught that has begun about Iran?

If we have to lie our way into disastrous wars to be "credible" on national defense, we should give up now.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Care to explain 'lead on Iran'? nt.

[bluestateguy]

3. I couldn't agree more

Democrats need to be out front in opposing any war on Iran. Making war on Iran does nothing positive for defense or foreign policy.

[Orlandodem]

4. At least someone is thinking.

Obviously an invasion is off the table. Tactical strikes? Possible but not likely. I'm not in favor of marching in. I also don't have the answer. But that's why we vote for these people to make the big bucks and big decisions. As a party, we can't let this opportunity slip away. We must offer up some suggestions.

If we look strong and credible on national defense we become a majority party for a long, long time.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. Why are we allowed to bomb nations that are not harming us?

I don't get it. Iran is doing nothing to us and yet otherwise rational people seem convinced that it is reasonable for us to go and blow up their country if they displease us. How about we just leave them alone?

[LittleClarkie]

5. Kerry in India said something about the need for diplomacy right now

and getting the international community involved. But I'd be surprised if anyone was listening.

[catmother]

6. diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy. nt

[Orlandodem]

9. And if diplomacy doesn't work, then what?

As a party, we need a disciplined and reasoned position. I don't know the answer but our party leaders must provide something. That's their job.

[catmother]

12. i don't know. my repub husband says bomb them or at least

their nuclear sights. i think with iran we would have the backing of the UN. or maybe israel will do the job.

my repub husband also likes the repubs because he says the dems are weak on defense.

[Poppyseedman]

7. Been saying this same thing for months. Falls on deaf ears

Until people find us credible on national defense we won't be a majority party.

To lead on Iran and being credible on national defense doesn't necessarily mean taking a rethug position. Invade, bomb and occupy.

What it does mean is stop telling the American people bush's national defense strategy is bad without offering something as a alternative.

[Orlandodem]

8. I fear we're going to throw away a golden opportunity.

As you say, we need to offer a good alternative to Shrub's defense policy.

[IndianaGreen]

11. The golden opportunities are to impeach Bush and Alito filibuster

Those are the only golden opportunities worth fighting for.

I am not about to endorse a political party that endorses wars of aggression in order to feed the public's racism, Islamophobia, and imperialist dreams.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. Here is a good alternative: leave other nations alone. nt.

[IndianaGreen]

10. There is no crisis in Iran, it is all make believe!

Democrats like Kerry and Hillary are repeating their cheerleading roles that they played on the lead up to the Iraq war.

[neverevergivein]

14. Iran is not a threat! Bush is!!!! n/t