NYT: Democrats Now Say We Will Be in Iraq for MANY MORE YEARS (?????)

[The Cleaner]

Not that I would ever go over to the dark side but I have to ask: What then is the difference between Dems and Repubs?
:shrug:

DES MOINES, Aug. 11 — Even as they call for an end to the war and pledge to bring the troops home, the Democratic presidential candidates are setting out positions that could leave the United States engaged in Iraq for years.

John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, would keep troops in the country to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York would leave residual forces to fight terrorism and to stabilize the Kurdish region in the north. And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois would leave a military presence of as-yet unspecified size in Iraq to provide security for American personnel, fight terrorism and train Iraqis.

These positions and those of some rivals suggest that the Democratic bumper-sticker message of a quick end to the conflict — however much it appeals to primary voters — oversimplifies the problems likely to be inherited by the next commander in chief. Antiwar advocates have raised little challenge to such positions by Democrats.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/us/politics/12dems.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[rfranklin]

1. Most of knew this was why Bush went in there and was determined to...

drag it out to the end of his occupancy. Once the fortresses were built along the oil fields and pipelines, no "moderate" Democratic president would pull out completely and the oil companies would have their claws into one of the biggest oil supplies that we know of.

[The Count]

2. The first two voted to start this war so it's only consistent...obama got coopted as well

Yup. One big colonial family. I'm so proud!

[indepat]

6. Looks like they wanna be there until the oil has been harvested fbo big oil

[napi21]

3. There's quite a difference between the Dem plan and the Pub one.

This is a link to quite a long interview with Biden, but he's really the only Dem who has laid out the specifics of a plan. If you have the time, watch it. It was worth MY TIME to watch it.

http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2007/08/09/1/a-conversation-with-senator-joseph-biden#comment_47292

Bottom line, Joe's plan wOULD leave some US troops in Iraq, but in a completely different capacity than they are now. He compares it to Bosnia. We've been there for 10 years, but NOT ONE SINGLE American has been killed there since the final agreement.

[SteveM]

7. Biden was at his best on Rose's show. But there is a problem...

Whatever happens in Iraq cannot be forced by the U.S. or anyone. The idea of bifurcating Iraq is imperious at the least no matter who does it. It does seem popular, however, since cutting up and re-forming Iraq was done after WWI. I think we should remove all our troops from Iraq. Any "redeployment" would be to areas (or seas) where we cannot be viewed as an occupier. From these vantage points, we can better gather intelligence on terroristic activities and, if need be, strike militarily at confirmed targets which directly threaten U.S. security.

[napi21]

10. I understand Biden not to be forcing anyone to do anything.

He talked about calling all the Perm UN members together, getting a consensus from them, and then approaching Iraq with a proposal that would acceptable to THEM. THEY would make the final decisions, and honestly go back to something similar to the Ottoman Empire from years ago. It sure sounds like a heck of a lot better solution than any other one I've heard EVERYONE ELSE wants to impose OUR decisions on them, and I don't believe THAT will ever work!

[many a good man]

4. Redeploying all troops to Kurdistan is a smart move

I'd love to bring all our troops home from all over the world and stop playing this empire game, but face it. It ain't gonna happen.

Kurdistan is relatively homogeneous and peaceful. We need to pull our troops out of the hot spots right away. Get out of the middle of the civil war.

Complete withdrawal could lead to 1) genocide; 2) Sunni arms and fighters flowing in, including AQ, financed by SA, etc.; and 3) Kurds at war with Turkey and/or Iran.

A presence of about 40K troops in Kurdistan will help quell those impulses. It might buy some time to bring about diplomacy, compromise, settlement. Not by bushcheney, of course, but maybe under a Democratic administration.

It's the only slim chance we have to prevent complete devastation.

[SteveM]

5. Telling sentence at the last: "Antiwar advocates have raised little challenge...

to such position by Democrats." I wonder how ANY antiwar Democrat can raise a challenge? I envision demonstrations, sit-ins, harassment at speeches, etc. But this is a Spike Tail Production in Technicolor and Vista Vision. And 40 years old.

What do folks less than half my age envision? Anything?

Without a vision of what you want done, how can anything be attempted? Does clicking away on this post really mean anything? Like it or not, when the Top 40 died, the national "community" of pop music died with it, resulting in fragmentation, genre and murky trends picked over by college critics. Similarly, as the old forms of communication (MSM, radical rags, live-body & on-site organizing, etc.) shrink back, what is left is a few noisy web sites who can point to so much money raised here, a cyber-lynching there; but very little provision for establishing COMMUNITY, which begets LEGITIMACY and LEADERSHIP.

We have indulged ourselves as individuals to a fine degree, enjoying the anonymity of the bathroom wall without the stink. But we have also abandoned the notion of who we are, what we believe, and how we act.

We are prisoners of our own making, willingly taking separate cells.

As for the rest of the article, an example of how the GOP remains a far more powerful and smarter force than the Democrats. GOPers know what they are doing and they know how to slap around their "opposition." Standard stuff.

[rodeodance]

8. This is nothing new if you have followed their speeches.

[G_j]

9. wait..

"Antiwar advocates have raised little challenge to such positions by Democrats."

The NYT has downplayed the antiwar movement from the beginning.

[billyoc]

11. Domestic spending and workers' rights. As far as the war goes,

get used to it.