Democrats should have a strategy for Iraq...

[kentuck]

No doubt, this will be one of the first questions asked of Kerry at the debates and he will say we need to "internatioalize" the war and share the cost and casualties with our "allies". Sorry, that is not enough. And if he doesn't have a vastly different option than Bush, he has lost the Iraq issue. And that is the biggest issue in this election.

First thing we could do is ask that Allawi resign. He has become a symbol of American occupation and will never be accepted by the Iraqi people. We need to call for a new coalition for Iraq that involves all the factions. There should be representatives from every faction to work out a method for new elections where everyone is represented. But first, we will ask that Allawi resign. Then we will start to withdraw our troops as soon as the election is over. This would be a start at doing something different from Bush - unless of course, we want to continue the Bush "doctrine"??

[xray s]

1. Nixon won in '68 by claiming he had a secret plan to end the war

Kerry should do the same. He has a plan, but he can't lay it all out because to do so would tip off those who want us to fail in Iraq. Reveal the names of top military and diplomatic people working on the plan. But stay away from details, they will only give Bush an opportunity to second guess Kerry.

Then he should hammer the hell out of Bush on all the things Bush did wrong.

He needs to attack Bush's "catastrophic success" in Iraq. Keep that the focus.

[kentuck]

2. People are just looking for anything different from Bush.....

any plan will be better than what is now offered.

[xray s]

3. I know and share that frustration

I think the best way to win this election is to keep the focus on Bush and convince people that Kerry has a much stronger team to come up with a plan than Bush does.

Compare Bush's neocons with the profesionals Kerry is assembling.

That should help people make up their minds.

[barb162]

4. Joe Biden went into this big long answer a few weeks ago

on Charlie Rose. Depending on the situation on the day you take over, it is almost impossible to answer that question. The situation is so fluid in Iraq, and civil war might have already started there, how could Kerry say something today when he can't predict how it will be there 4 months from now. Also, Kerry doesn't have the intelligence briefings from the generals that Bush is getting daily.

[Cocoa]

7. exactly right

ANY plan articulated by Kerry now will just be the object of ridicule a week from now, due to events on the ground, and it will for sure be obselete by the time Kerry takes office.

It's a trap, deliberately set up by the media.

[kentuck]

9. So, are you saying Bush owns the Iraq War issue ??

Because that is the issue of this election. If we cannot come up with something different from Bush, we are in a deep hole before we begin? You are correct that it is unpredictable over there but so far, we haven't sunk into civil war. I do not buy that we cannot come up with a different strategy - even if it is in general terms - we must offer something different from what Bush is offering.

[barb162]

12. 2 things

First, Biden was eloquent and did about 5 minutes straight on this subject. Charlie asked the question and Biden said there is no 10 second, 30 second sound bite answer to the Iraq mess and the situation there is changing fast and is immensely complicated. He then went into the complications, our troop strength there, some of the different factions, etc.

Second I think it may be going into or is already in civil war. I would not have thought this 2 days ago, but Eleanor Clift of Newsweek mentioned this yesterday and she has a lot of connections. Other than the green zone and the airport I am not sure what we are controlling there anymore. Clift said the country was in civil war already. If it is we sure aren't getting reports or news of it here and I was surprised she put it that bluntly. The fact she stated it as she did, when she is not exactly the type to shoot her mouth off, was a real wake-up call.

I think what Kerry would have to do is speak in generalities, like some of the other posters here mentioned, getting the best diplomats who know the region, the country, etc., and build from there. Somehow say something (????), but don't trap yourself. If Bush has the data of what is going on and Kerry doesn't, Bush can make mincemeat of him. I don't think anyone feels comfortable making statements and offering opinions when the other guy has way more information. We already know Bush is trying to make things look like they are going smoothly over there and the media is going along with him on this. He doesn't want Iraq blowing up in his dumb face before November.

[barb162]

15. and one more thing

in that discussion with Eleanor Clift, Pat Buchanan thought the country was tipping into civil war. And he has a lot of connections too. What's so fascinating is we are not hearing this; maybe because all of the reporters are still too afraid of going out of their hotels? I sure wouldn't blame them.

[xray s]

8. That is right

What Kerry has to convince people of is that he will have a team of military and diplomatic professionals that will be able to look ahead and see the consequences of actions and avoid making things worse.

He has to hit the neocons. Call them out. People do not like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Pearle. They have screwed things up, and they have trusted guys like Chalabi. Liars and spies.

Pound that home. Hard.

[gratuitous]

5. Some talking points anent a strategy for Iraq

First of all, nobody seems to really know what's going on right now in Iraq. The administration assures us day after day that progress is being made. Yet, reports come out all the time of another attack, another city taken over by insurgents, another aid group leaving because the American wehrmacht can't protect them.

As such, making peremptory statements about what kind of strategy to pursue are just so much hot air. With all the inside knowledge that the Bush administration has, they still aren't capable of stopping the deterioration of the situation in Iraq.

That being said, the road to normalization for Iraq will begin with the U.S. getting its big bazoo out of Iraq's affairs. Mr. Bush's best friend before and for the first year of the invasion was Ahmad Chalabi. It seems now that Mr. Chalabi is an Iranian double-agent, and a corrupt money-launderer. Why these facts haven't gotten more play in the U.S. media is an unanswerable question. The implications are just too hideous to contemplate.

Finally, the Bush doctrine of going-it-alone (and the administration can just stow its empty rhetoric of the coalition of the willing) has isolated the U.S. when we most need our allies and friends to cooperate with us in tracking terrorists. Terrorists move at will through countries that are our putative allies (Pakistan), and their money flies around the world, working mischief everywhere because this administration is too beholden to its monied interests to insist on a system of regulating banking transactions.

That'll do to start.

[kentuck]

6. There are some things we do know...

There are more attacks since we turned over the "sovereignty" to Allawi and his group...There have been more Americans killed in the months since the turnover than in the months before the turnover. Americans will continue to die as long as we are there. We do know those facts.

[xray s]

10. Message; Bush and the neocons have failed

That has to be hammered home first.

I would like to see moveon, etc, hammer that for a while (and I don't think a cartoon is the way to do it BTW)

[moondust]

11. Would other Muslim countries

participate in or take over peacekeeping if Kerry went to them and admitted this whole thing was the ill-conceived, ill-planned, self-serving, foolhardy idea of a bunch of provincial lunatics who want to take over the world but THAT IS HISTORY NOW, that the adults are in charge and we want to get Iraq straightened out for real but we need their help as they may be the only ones who can do it? If necessary ask "How much?"

[barb162]

14. But what about Iran and Turkey?

The Kurds hate the Turks, some Iraqis hate the Iranians, some Iraqis love the Iranians, etc. But it sure is a goood idea.

I said this when the idiot first talked about going into Iraq and that it would split into three countries. Now more than ever, I think it will split in 3 countries with a lot of killing and grief, like we aint seen nothin' yet. And then when you have the addition of the al qaida types who came in there the last several months, I don't even want to fucking think about it.

[moondust]

17. It could be partitioned temporarily.

Until order was restored and people had jobs to keep them busy. Incompatible Muslim troops would not have to serve in the same sector. Economic arrangements would have to be made particlarly for sharing(?) oil revenues. There are ways but the U.S. cannot come clean and turn the page with * hanging around.

[library_max]

13. The point of internationalizing the war

will be to change from US command to UN command there. The troops would be peacekeeping troops. As for Allawi and the provisional government, that would be up to the UN, not us. Everything would be up to the UN. That would be the point - to get our dirty fingerprints off the solutions to Iraq's problems and remove the taint of empire from the rebuilding effort. Saving money would be secondary. The assumption, which seems at least reasonable enough to be worth a try, is that if we let go of everything except our checkbook (because the destruction is still our responsibility, not the UN's), the insurgents will calm down.

[kentuck]

16. My point is any strategy, so long as it does not agree with George Bush

If Kerry must speak in generalities, so be it. He could say, "If we don't slide into civil war because of this mess, we need to change the government in Iraq so that all her people are represented in the new government...We will assist them but we will start withdrawing troops as soon as they elect their representatives and new president"
Something as general as that would be in stark contrast to what we are doing now by supporting the outrageously stupid Bush doctrine...

[Leilani]

18. Why do Dems need a strategy?

Kerry is now the leader of the Dem Party.

He has all the brains of Dem foreign policy establishment working for him & advising him.

Just a few: Richard Holbrooke, Madeline Albright, Jamie Rubin, Rand Beers (natl security), & Bill Clinton.

The reason there is no coherent strategy is because of the various positions & statements Kerry has expressed.
Unfortunately, Kerry thought his Vietnam experience would be strong enough to carry him through foreign policy matters, & his strategic decision was to campaign mostly on domestic issues. I think he was clearly unprepared, as demonstrated by his answer to {If you knew then what you know now, etc.}

A vocal group of us disagreed with that approach. Our country had been attacked, & we were engaged in an ongoing war, taking daily casualties. You cannot blow that away, & say I will get you health care coverage. We saw the need for a strong foreign policy, a national security plan to protect against terrorism, & a strategic approach to the MidEast & the Iraq War. We were told that domestic issues would dominate.

And finally, if Kerry does not have an Iraq strategy by now, chances are there will never be one...remember, the election is rapidly approaching.

[AntiFascist]

19. Where is the rest of the world on this?

If our allies really want to see peace in Iraq then they need to start making noise about what they will do to cooperate if the U.S. suddenly decides it is time to create a plan to pull out of Iraq within a certain time period (ie Kerry wins the election).

[faithnotgreed]

20. many voters are looking for a reason to not vote bush. iraq is the

issue that kerry has not given enough specifics on. some are saying its a trap from the media or that bush hasnt given any specifics on iraq either etc

but thats the whole thing. most of the country knows kerry will do better on domestic issues. its the national security/iraq issue that kerry is perceived weak or without a plan.

agreed this thing is a mess of great proportion. and kerry wont be able to give a lot of information but he has to lay out something. i know he has strong feelings about this, and has mentioned in his recent speeches that iraq is likely problem #1.

we have facts on our side which he should lay out. increased soldier deaths every month, insurgents taken over x amount of cities, ignoring state dept and military plans, and many more. the sheeple dont hear these truths from the media. i think they would frankly be a little shocked to hear all these things that we can lay out to clearly & factually articulate the gigantic mess that has been made

i believe strongly that many voters are waiting for this kind of thing. unfortunately many media people who for better or worse, are already beating kerry up on this and this is what the people keep hearing.
so if kerry would have a press conference, or do an extensive interview and lay out his clear vision, demonstrate his vast intelligence and experience etc , he could win many people over who are wanting and waiting for something to vote against bush

among other things, kerry should point out he wrote a book in 1996, the new war, about terrorism etc. maybe he can lay out that he busted bcci etc.

if he presents his strength through the iraq issue, i know people would respect him for it. and if he does it on his terms, he can present the reasonable outline for getting out of what bush has gotten us into

i think its needed as soon as possible.....

[faithnotgreed]

21. before the debates

[barb162]

22. I stole this from another thread (hope I'm not breaking rules)

( maybe civil war is starting. barb)


By Ibon Villelabeitia

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - At least 110 people were killed across Iraq (news - web sites) on Sunday in a sharp escalation of violence that saw gun battles, car bombs and bombardments rock the capital.


The Health Ministry said the worst casualties were in Baghdad, where 37 were killed, and in Tal Afar near the Syrian border where 51 people died.


The capital suffered at least seven car bombs, and insurgents fired a dozen mortar bombs or rockets around the so-called Green Zone compound housing Iraq's interim government and the U.S. embassy.


It was one of the heaviest barrages in Baghdad for months. "We've seen a tremendous increase in the number of attacks," said Brigadier General Erv Lessel, a U.S. military spokesman.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040...

[KoKo]

23. Yes...a different plan needs to be put on the table. But as of yet...we

don't see or hear anything except in corners of "C-Span" debates..

Americans are hoping for an alternative plan to Bush which can be discussed. So far there's not an alternative except as Sy Hersh said today "different colored corpses." (which is kind of a disgusting way of putting it about brining in the UN)..:-(