Good remarks by Chairman Dean. Lets discuss Iraq on the Democratic Party partybuilder website blog Get Out of Iraq here:

http://www.democrats.org/page/community/group/getoutofiraq
and you're welcome to join that group.

The speech had overtones that were definitely reminiscent of Lyndon Johnson's propaganda during the Vietnam War that if we didn't send in more troops to win the war that communism would eventually spread to our shores.

Bush should demonstrate his commitment to sacrifice by sending his daughters to Iraq to help serve in some capacity. Unfortunately, it is just too easy for him to send someone else's sons and daughters to risk life and limb.

He strikes me as a child in a man's body playing an adventure game. Unfortunately, it is all too real.

"Our troops have already sacrificed enough for the President's mistakes."

"Our troops have already sacrificed enough for the President's mistakes."

I'm very frustrated with this situation, especially as a young man whose friends have been over there once already. Something that really bothers me is that while looking on CNN.com, Bush states that, "Withdrawal would lead to stronger enemy". The part that hurts me as a human is that these people are no more our enemy, than our neighbor. I support our troops and what they are doing, but we need to allow them to find a way to govern themselves. President Bush is putting us in a situation to feel as though we have an enemy.

On the pissant of the United States speech of 01/10/07:
I have only 3 words: IMPEACH, IMPEACH & IMPEACH!
And that includes president Cheney

Howard Dean continues to capture the essence of the issue in a few words. The grassroots has to act before to slow down the damage to the country and hopefully to restore some of what we were. Some things can never be restored like our reputation of not being a nation that tortures or denies people attorneys.

George Bush thinks he's General Thad from Planet of the Apes.

;p

Although, come to think of it, as I watched him tonight, he did look like a Chimpanzee.

Senator Mitch McConnell on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, commenting after the President's speech, drew a parallel between the cutting of funds during the Vietnam war and today's situation by saying: "As Senator McCain stated, the difference between the Vietnam War and now, is that when Congress cut funding for Nixon, they were not coming over here" (meaning they the Vietnamese). He added: "Now, we have had 5 years with no terrorists attacks".
He seems to be preparing to argue against the possibility that Congress might have to cut funding by using the same line that the Bush Administration has used so many times before. That we are fighting in Iraq to prevent terrorists from attacking us here at home.
Putting aside the fact that we are definitely there for the control of the Middle East and its "oil", if he is so concerned about the security of this Country, cutting funding makes a lot more sense than escalating the war. At the tune of 1/4 million per minute, we can buy the best homeland security money can buy and have a lot left over for other important things.
These people have completely lost their compass and not only lack in wisdom but also in morals.
Many of my friends are saying__ "now we will see what the Democrats are made of"
I am waiting to see the same and hope they will tell Israel to withdraw from occupied land to settle that part of the issue and buy the oil at the going price with the money we save, instead of stealing it.
It would actually be cheaper that way...
We are in over our heads in Iraq, and the quicker we get it, the better off we'll be.

Impeachment please.

I agree with Beau. Besides the 3000+ men and women who have been killed, they are thousands others who are have been maimed and lives devastated. Then there are the innocent Iraqis who have been killed, maimed and have had their homes destroyed. Enough already! If Bush & Chaeny & Co. don't get it, then it is time for them to go. They got us into this war illegally and they unscrupulously lie to us to continue this deadly morass. Until this is resolved, our nation will be preoccuppied and unable to focus on the other issues that need attention.

I agree with Beau. Besides the 3000+ men and women who have been killed, they are thousands others who are have been maimed and lives devastated. Then there are the innocent Iraqis who have been killed, maimed and have had their homes destroyed. Enough already! If Bush & Chaeny & Co. don't get it, then it is time for them to go. They got us into this war illegally and they unscrupulously lie to us to continue this deadly morass. Until this is resolved, our nation will be preoccuppied and unable to focus on the other issues that need attention.

To: Speaker Pelosi, Leader Reid, Leader Hoyer and the rest of the Democrats;

It doesn't matter if your for the "surge" or against the "surge", you elected official have taken the position that you will not stop funding this war. Obviously for political purposes that is the smart strategic move.

But if you would like to do the right thing and want to be proactive, I have a suggestion. Tommorrow when the House and the Senate take the floor try proposing a suplementary bill to increase funding for the Veterans Administration and funding for Tramatic Brain Injury (TBI). Don't just nickle and dime it, increase it 10 fold. Tell this President if he wants to sacrifice more American Servicemembers then he must understand that more and more servicemembers will be entering the roles of the Veterans Administration and it will need more funding. Lets see who really "Supports the Troops"

Stem Cell can wait till Friday, Lets push a new Veterans Bill now!

IraqVet,

The Dems have been forced to go along with the funding for this illegal occupation, because they will be turned into Anti-troop, anti-American, un-patriotic if they do not.

I have a nephew , 21 yrs old, back from 2 tours, most assuredly will face a 3rd if this 'escalation' goes forward. Like Russian Roulette, which tour will he get killed or maimed in? I want him to have good benefits available to him after what he has gone through. He is no longer the same boy who left for Iraq the first time. I doubt he will ever be the same, judging by my brother after he came back from Vietnam.

We need you and other Vets out there writing LTE's, contacting TV reporters, and getting the word out there. There are groups like Vets against the war, etc that you should be part of.

(ivaw.org)

PamB;

First, Thank you for your newphew and brother's service to our Country. Second, I already belong to IVAW, but IVAW does not care about veteran benefits, they are an organization that likes to hangout in Berkeley, NYC, and Washington D.C. marching with groups like CODEPINK and ANSWER. They will not stop this war because the American people (unfortunatly) don't listen to hippies, anarchist, and radicals who believe "down with government". Its not the 1960's.

We can't stop the President from sending more troops and obviously the media will spin cutting off the funding for this war against the Democrats as if they were against the troops. So what I propose is to increase spending on Veterans Benefits immediately and charge the American Taxpayer NOW!!

Who will lead us?!

Is there no one in the Democratic Party who can step up, put their personal interests aside, AND organize and direct the outrage the American people feel towards this President?!

Tell us WHERE you want us to MEET; what time you want us board the buses to converge on Washington to tell Bush, loud and clear, up front and personal how disgusted we are with his blatant disregard for the will of the people.

WHEN does the March on Washington begin?!

It's now or never for the Democratic Party. Seize the moment! Or it will dissipate into universal despair.

PLEASE RESPOND.

Sending more troops is just stupid. You should be out of your mind to see it as a "solution"...

See it on The Stupid Page!

As a democrat that believes in the USA, we must have a strategic plan for Victory in Iraq. We must CRUSH the insurgents that want to show that America will cowar to defeatism. History will prove we made a huge mistake if we take a defeatist stance to Iraqi insurgents. What plan can we give America? We are the most powerful nation on the planet ! Mike Boncella

Stop the Iraqi War!
*American interests = American imperialism = Control of Mid-east oil reserves = Sole interest of multi-national conglomerates = Demise of global environmental protection = Wrong investment of lives and dollars!! Welfare of Iraqi people = Who?
Call the White House and tell President Bush we want our troops out of Iraq, now! We want no more of his war.
Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461

When the president said, "Where there are mistakes made, the responsibility rests with me.", it is time to begin impeachment. He should resign.
Over three thousand deaths and over twenty thousand disabilities are too many mistakes.

All of the cowards want to stay in Iraq, because
they don't have the heart to get Osama Bin Laden.

Conflating Iraq With the War on Terror

Once again, Bush and some Republican Senators are attempting to confuse Bush's optional war in Iraq with war on terrorism. It is time for Democratic leaders to once and for all separate these two issues.

A scathing report published by the Army War College in 2004 broadly criticizes the Bush administration's handling of the war on terrorism, accusing it of taking a detour into an "unnecessary" war in Iraq and pursuing an "unrealistic" quest against terrorism that may lead to U.S. wars with states that pose no serious threat.

The report, by Jeffrey Record, a visiting professor at the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, warns that as a result of those mistakes, the Army is "near the breaking point."

It recommends, among other things, scaling back the scope of the "global war on terrorism" and instead focusing on the narrower threat posed by the al Qaeda terrorist network.

Democrats should emphasize the fact that under Bush's watch our military has been pushed to near the breaking point. Rather than tripping all over ourselves in support of an expansion of the size of our military, we should emphasize Bush's poor judgment in the use of our military. In the mid-1990's Republicans stated emphatically that our military should not be the world's "911 response team". Democratic senator Dick Durbin made the same argument in his response to Bush's speech the other night. The American people overwhelmingly hold this view. Democrat's must offer a realistic view of the world and our role in it, yet constraint is needed so we don't destroy the ability to form and operate an all volunteer service.

America's response to al Qaeda must be clear and we should build a worldwide alliance toward this end. But first, politicians must stop conflating this effort with Iraq.

McCain, Where Were You?

On January 12, 2007 before the Armed Services Committee Sem John McCain made the following remarks:

"We should make no mistake - the potentially catastrophic consequences of failure demand that we do all we can to prevail in Iraq."

"I know that some of my colleagues disagree with a troop increase in Iraq, and I have heard the calls for a withdrawal to begin in 4 to 6 months. Those who advocate such a policy have a right – even an obligation – to join the debate on this issue. But I believe these individuals also have a responsibility to tell us what they believe are the consequences of withdrawal in Iraq. Do they not fear Iranian, Saudi, and Turkish involvement in Iraq? A wider regional war? A haven for terrorists? A humanitarian catastrophe? Do they truly believe that we can walk away from Iraq?

"We were able to walk away from Vietnam. If we walk away from Iraq, we will be back – possibly in the context of a wider war in the world’s most volatile region. I believe that those who disagree with this new policy should indicate what they would propose to do if we withdraw and Iraq descends into chaos."

For politicians such as McCain, Lieberman or Graham, one can only wonder where they were in 2002? After all, that was the time to ask such questions. Presidents and Congressman are supposed to consider all likely options before committing our nation to war. This includes considering not only the best, most hoped for scenarios but also the worse. It's not as though the probability of severe sectarian strife was not considered. It was, and generals and others who had the nerve to raise such questions were quickly and unceremoniously dismissed.

It's also not as though history hasn’t provide us with lessons from regional conflicts and sectarian violence. As Harvard’s Naill Ferguson writes: “The lesson of European history is that the experiment (in a democratic political process) is a highly dangerous one, particularly at times of economic volatility and chronic insecurity, and particularly where tribes and people are mixed up geographically, both within and across borders. The minorities fear – and with good reason – the tyranny of the majorities. People vote their ethnicity, not their pocketbooks or ideology. And even before the votes are counted, the shooting begins.”

Ignorance of history's lessons is no excuse - for Bush, McCain or others.

Even if we accepted their contention that the consequences are too dire not to continue our support in Iraq (that too needs to be carefully examined), then why 20,000 more troops when clearly 30,000-50,000 are needed? The number of troops being proposed represents at any point an additional 8,000-10,000 soldiers on the street, an insignificant number considering the size and population of Baghdad. McCain and Lieberman have criticized the execution of the war plan todate, yet they are now signing on to a plan that is doomed for failure and at what cost in human lives?

Is it not fair to question John McCain's judgment about the proper use of our military when he has been consitently so wrong?

Gregory Dunkling

I just read Sen. Hillary Clinton's report on her trip to Iraq and it's my personal opinion that Bush is the worst President U.S. History. I say we pull every U.S. troop out of Iraq as well as our tanks and military hardware. Leave nothing behind. Let the people of Iraq deal with their own garbage. In my opinion this is worst than Vietnam.

This one who is in the office of the President of the United States is just an idiotic child and must be punished. Lets set him down in the corner of his Crawford Texas home and give him a VERY LONG TIMEOUT!

I am seeing the actions of this man like those of a kid who is acting out. Much like I did and like my own kids have done (and still do). With the defeats the Richocrats have suffered, The President is acting like "Lookie at this, see what I can do because im President!"
Cmon' Democrats, whoop his butt and tell him to sit down and do like he is told!

Something really scary here.. CNN - News **Bush Quoted saying Congress cannot stop troop increase.. Does this mean the check and balance system set up to stop presidents from having all out power is gone ? We need to stop this man now.

While I am as concerned as anyone regarding Iraq, I think it is too politically expedient to simply call for a withdrawal without offering up an alternative strategy. I am not a strict idealogue, so while it is clear that President Bush has made many, many errors, simply calling for a pullout of troops without an alternate strategy for success is akin to District Attorney Nifong seeking to prosecute the Duke students for rape to court the African-American vote. Didn't anyone else draw the same conclusion after watching 60 Minutes? Calling for a troop withdrawal sure meant a great deal on election day for Democrats, but I have yet to see an alternative strategy explained on this website, or on CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, or Fox. No one on this blog has offered an alternative strategy. Is there any question in anyone's mind that pulling out our troops now will further de-stabilize the Middle East? It's very easy to state in hind-sight that we never should have gone in, but now that we are there, someone needs to express a different path to success which will not endanger more American service men and women. I agree that simply "staying the course" and throwing more money and manpower at the problem is unlikely to solve this crisis, but calling for a blanket withdrawal without a thought to the consequences is just plain naive, simplistic, and more dangerous to the United States. Anyone care to address this?

ConcernedCitizen: I could not agree with you mroe!!!!! 100%!!! Alot of rhetoric, but not one concrete, authoritative, truely unique foreign policy plan from the Democrates....ZERO! Oh, "cut and run"? I don't think so!

And for you "wizard", your last post is actually typical of the depth of knowledge for the Democrates that I hear spouting off about the Iraq situation or just about any other foreign policy issue. I suggest you check out this Wiki site and do some easy reading...(opps they let Bush have the keys back in 2001)

Note the following votes on this Bill...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force
House of Representatives
On September 14, 2001 this bill passed in the House. The totals in the House of Representatives were: 420 Ayes, 1 Nay and 10 Not Voting (the Nay was Barbara Lee - D-CA).

Senate
On September 14, 2001 this bill passed in the Senate by roll call vote. The totals in the Senate were: 98 Ayes, 0 Nays, 2 Present/Not Voting (Senators Larry Craig - R and Jesse Helms - R).

Then....go here...where they gave up the keys to the dune buggy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Iraq_Resolution_of_2002
On this bill, look who voted for it...

"wizard" did you really not know about these two votes in Congress?

A couple of other points. Let's assume that two months after the Iraq war started, the United States found a nuclear device in Iraq which was almost operational. Would that make the present situation better? Would it justify everything? Let's put this debate in simpler terms. Instead of war in Iraq, pretend that your 14 year old daughter is pregnant. Railing at the top of your lungs that she never should have gone out with the boy, that she shouldn't have had sex with him, and she shouldn't have lied about it at first does nothing to address the problem moving forward. The Democrats have reaped great rewards at the ballot box as a result of their criticism of President Bush, but calling for a troop withdrawal doesn't address our current situation. Can someone please explain the Democratic plan for resolving the crisis in Iraq?

Why doesn't the Democratic leadership threaten to place the Bush Tax cuts on hold until all the occupation troops are brought home? And promise to cancel them altogether if they are not out by their expiration date? The Democratic Party needs to contact Bush's political base on the Iraq issue, and that is the only way to do it effectively. That bunch can help our grandchildren and great-grandchildren pay for the war.

The real Democrats have a plan for the Iraqi Occupation, but the wimps are holding us back. The PLAN outline is as follows:
1. Place the Bush Tax Cuts for the super rich on hold until all US troops are out of Iraq.
2. Move the British troops to Saudi Arabia.
3. Move most of the American troops (approximately 90,000 to Kurdistan) and the rest to Afghanistan)
4. Let the Iraqis kill each other in a mad struggle for dominance for at least a year.
5. Go back in if the Iraqis are desparate enough to form a unity goverment of the Sunnis and Shiia.
6. Allow the Kurds to go it alone as long as they treat their Turkish neighbors to the north with respect.

There are at least 50 active duty generals who can and will fill in all the blanks if given half a chance.

The real Democrats have a plan for the Iraqi Occupation, but the wimps are holding us back. The PLAN outline is as follows:
1. Place the Bush Tax Cuts for the super rich on hold until all US troops are out of Iraq.
2. Move the British troops to Saudi Arabia.
3. Move most of the American troops (approximately 90,000 to Kurdistan) and the rest to Afghanistan)
4. Let the Iraqis kill each other in a mad struggle for dominance for at least a year.
5. Go back in if the Iraqis are desparate enough to form a unity goverment of the Sunnis and Shiia.
6. Allow the Kurds to go it alone as long as they treat their Turkish neighbors to the north with respect.

There are at least 50 active duty generals who can and will fill in all the blanks if given half a chance.

The real Democrats have a plan for the Iraqi Occupation, but the wimps are holding us back. The PLAN outline is as follows:
1. Place the Bush Tax Cuts for the super rich on hold until all US troops are out of Iraq.
2. Move the British troops to Saudi Arabia.
3. Move most of the American troops (approximately 90,000 to Kurdistan) and the rest to Afghanistan)
4. Let the Iraqis kill each other in a mad struggle for dominance for at least a year.
5. Go back in if the Iraqis are desparate enough to form a unity goverment of the Sunnis and Shiia.
6. Allow the Kurds to go it alone as long as they treat their Turkish neighbors to the north with respect.

There are at least 50 active duty generals who can and will fill in all the blanks if given half a chance.

I will repeat what I think the Democrats should do. Introduce legislation that increases the money allocated to the Veterans Administration by 10 fold. They should also fully fund Tramatic Brain Injury now. Bring Harry Reid's Veterans Concurrent Reciept bill to the floor for a vote now. If this President thinks he can send more troops over to Iraq, then the consequences are increase funding for the VA. This idea will do two things. One, help all veterans. Second, politically the Democrats will have the Veteran Community as their base. Oh yeah, one more thing, it will show the American people who really "Supports OUR Troops".

ColdLightning:

Was that response (x3) a joke? I'm particularly interested in items 4 and 5 on your list. Wide-spread mayhem and a hope for desperation are sure to draw universal acceptance at the U.N.

IraqWarVeteran:

I can appreciate your concerns about appropriate care for our Veterans, but I think your plan is unlikely to make much of a difference to an Iraqi preparing an I.E.D.

Seems clear to me that although there are plenty of reasons and people looking to take a shot at President Bush for how the war has unfolded, legitimate, well-reasoned alternatives are completely lacking.

Dr. Dean: First, can't believe you have only 35 comments to date (1/20). Second, it is important for our party members in Congress to make a strong statement and do more than "hold the President accountable." The more I read about individual Democratic Congressional members' responses to troop increases in Iraq, the more concerned I become that they may sit on their proverbial hands, while Bush sends more Americans, not to mention Iraqis, to their deaths. Is there no stronger stance to be taken by members of our party than any of the ideas we have heard to date?

As far as I'm concerned, there haven't been ANY legitimate alternatives posted here or elsewhere. At best, it has been a wishy-washy suggestion of greater diplomacy with Iraq's neighbors, but I have a hard time believing that reasoning with Iran is really a viable alternative. Isn't this the same country whose leader questions the existence of the Holocaust and wants nothing more than the complete elimination of Israel? Is this the country who is going to help bring peace to Iraq?

If anything, this call for more American troops seems to have at least motivated Maliki into dropping his alliance with al-Sadr somewhat, which is a positive development. Perhaps people calling for an immediate withdrawal are banking on the Iraqis to rise up on their own against the relentless violence, but I suspect that is just wishful, Pollyanna thinking. In my mind, this is no different than a neighborhood which is infested with organized crime. Everyone in the neighborhood knows who the bad guys are, but they are afraid to point them out to the police for fear of reprisal. While this is a legitimate concern, until the locals start pointing out the al-Queda in their midst, the violence will continue unabated.

Dr. Dean has missed the mark again. The issue at hand is we, as a united nation, are fighing Radical Islam. It should not be fighting with the President and our troops who WANT to be there to fight these evil people.
Dr. Dean is the Nevelle Chamberlain of our day and it won't take long for current events to prove it.
We need to unite as a nation against the REAL enemy: Radical ISlam.