Please post a Democrat's Iraq Plan -- MSM needs some help with research!!

[Sparkly]

DUers -- I suggest we collect together all the various Democrats' proposals for Iraq. It appears the Media needs some assistance, as they continue to assert that Democrats have "no plans," and that the question is either "stay the course" or "cut and run," and of course, that it's the Democrats' problem to solve in the first place!!

Witness David Ignatius in the WP today. The linking page sums it up this way:
The Iraq Question Democrats Are Ducking: Neither criticizing the invasion, nor calling for a 'strategic redeployment' is enough. Democrats need to answer one very complicated question: How do we fix Iraq?

(Who's "WE," David? Democrats have offered proposed solutions for YEARS, but "we" can't fix Iraq because "we" are not in charge!!)

And he declares, incredibly: "The Democrat who has tried hardest to think through these problems is Sen. Joseph Biden." :eyes:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601137.html

I know Kerry, Clark, Murtha and others have offered specific outlines for moving forward. Let's gather up Democrats' proposed solutions -- ones you agree with and those you don't -- and keep the links handy for just such repeated claims that Democrats (except Biden!) aren't thinking about solutions for mitigating the mess in Iraq. (Most proposals, Ignatius hasn't noticed, begin with "FIRE RUMSFELD!!")

[calimary]

1. Truly. Sometimes you have to lead a horse to water.

Please consider this thread, too:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2848730

It's on the same topic - only focusing on Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" at the moment. He said last night that tonight's show was going to delve more deeply into what the bushies did and did NOT do about terrorism and bin Laden in the "missing 8 months" before 9/11. He could use our help (AND OUR CONTINUED, LOUD, VERY VOCAL SUPPORT). They ALL could use our help. Clearly they haven't managed well without it so far.

[zbdent]

2. Well, it isn't the Zap Branigan approach that Bush apparently

embraces ...

[madame defarge]

3. Also check here...

Daily Kos's Bill in Portland Maine has some interesting stuff about the Dems plan vs. the Pugs plan:

http://www.dailykos.com/hotlist/add/2006/9/27/82049/8133/displaystory//

The Democrats' plan to fight terrorists:

Increase the size of Special Forces to destroy Osama Bin Laden and terrorist networks like al Qaeda. Implement the bipartisan 9/11 Commission proposal to secure America's borders and ports and screen every container. Fully man, train, and equip our National Guard and our police, firefighters and other first responders.

The Republicans' plan to fight terrorists:

Tax cuts for the rich, no-bid contracts for the cronies and, what the hell, let's invade Iraq.

A plan by Democrats' for dealing with Iraq (Kerry-Feingold):

Only U.S. troops essential to completing the mission of standing up Iraqi security forces, conducting targeted counter-terrorist operations and protecting U.S. personnel and facilities would remain . The United States to maintain an over-the-horizon military presence to prosecute the war on terror and protect regional security interests. The President to work with the new Iraqi government to convene a summit that includes the leaders of the governments of each country bordering Iraq, representatives of the Arab League, NATO, the European Union, and leaders of the governments of each permanent member of the United Nations Security Council to try something new.

The Republicans' plan for dealing with Iraq:

Tax cuts for the rich, continued war-profiteering, indefinite deployments, stay-the-disastrous-course, cut and run from reality, raise the top recruiting age to 42 (forty two!!) and keep civilian death counts artificially low by not counting car bombs. After all, the war and occupation are just a comma, anyway.