Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AmericanBlog: Here is the Democratic message on Iran.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:16 PM
Original message
AmericanBlog: Here is the Democratic message on Iran.
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 04:06 PM by Blue_Roses
George Bush has decided to use Iran as a foil to help his sagging poll numbers and to help Republicans in the fall congressional elections. I'm going to discuss why this is true, and what the Dems should do about it.

Iran is ten years away from developing nukes.

I'll say it again, TEN YEARS away. That would be TEN YEARS at the earliest, according to the best estimate we have. And that's not according to some peacenik liberal, it's according to the best estimate of US intelligence.

From the US State Department's own Web site:

Iran is likely years away from producing weapons-grade plutonium or highly enriched uranium. Vice Adm. Jacoby, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2005 that Iran is expected to be able to produce a weapon early next decade. According to one report, the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran assesses that it will be ten years before Iran has a bomb.

-snip-

So how should Democrats respond to the issue of Iran's nuclear threat?

1. George Bush is the wrong man to be launching yet another war.

The same president who made a disaster out of the Iraq war now wants to launch another war with Iraq's neighbor, Iran. Bush has already proven he is incompetent at running an effective war. America simply cannot afford another rash Bush misadventure.

--snip--

7) Bush either lied to us, or was unable to determine the truth, about Iraq's WMD program (which we now know didn't exist). Why should we believe claims from the same president and same intelligence agencies about Iran's WMD program? We need more than President Bush's assurances.

8) What military and what money are we going to use to launch a war against Iran?

Our troops are stuck in Iraq, and Bush says he refuses to withdraw them. So what troops are we going to use to invade Iran? And is America truly prepared to fight 3 wars at the same time? That has never been US military policy, at least not in the past several decades, to be able to fight a three-front war. Our military simply is not made to fight three wars simultaneously.

9) WHY IS IT ALWAYS US?

If Iran is such a threat, then why not let the Europeans and the Russians and the Chinese take care of it? Clearly none of those countries wants a nuclear Iran on their back porch. So why is it always America that has to give our money, our soldiers' lives, and our goodwill?

Having explained all of that, I think the Democrats' message and policy needs to be distilled into one single point. The Democrats always have ten pages of talking points, while the Republicans have a one-liner. We need a one-line, clear answer to the question: "Congressman, will you vote for or against the congressional resolution to authorize all necessary force against Iran?"

Here's a perhaps not short enough attempt:

Iran is ten years away from developing nuclear weapons. There is no discussion of America rushing into another premature war until either Bush leaves office, or Congress is able to provide effective oversight of, and can serve as a counter-balance to, the Bush administration's incompetence.


more talking points here...


http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/04/here-is-democratic-message-on-iran.html


-------
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
slor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. All good points n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dubyaD40web Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. Not to mention
Iran is not an exit strategy for Iraq!

~Mine
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Great bumper sticker fodder! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. That's a beauty!
You should make T-Shirts with that on it!

Saw a great bumper sticker the other day: "The Rapture is their Exit Strategy". Scary but true!

And, please... not to nit-pick, but it's DemocratIC, not Democrat. Don't allow the Republicand to "frame" even our Party's name.

TC

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. sweet
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
3. Democrat is not an adjective. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greeby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Murtha has already got a jump start
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerry-is-my-prez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
5. "Democratic" talking points not "Democrat" talking points.
The Republicans and Rush Limbaugh have been trying to change the name of our party for a few years now - they think that Democratic sounds too noble.

I've noticed that there are several talking heads who are using Democrat Party now and it's caught on to the point that I've even seen the term used here.

They also like to emphasize the word "RAT" in Democrat.

Sorry - just a pet peeve. We've really got to fight against this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. AMEN! I was about to post the same thing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. done
was in a hurry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kailassa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
11. What's with your headline? Are you arguing FOR war on Iran?
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 03:47 PM by Kailassa
Perhaps instead of "Democrat talking points for war AGAINST Iran. Excellent!"
you should have typed "Democratic talking points against war AGAINST Iran. Excellent!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. oh, for the love of gawd...
Edited on Thu Apr-13-06 03:56 PM by Blue_Roses
what is this? Advanced Grammar 101:eyes:

It has been changed. I was in a hurry to get this posted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kailassa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Oh, then I apologize for pointing out that your original headline
meant that you were advocating war on Iran.

Using a word that conveys the opposite meaning to the one you would appear to be trying to convey is certainly not a grammar issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Guess you didn't bother to read the link
since you were so busy "grading" me:eyes:

Geeze...guess it takes all kinds
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
13. k
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevietheman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-13-06 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
15. Time to catapult the extreme regimes
I wouldn't be surprised if both Bush and Ahmadinejad were both heading towards internal coups over their extreme overheating of non-issues. The peoples of both countries do not see any need whatsoever for a war. Any attack by the U.S. would be wholly unjustified, yet Bush and Ahmadinejad seem to keep increasing the heat for such a thing.

Maybe its past time to forcefully remove these two respective traitors from their high positions.

That's right, I said it, both these leaders are grossly incompetent, and TRAITORS to their nations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC