|
Edited on Tue Dec-06-05 03:42 PM by Mass
I think I will stop getting mad at the reporters about how they report Democrats' positions on what to do in Iraq. There were already a lot of different positions and Lieberman, Dean, and Clark speaking yesterday and today made nothing clearer:
Here are the different factions as I understand them:
- Lieberman wants a War cabinet and that the Democrat stop to criticize Bush.
- Warner, Clinton, ... say that we should not rush to leave. As of today, Clark added his weight in his column in the NYTimes, saying that the US troops should protect Iraq from Iran "?"
- Biden wants to withdraw 50,000 troops in 2006.
- Dean is supporting the Korb plan (as far as I can understand) - 80,000 troops (NG and reserve) out early next year (I am all for that) and the rest in 2 years with redeployment in other countries in the Middle East.
- Kerry is proposing 20,000 + troops after the December election and a withdrawal thru 2006 with troops in garnison in-between except for special forces. Feingold seems to want something of the same type, if I understand correctly what they are proposing.
- Murtha is for a redeployement in 6 months, with part of the troops redeployed in the ME and offshore.
- Kucinich, McGovern, and others want a withdrawal of the troops as soon as possible (target date Oct 06).
Some of these people are proposing international involvement, other not.
Now, it is good to see that Democrats have plans, but I doubt that journalists can really report correctly on that, and GD is giving me a headache today, with people defending the plan of their preferred person, whatever it is.
Did I miss any position?
|