Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Don't Talk About Iraq

Judd Ledum has the right take on what's missing from the Democrats' national security plan. This is what happens when you have to keep Joe "lost the plot" Lieberman on board.

The real issue isn't what Democrats are saying about Iraq now. The real issue is knowing what they're going to say in October, and laying the foundation now to do that. In the plan:

Ensure 2006 is a year of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with the Iraqis assuming primary responsibility for securing and governing their country and with the responsible redeployment of U.S. forces.


Early November is pretty near the end of 2006 and at that time, I imagine, Iraq will still be shit. If 2006 fails to be "a year of significant transition" what will Democrats be saying then? Forget the unified message now, what will be the unified message then?

Through the miracle of time travel I've recevied an advance copy of their 2010 national security plan:

Ensure 2010 is a year of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with the Iraqis assuming primary responsibility for securing and governing their country and with the responsible redeployment of U.S. forces, and a pony.



(linked post seems to have disappeared. maybe it will return.)