Positions of the Dems in Iraq - Help because this is giving me a headache.

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?

I would argue that ALL Iraq plans give me a headache!! Let's throw in McCain, Hagel, and * while we're at it. Who the f*** knows what to do? I say, nobody!!

I think your list was about right, Mass, and thoroughly confusing. Of course, at least Dems have gone from "not having a plan" to having about 6.

I think the better question is: what are the chances of ANY of these plans working? Now I love Kerry, and God bless him, but I am very pessimistic about ALL plans. Withdraw NOW is as troubling as stay the course, and all the plans in between are just different variations of the same horrible outcome of more blood, toil, sweat and tears for the condemned people of Iraq.

On the bright side, I just read an article about Vietnam in The Economist and their economic growth rate continues to be in double digits! Yes, there is hope for Iraq, but only for the NEXT generation. Eventually, people do tire of war . . .

not hard work.

I think Dean's statement and Clark's radio appearance and op-ed caught some people off guard, even some of their staunchest supporters. No confusion: Kerry is still the only one advocating no permanent bases and turning the region's affairs over to those in the region.

Withdrawing precipitously would create chaos. Kerry's reduces the risks immediately and has as a clear goal some form of government that recognizes the rights of the Sunnis and Kurds.

I was surprised that the 2 Clark threads are not really getting any grief - if Kerry and Clark traded plans - there would be a 300 post thread that would make Limbaugh's assessment of Kerry sound positive.

And many fail to acknowledge the depth of Kerry's plan.

Clark's plan is frightening. He doesn't seem to understand that if you start removing the occupation, you reduce the occupation as an excuse for the insurgents. He wants to keep lots of troops in Iraq AND continue US actions against insurgents. That's just keeping the war going. I don't understand why he doesn't see that. Then he says the Iraqis must change the Constitution, is that another election that we have to stay for? I would think he could look at our own Constitution and understand that no matter what it says, people will be arguing over it forever. The culture will decide how Iraq is governed, in the end. Iran is having influence over the Shi'ites? Well duh. Why'd we back them in the first place only to complain about that influence now. The chance to diffuse Iranian influence is long gone.

It's a horrible plan and if Kerry had written it, there would be blistering attacks.