Iran code words: "no option can be taken off the table"

Edwards said it. Now Hillary has said it. It's just a matter of time before Obama and Biden chime in.

Who are they playing to? Clearly the Israel lobby, as Edwards made his remarks while in Israel and Hillary at an AIPAC forum. Is either one aware of how craven they appear using the AIPAC boilerplate? Does either campaign have any awareness of what good it would do their campaigns to say something original, intelligent and truly brave about Iran, especially in the context of an address to AIPAC? The cliche would no longer be "Sista Souljah moment;" it would be "AIPAC moment" and would describe a candidate's revolutionary declaration of independence.

Before this gets shuffled off to certain I/P death ( :hi: ), the question I want to ask DUers is, what can netroots Democrats do to change the direction of the Democratic "debate" on Iran? Who among the candidates do you think will show real bravery on this issue, bringing the discussion away from the AIPAC view and back toward reality, which is that the US--in fact, the world--does not need and cannot afford another US military engagement in the Middle East right now. Who will say, "No more mistakes!"?

and rebut the opinions of their democratic brethren for such words meant to pander and which potentially can light the fuse of a war that can last for more than a decade. I know, I know, we can't have anything but unity within the party, but the reality demands that another faction dominate the issue and have the louder voice.

at least for clark and kucinich.
pretty sick behavior on the part of the aipac/adl, attacking anyone seeking a non-violent resolution.