Some DEM are changing their minds and now support staying in Iraq:

Forum Name Latest Breaking News
Topic subject Senator Calls for Maliki's Ouster
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2962192#2962192
2962192, Senator Calls for Maliki's Ouster
Posted by rodeodance on Tue Aug-21-07 08:12 PM

Source: Washington Post

Senator Calls for Maliki's Ouster
Levin Urges Iraqis To Replace Leaders

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 21, 2007; A01
..........

"I hope the parliament will vote the Maliki government out of office and will have the wisdom to replace it with a less sectarian and more unifying prime minister and government," Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) said after a three-day trip to Iraq and Jordan.
............
Not every Democrat has come back from Iraq supporting a drawdown of U.S. forces in the coming months, as party leaders have advocated. Staking out positions that could complicate efforts to achieve party unity in September, a few Democratic lawmakers have returned expressing support for a continued troop presence. One of them, Rep. Brian Baird (Wash.), said yesterday that he will no longer vote for binding troop withdrawal timelines.


Republican leaders have seized upon any positive statements from lawmakers returning from Iraq to portray Democratic leaders as wedded to failure there while the Democratic Party grows increasingly divided over the war's progress.

Last Friday, Baird told the Olympian, a newspaper in his district, that he now believes the United States should stay in the country as long as necessary to ensure stability.

That followed comments by Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) suggesting that his trip to Iraq made him more flexible in his search for a bipartisan accord on the future U.S. role in the conflict. "If anything, I'm more willing to work to find a way forward," he told reporters late last month.

Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fla.), who was with McNerney, told his local paper that the troop increase "has really made a difference and really has gotten al-Qaeda on their heels."

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/20/AR2007082000871_pf.html

Is this why people are more "flexible" after their visits?

Some will believe what they are spoon-fed.

The majority of Dems support the US Occupation of Iraq for an indefinite time frame. There are various reasons for this. You can speculate as to those reasons. The US Occupation will continue & the Dems will keep funding it. There will be a draw down but at least 60K US Troops & 140K Mercs will remain in Iraq. US presence in Iraq will continue for decades.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!

Grab a uniform, grab a rifle, and get on the next plane to Baghdad!

You would be hard pressed finding anybody right now to say that the military aspects of the surge aren't working. Iraq is hardly tranquil, but changes have been noticed.

Needless to say, the point of the surge was to give the Iraqis breathing room to establish political stability and a chance to rebuild their own forces. That hasn't happened quite yet, particularly on the political front.

I suggest we be patient for just a little while longer. In 6 to 8 months, draw-down of US forces in Iraq will be forced upon the Bush administration. It will be gradual, but it will be gradual no matter when it begins.

I think the strategy among the politicians is to buy into the current strategy knowing that it will eventually merge with what we want.

If we buy into it now, the GOP cannot claim full credit for the withdrawal.

FURTHER APPEASEMENT & BACKSLIDING ON IRAQ IS UNACCEPTABLE - TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.

:puke:

time to ratchet up that rhetoric before next months dance around the oil law...or the meeting of benchmark #1..which will of course, provide stability to the region and enable the 're-deployment' of U.S. troops.

contributions of these politicians, who is giving them money.