Biden will likely run in 2008

[jokerman]

Biden needs to be our up and front voice on national security for this party.  But his time for President has passed.  His integrity is in too many shambles for him to be elected.

[Democratic Hawk]

Biden needs to be our up and front voice on national security for this party

Agreed. Doves never did the Democratic Party any favours

Dave

[danwxman]

Biden needs to be our up and front voice on national security for this party

Agreed. Doves never did the Democratic Party any favours

Dave

I agree! Democrats need to realize that doves don't win in war-time. Biden has supported the war but been critical of Bush's mistakes. He hasn't flip-flopped around all over the place like Kerry.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Agreed. Doves never did the Democratic Party any favours

Dave

You do realize that if doves stopped voting for Democrats, the Republicans would win every single election no matter what? I'm ing sick of tired of people accepting that the Republicans are crazy-right wing, and then saying Democrats need to move to the right on issues like war.

This war was for no good reason, and Bush lied. You can sign the  up instead of bashing us people who were smart enough to oppose this disaster all along.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Anyways, an overwhelming majority now oppose this war.

[Joe Biden 2020]

This war was for no good reason, and Bush lied. You can sign the f**ck up instead of bashing us people who were smart enough to oppose this disaster all along.

With your post, Saddam Hussein, who himself was a weapon of mass destruction, would still be in power.  I don't care if he wasn't an immediate threat to the United States, the fact is he would have been in the near future, and in the short term, he was killing his own people and his neighbors for no reason.  I support, with Biden, the war in Iraq.  Bush and this Admin has definitely made some serious errors in judgement, but this war was going to have to be fought sooner or later.  Saddam was not going to relinquish power by peace negotiations alone, he needed to be forced out. 

I see and appreciate your point of view, jfern, but I hope you can see and appreciate our point of view, as well.  We don't have to agree with each other, but at least respect each other's opinions and views.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This war was for no good reason, and Bush lied. You can sign the f**ck up instead of bashing us people who were smart enough to oppose this disaster all along.

With your post, Saddam Hussein, who himself was a weapon of mass destruction, would still be in power.  I don't care if he wasn't an immediate threat to the United States, the fact is he would have been in the near future, and in the short term, he was killing his own people and his neighbors for no reason.  I support, with Biden, the war in Iraq.  Bush and this Admin has definitely made some serious errors in judgement, but this war was going to have to be fought sooner or later.  Saddam was not going to relinquish power by peace negotiations alone, he needed to be forced out. 

I see and appreciate your point of view, jfern, but I hope you can see and appreciate our point of view, as well.  We don't have to agree with each other, but at least respect each other's opinions and views.

You 39% who support this war don't give a sh**t what the 59% of us who oppose this war think.

[riceowl]

I never realized til today that there was an IRAQI LIBERATION ACT signed into law, INTO LAW that removing Saddam from power and establishing democracy should be high priority, and that it was signed in 1998.

So, wasn't Bush just following US law?

[J.R. Brown]

I never realized til today that there was an IRAQI LIBERATION ACT signed into law, INTO LAW that removing Saddam from power and establishing democracy should be high priority, and that it was signed in 1998.

So, wasn't Bush just following US law?

The War was a good idea. Saddam had to go, I would hope everybody believes that, but the way in which it was handled was disgraceful. First of all the inteligence was way off. Rumsfeld thought that we would be welcomed with open arms and didn't take the time to calculate in a possibility that Al quada may use this as a chance to take control of the country once we leave. Also the number of troops sent in was no where near the number it should have been. Powell knew this. 

So, I would like to say that it is imperative that we secure that country and we must secure bases there for future conflicts in the region. I have never been as hawkish as I  am now, but these people need to be destroyed. If we get bogged down there, which is starting to happen with insurgents, there is no way we can win.

I am worried that we will began sending more and more troops in like Vietnam and end up staying there for years. At the same time I don't believe we should abandon our cause. I hope in the next couple years we train a sufficient number of Iraqis and come home.

[Democratic Hawk]

Agreed. Doves never did the Democratic Party any favours

Dave

You do realize that if doves stopped voting for Democrats, the Republicans would win every single election no matter what? I'm g sick of tired of people accepting that the Republicans are crazy-right wing, and then saying Democrats need to move to the right on issues like war.

This war was for no good reason, and Bush lied. You can sign the f**ck up instead of bashing us people who were smart enough to oppose this disaster all along.

I seem to recall a Dove by the name of George McGovern and by didn't the Democrats do brilliantly in that presidential face-off. I wouldn't by any stretch of the imagination define my as a neo-con but I am a realist

I'm a Hawk pure and simple. Diplomacy by all means but if that proves bleeding fruitless what are the alternatives? Can you imagine what may have happened had the Islamic miltants toppled Saddam, instead of the Coalition and got their hands on his biological and chemical weapons (he has a trach record of using those) and run amok in the streets of NY, LA and London, etc. Carnage, that's what

National security has been an issue that the Republicans have beaten Democrats around the head with for way too long, which partly explains why there have had more success in winning the presidency

And while I'm on the subject, should the Democrats embrace a more cautious, as opposed to radical, hawkish foreign solicy, who would the Doves support? The GOP, I doubt that very much

But, Jfern, if you are content to see your party fair badly in elections because of perceived weaknesses on important issues that's your prerogative - but, frankly, I want to see the Democrats in power rather than out. Democrats need to be every bit as strong on national security as Republicans are - because America is their country too

Dave

[Joe Republic]

I don't actually mind Biden all that much, but yeah, he's a has-been.