Bob Woodward is on MTP today asking (demanding) an extended interview

[hansolsen]

with Kerry on Iraq. Kerry should grant that interview.

If Kerry can't give Woodward an extended interview and present a real plan for what he will do in Iraq, then we do not deserve to win this election.

Kerry needs to move beyond his weak idea of internationalizing Iraq. Nobody is buying that -- it is impractical to the point of being irresponsible.

Here is what he should say in an interview with woodward:



QUOTE
Fellow citizens, hear me: I served in Vietnam and experienced the combat of war. I saw people killed and I killed enemy soldiers. I learned some things from that experience that will profoundly effect the orders I will issue as Commander and Chief. I will keep our soldiers safe from the folly of war. I will not send them on combat missions with no clear objective. I will not send them into battle where they cannot tell friend from foe. I will not ask them to fight for people who will not fight for themselves. I will never send American soldiers on a combat mission with rules of engagement where they cannot fire unless fired upon. I will never ask young soldiers to risk their lives because old men in high places cannot admit their mistakes.

I will go to Baghdad myself and I will meet with the leaders of the Iraqi insurgency. I will end this war on Iraq. I will not fire another shot in that war. I will hold an immediate national referendum in Iraq to determine if the Iraqi people want us to stay. If the people of Iraq want us out of there, I will bring the troops home. If a clear majority of Iraqis want us to stay, I will demand they stand along side American troops and prove it. If they refuse or shirk that duty, I will still bring our troops home. If they want us to stay and will stand with us, I will keep American forces there as true peace keepers.

I believe that God helps those who help themselves, and so do I. That principle will guide my policy in iraq. Please give me your vote and your confidence. Please trust that what I learned in the rice fields of South Vietnam is relevant to what must be done now. I ask for your trust.

[Snellius]

1. Excellent

Not LBN but excellent

[In Truth We Trust]

115. Where's he been for the last four years?!? I don't seem to recall any such

demands upon * who happens to be the president* whom has given the least amount of press conferences EVER!

[hansolsen]

118. Woodward was specifically refering to the 3+ hour interview he did with

Shrub and implying it would be a good thing if Kerry granted him a similar opportunity. Self serving on Woodward's part, but also an opportunity for Kerry, IMO.

[sally343434]

2. Get off your high horse

Kerry owes Woodward nothing. He's a Bush tool. Who does he think he is?

Why is this LBN anyway?

As far as "not deserving to win the election," that's preposterous. Are you saying Bush does, even under any circumstances? Bush is a fraud and a war criminal. He deserves only to be in the dock.

[librechik]

18. exactly

Kerry is being deliberately presented as confused and planless when he is nothing of the sort. All people have to do is ACTUALLY listen to him instead of let these press whores tell you what he's saying.

Why should we allow Woodward a chance to spin him again? Woody is a cunning partisan of the highest rank, and a dupe of the First Family--It's possible that DEEP THROAT was Poppy Bush--so Woodward might owe his entire career to the Bushes! That would explain a lot wouldn't it?

Kerry should tell Bob to BITE ME and go on Real Time with Maher and Oprah.

[hansolsen]

24. Bob Woodward brought down Richard Nixon. He has more integrity

than most of the media bigfoots, IMO.

I would like to see Kerry give him that interview live on TV. High risk for Kerry but could win us the election.

[Kahuna]

25. Woodward *HAD* integrity. Now is just a neo con tool.

Bernstein still has his integrity though.

[Lex]

99. Agreed! Woodward sold out bigtime. n/t

[Media_Lies_Daily]

43. For a guy who supposedly had integrity prior to Watergate....

...he has a VERY interesting background:

<http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr196-woodward.html>

Excerpts:

"The staunchly conservative Bob Woodward grew up in Wheaton, Illinois. A good student at Yale, he was ultimately one of fifteen seniors "tapped" for one of that university's secret societies, Book and Snake, a cut below the more infamous Skull and Bones, but the top of the second-tier fraternities. Woodward had his first journalistic experience working for the Banner, a Yale publication. In his 1965 yearbook he was referred to as a 'Banner mogul.' Havill writes,

Certainly, with the CIA encouraged to recruit on the Yale campus, particularly among history majors and secret societies, it is more than reasonable to assume Bob may have been one of those approached by the agency, or by a military intelligence unit, especially after four years of naval ROTC training."

...snip...

"Three days after graduating from Yale, Woodward was sent by the U.S. Navy to Norfolk, Virginia, where he was commissioned as an ensign by none other than U.S. Senator George Smathers from Florida. Bob's assignment was to a very special ship, called a 'floating Pentagon,' the U.S.S. Wright. The ship was a National Emergency Command Ship-a place where a President and cabinet could preside from in the event of a nuclear war. It had elaborate and sophisticated communications and data processing capabilities. It had a smaller replica of the war room at the Pentagon."

...snip...

"Aboard the Wright, Woodward had top secret "crypto" clearance-the same clearance researcher Harold Weisberg found had been assigned to Lee Harvey Oswald when he was himself in the Marines. Such clearance in Woodward's case gave him full access to nearly all classified materials and codes on the ship."

...snip...

"The Wright carried men from each of the military services, as well as CIA personnel. One of Havill's government sources reported that the CIA would likely have had additional informants on a ship of such sensitivity, adding that 'the rivalry between the services was intense.'

...snip...

"Whatever his background, whatever his connections, one cannot trust what Woodward says as fact. Take, for instance, his account in Veil of his last interview with dying CIA Director William Casey. Havill tracked down Casey's family, friends, hospital security staff and CIA guardians and found that the visit Woodward described was impossible. First of all, Casey was under 24 hour guard by several layers of security: CIA members, hospital security, and Casey's family. And Woodward had already been stopped once while trying to see Casey. According to one of Havill's sources, Woodward was not merely asked to leave, as Woodward reported in his book, but was forcibly shoved into the elevator. And Woodward's story kept shifting. Woodward told a Knight-Ridder reporter that he had gotten in by flashing his press pass. To Larry King, Woodward claimed he just 'walked in.' But even assuming he somehow managed to get by all of that security, Woodward would still have been the only person to claim that Casey had uttered intelligible words in those last hours. The only other person to make such a claim was Robert Gates, who himself became CIA Director. The family, doctor and medical staff said Casey could not make words at this point, only noises. At least Gates questioned whether he might have been imagining he heard words. Woodward has never retracted his 'conversation.' In addition, Woodward once said that Casey sat bolt upright, which would seem highly implausible given his rapidly deteriorating state. Onetime CIA Director Stansfield Turner, a friend of Woodward's since 1966, said Woodward told him he'd walked by Casey's room and Casey had waved to him. Casey's bed was positioned in such a way in the room as to make that impossible too.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hansolsen]

23. Bob Woodward is an American institution. If Kerry can't face Woodward

how in hell can he face Osama bin Laden??

I accept second place to no one in despising Shrub, by the way. But I will offer constructive criticism of this campaign when I see fit. And that doesn't mean I don't want Kerry to win.

[librechik]

46. Bob Woodward has conflicts of interest nowadays

However Kerry should speak to him but only if he brings along Bernstein, no edits are allowed in the tape, and it's live tv. Why not? He's not Bushovic!

[Scairp]

73. If Kerry submits to any interview, it should be Lou Dobbs

It seems he is the only true journalist at any media organization anywhere these days. As for Woodward, I realize he has this really great piece of investigative reporting on his resume that helped to rid this country of a paranoid and corrupt president, but I don't think he's the same reporter he was 35 years ago.

[IndianaGreen]

89. I like Lou Dobbs

He has become increasingly critical and skeptical of Bush's policies. He has the best interviews on cable news today, followed closely by Keith Olbermann on MSNBC.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

55. "Bob Woodward is an American institution"??? LOL!! Please stop!...

By the way, why haven't FratBoy's minions captured Osama yet? He's only had three years to do it since 911...what's the problem?

[The Zanti Regent]

84. Bob WHOREWARD is just another REICH wing shill

He earned the Media Whores Online WHORE OF THE YEAR crown by himself.

Fuck Whoreward and everyone else at the WHORESHINGTON POST!

[hansolsen]

100. Kerry would get points just for going in the "Lions den". What's he got t

lose. He is behind 20 points on the Iraq issue by playing it safe?? There is no where to go but up.

[DS1]

65. and I pray that Kerry steers as far away from your quote as possible

shit

[hansolsen]

98. Why? N/T

[krkaufman]

3. Why should Kerry be held to a higher standard than Bush?

Where is Bush's detailed plan for getting out of Iraq? (Oh, and Bush has the entire government with which to have formulated his plan.)

[hansolsen]

26. My main point in starting this thread is to have a real discussion on DU

of what Kerry's plan should be. I see a route forward in Iraq.

What is wrong with making the first vote in Iraq a referendum to decide if they want us there of not??

What is wrong with changing the rules of engagement so American soldiers are not sent on patrols where they cannot shoot unless fired upon???

What is wrong with having a meeting with the heads of this insurrgency??

[krkaufman]

83. Then your point was miscommunicated in your declarations...

If Kerry can't give Woodward an extended interview and present a real plan for what he will do in Iraq, then we do not deserve to win this election.

Kerry needs to move beyond his weak idea of internationalizing Iraq. Nobody is buying that -- it is impractical to the point of being irresponsible.

I don't see Kerry or the Democrats being any less deserving of winning the election over this one issue (i.e. standing alone in publishing a detailed plan for stabilizing and exiting Iraq) -- and certainly no less deserving than the Administration that put us there.

This is a standard right-wing and media talking point... "Kerry has no real plan"... "Kerry's plan is identical to Bushes"

What everyone fails to mention is that Kerry is not in a position to publish any real alternate plan, as that might undermine the current Administration and its efforts.

Further, the only way to change how we're viewed in Iraq (and throughout the Middle East and the rest of the world) is by removing from office the oilmen who took us there. So step one in any potentially successful plan is removal of Bush from office.

[hansolsen]

101. Bush's charge that Kerry has no plan resonates with voters because it is

true. And Iraq is the pivitol issue of this election. And time is running out. Kerry will own Iraq in 7 weeks,; he damn well better have a plan. What is it??

[Spazito]

4. Woodward is a bush toady, why would Kerry give him anything?

bush should outline his plan beyond bombing the Iraqi people, imo.

[SoCalDem]

31. Bush has NO intention of getting out of Iraq

In fact he is establishing PERMANENT bases there...and his plan is to attack Iran and maybe Syria... By doing so he will "secure" a path from Afghanistan , all the way to the sea.. (or so he THINKS)..

A second-term Bush will have NO LIMITS... We can safely assume that if he "wins", his henchmen (congress/senate) will retain their majority, and we can rest assured that at least 3 justices will "retire", so there will be NOTHING and NOBODY stopping him from doing whatever he wants..

That is what the election is about...

He has stated that the "war" will last 50 years... If he cannot be replaced after so many screw-ups, what makes us think that he will EVER be replaced, until HE wants to go..???

Our whole system of government is on the line here..

[Ohio rules]

5. " I served in Vietnam ..."

oh, what a lovely start...
Just what we need to hear..again..for the 10,ooth time...
not
hmm
Has Kerry done any one on one interviews lately?

I only hear stump speech sound bytes

[qanda]

8. I believe if you *looked*....

You would have seen a thread on a Time interview he did. And why do have such a rude tone to your post?

[Ohio rules]

34. obviously you didn't read the original post.

but went straight to the the link. My response was what the original poster "suggesting" how Kerry's first words should be spoken. I completely disagree
I just finished reading the Time interview.
Kerry is pointing a finger at Egypt and Saudi Arabia as issues that need adressed.
Hey...it isn't the same ole 'Nam talk. I see this as a current issue.

but
I found this comment from the TIME article confusing;

TIME
If I could get back to politics—

KERRY
I don't talk politics.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

52. Why do you think the captive mainstream press is presenting...

...information like this? Do you think they could be trying to trash Kerry just like they trashed Gore?

When do you think they will start making up stories about about Kerry inventing stuff?

[hansolsen]

28. No, "I served in combat in Vietnam while Shrub was fucking the dog in

Alabama. Here is what I learned in combat and how it will guide my presidency. If George Bush had ever been in combat he might not have lied to the nation to take us to war."

That's what I want him to say, and that is the tone he should use.

He spennt his whole convention setting up his credentials as a combat veteran. What sense does it make to abandon that now and run on the economy??

[0007]

38. How many fucking one liners have we heard repeated over and over

again by junior?

Not a goddamn thing wrong with "I served in Vietnam" and Kerry should add while junior was AWOL.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

47. You "only hear stump speech sound bytes"? Since the press is....

...controlled by their very conservative corporate owners, why do you think that is?

Your first 1,000 guesses don't count.

[oasis]

80. Kerry's interview should consist of questions from citizens at a town hall

debate. Why doesn't Woodward address the fact that Chimpy is ducking that debate? Screw Bob Woodward, he is a Bush ass kisser.

[Raenelle]

6. Give the interview to Bernstein.

[goclark]

12. Or give the interview to Nelson Mandela and Jimmy Carter

We should tell that CIA Agent, Woodward, to get back to sucking up to Bush full time.
He is a spy and my tin hat tells me that he allowed Poppy to be Deep Throat.

Throw him to the wolves.

[AlCzervik]

20. Bingo!

When was Woodward coronated Pope of all legitimate jouralists? Woodward has turned into a partisan hack that will kiss any ass to score a big get. Screw him.

[aquart]

7. Give an avowed Republican an interview? Why, dear?

So his words can be twisted and slanted?

Let's just rush right out and do it. Sure.

[mazzarro]

9. Agree with most of your post except for ...

I will go to Baghdad myself and I will meet with the leaders of the Iraqi insurgency. I will end this war on Iraq. I will not fire another shot in that war. The reThuglicans will make a feast of that - "he is meeting with 'terrist'", "he is meeting with 'terrist'", "he is meeting with 'terrist'"! Take the meeting out and instead attempt to explain, in a sound bite format, the recent explanation of his IWR vote.

[hansolsen]

32. Warriors always appear at their strongest, most masculine, most daring

and most effective when they go out alone to meet the enemy commander in the center of the battle field. The fact that Bush is afraid to meet Osama bin Laden face to face and confront what he has to say, is a pure signal of Shrub's cowardice. Shrub doesn't want the American people to hear what Islamic leaders have to say.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

50. What a load of psycho-babble.

[hansolsen]

53. I've outlined three or four bold ideas Kerry could actually do when he

takes over. If you disagree with those ideas, take they on one by one or offer your own.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

56. No, you've outlined three or four ways for Kerry to be strung up by the...

...captive mainstream press.

Try again.

[hansolsen]

72. Fine if you disagree with my ideas. Please advance the debate by

saying why. What part of my suggestion do you agree with? Any of it?? What part is wrong, in your opinion, and why?

[Ohio rules]

44. Hello president Edwards, Hail to the new Chief

"I will go to Baghdad myself and I will meet with the leaders of the Iraqi insurgency. I will end this war on Iraq. I will not fire another shot in that war."
Kerry would never be so assinine as to do that...would the guy who proposed such a statement be willing to walk point for Kerry at that time?
Unless they both have a death wish..

[hansolsen]

58. The operative word in that sentence, in case you missed it, is "on".

We are now making war *** on *** Iraq, not just * in * Iraq. I want that stopped.

I have called for a referendum on whether or not the Iraqi people want us there. Why shouldn't that be the first vote cast?? What is so radical about that idea. Is it too much common sense?

And what is so far fetched about having a meeting under a flag of truce where "real men" can meet as warrior leaders have always met -- on the field of battle -- to reach a decision. Compromise or more war.

What are we fighting for in Iraq?? Do you know?? Are you sure we really have nothing to discuss with Iraqi leaders of this insurgency?? Is that your motto -- all guns and no talk?? Maybe you should be supporting Bush?? That's his motto, is it not??

[SpiralHawk]

10. I demand an interview with the Chimp-in-Chief*

on the subjects of Iraq lies, 9/11 failures, and his personal, shameful AWOL record.

With the support of DU, I know that the pResident* and I can get to the bottom of these murky and unresolved issues.

[hansolsen]

102. Woodward's point on MTP is that Shrub had granted him a 3+ hour

interview Kerry should now do the same.

[leesa]

11. Woodward works for Bush. Why should anyone waste their time for

an interview that will undoubtedly be a smear job??

[hansolsen]

33. What if the interview were live on TV? N/T

[Ohio rules]

36. Kerry should debate Bush already

and get everybodys attention

[hansolsen]

51. In the scheduled debates, the first question Kerry will be asked is what

he will do differently in Iraq. If he says internationalize Iraq, the next question will be what he will do if that does not work.

[Ohio rules]

60. honestly, in a bold move...

suggest the formation of three federal Republics under one flag and invite those internally to sit down at the bargaining table to form their own coalition of the willing. ( ie, screw the world )
Invite the leaders of the interim gov council to get the people involved in their own regional politics.


I know I know "civil war" blah blah...so what are they doing now ?

Any other proposals ?

[oasis]

128. Maybe Nader should be inserted into the debates to ask him that question.

Then we can be treated to a deja vous of the 2000 election "there is no difference between the GOP and democratic candidates."

Nader would definitely ask him that question.

[comradebillyboy]

13. it would give kerry a platform to

try and give a coherent and hopefully understandable explanation of what he would do. no one really thinks the french and germans are going to help even if kerry is elected, so he needs to come up with a concept that is more than wishful thinking.

kerry's iraq problem is that his position is little more than weak me too-ism

[hansolsen]

35. Yes, and Kerry can offer real alternatives starting with holding a vote

on whether the Iraqi people want us to stay.

[Cocoa]

14. only if Bush gives Sy Hersh a similar interview

Woodward should be excoriating Bush for his failure to give press conferences.

[Supply Side Jesus]

95. bingo!

why should only kerry be held to the flame?
Bush has fucked up everything, and he should be held to it first.

[JerseygirlCT]

15. While I would be happy to see Kerry -m

have an opportunity (preferably prime-time tv) to express his plans and views on this very important situation, I think this is a pretty transparent attempt by Woodward for a big "get".

Give the interview, by all means, but it needn't be Woodward. How about Rather?

[johnfunk]

16. Kerry should grant an interview... to Sy Hersh!

That oughta burn Bush buttswab Bobby Woodward's brownnose!

[CatWoman]

17. This is NOT LBN

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x87249

[hansolsen]

37. Sorry, I think you're right. I did post this in the Campaign forum too,

thinking the mods might combine them there. Mea culpa.

[ROakes1019]

19. Why should Kerry be asked specifically how?

It seems strange to me that people are always demanding Kerry come up with a "magical" plan to clean up Bush's mess in Iraq. If one of my children spills red dye all over the white carpet, should another of my children be asked to provide a quick answer as to how to get rid of the stain? Bush certainly has no good answer, all the while he keeps making the matter worse; yet, some pundit or repug seems to think Kerry should know, without even being intimate with all the insider details, immediately what to do. Don't fall for this illogical logic.

[daydreamer]

30. Why should Kerry be asked specifically how?

Exactly!

[hansolsen]

42. Welll, DUers, Get your ass ready because the first question Kerry will

get in the upcoming debates, is the question I am posing here.

And if Kerry just trots out his old point about getting international support, Shrub will wipe the mat with him, the media will shove it up his ass, and we will lose, and we will deserve to have lost.

Kerry needs a new answer to what he will do differently in Iraq. That answer needs to be bold.

I've given some bold ideas here. If you don't like mine, what are yours??

[Media_Lies_Daily]

57. FratBoy will have some REAL problems debating a guy that formed a...

...debate club back in prep school.

FratBoy is about as articulate as a dead parrott...Kerry will destroy him.

[hansolsen]

62. Kerry can't destroy anybody with limp dick argument about international

izing Iraq. This campaign had better come to grips with the fact that there is no tomorrow. Decision time is here. Kerry needs to make up his mind on Iraq, for better or worse.

[hansolsen]

39. He should be asked, not for a "magic" plan, but for a simple statement

of what will be different when Kerry takes over. This is relevant now because Kerry will literally own Iraq on Nov 3, if he wins this election. The country and the world will turn to him that morning and ask, "Now what?"

He needs an answer. He has not provided an answer. His answer should come out of his experience in Iraq.

He should say it is an unjust war that nees to end.

He should say he can issue rules of engagement for U.S. troops that don't set them up in a shooting gallery.

[TexasBushwhacker]

64. I agree - Kerry does not have all the info

It is unfair for Kerry to reveal a point by point plan when he is not privy to a great deal of top secret information. Furthermore, it may not be in our best interest, in terms of resolving the Iraq situation, for Kerry to reveal too much. The bottom line is, Kerry needs to sell himself as 1) able to serve as Commander in Chief 2) trustworthy, that he is not motivated by some hidden agenda (oil, PNAC, etc.).

I have NO IDEA why so many people still consider Bush to be THE MAN, when it comes to resolving the Iraq situation and making us safer from terrorist attack. 9/11 happened on his watch, we still haven't found OBL, terrorist cells are becoming larger and their attacks bigger in scope, and Bush has even admitted that he "miscalculated". Why do so many people trust him? What has Kerry done to make people NOT trust him? It makes NO SENSE.

[Ron Green]

70. The reason so many people still consider * to be THE MAN is because

they are not very smart. They're scared by Rove and his fear-mongering campaign, aided by a bought-and-paid-for media. Fear will ALWAYS trump reason, even in a "liberal democracy." Kerry needs to find a slogan than will cut through the noise, and stop with the thoughtful discourse. He can do the reasoning after he's been elected. We just need a few more sheeple to vote for him.

[Judi Lynn]

74. Appreciate your point. Right on all counts, I'm sure. Well expressed.n/t

[hansolsen]

76. It is "unfair" of Kerry to expect to win if he can't articulate what he

do differently in Iraq. This is not some distant, hypothetical event. This is seven weeks away in reality. Bush will be a lame duck until he leaves office.

[TexasBushwhacker]

85. But it can't be reduced to a sound bite ....

and frankly, Bush hasn't outlined, point by point, what his plans are for Iraq over the next 4 years either. I think people are operating on the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy. They don't want to change leaders in the middle of a war and I think this is understandable. Frankly, if Bush were doing anything remotely close to a good job I might agree. BUT HE ISN'T! The mission ISN'T accomplished. He admits he "miscalculated". We didn't find any WMD's. Iraq may eventually be in better shape than when Hussein was in power, but when, how, and at what cost? Yes, Saddam is guilty of human rights violations. SO ARE WE - Guantanimo and Abu Ghraib for starters!

Are people not getting Kerry's message because of Kerry or because of the failure of the press to cover it adequately. There seems to be plenty of material to work with:

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/iraq.html

[hansolsen]

77. As the Dem pres candidate, Kerry gets high level briefings on Intell

right now. He has enough info to get off the fence, quit trying to appeal to swing voters who support the war in iraq, and tell us what the hell he intends to do.

[newyawker99]

94. Hi ROakes1019!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[tinanator]

21. woodward is the devil

the enemy. emperor of the intelligence corrupted fascist press.

[salin]

22. Demanding?

If that was the tone on the tv spot, than it would sure appear that Woodward has a rather grandiose view of his (self) importance as a journalist.

[hansolsen]

45. He was very low key about it. I am reading between the lines when I

used the word "demanding". That is soley my interpretation. Watch MTP yourself and see how you read it.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

59. Oh, so you admit that you've overplayed your hand on this issue?

[hansolsen]

66. No, I am saying the "demand" was presented in a low key, velvet glove,

but it clearly was a demand, by my reading. Go see for yourself.

In any case it is really an opportunity. Right now Bush is ahead by 2 to 1 on who can handle Iraq and terrorism the best. Some advisors want Kerry to capitulate on Iraq and move to discussing the economy and domestic issues.

I say the way to win this election is to make the American people really believe Kerry will make a difference. He hasn't accomplished that yet.

Woodward is offering Kerry one more platform to make his case. Isay, take him up on it.

[City Lights]

27. Well I demand that bush grant an interview to Dan Rather

to address the serious questions Rather has asked about his service to this nation during the Vietnam war.

[daydreamer]

29. Iraq

I don't think Kerry should be specific. He is not the President yet. Let's be fair, nobody has asked Bush what his plan is for Iraq for the next four years.

[hansolsen]

48. He needs to be specific enough to offer a real difference that is seen as

bold, innovative, courageous, smart, reasonable, and cogent.

I have layed out such a plan here. What is so hard about that. Let's get on with it.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

61. You haven't "layed out" much of anything except some VERY....

...weak personal opinions.

Why don't you rework it and then come back so we can "get on with it".

[hansolsen]

67. Well, they are my personal opinions, all right. What is wrong with that?

I have proposed some very concrete steps, have I not?

1. Make the first vote in Iraq a referendum on whether or not
the Iraqi people want us there.

2. Change the rules of engagement under which our soldiers fight. This will cut our casualty rate.

3. Withdraw our troops to forward bases. Stop the carnage without purpose.

4. Have a meeting under a flag of truce with leaders of the Iraqi insurgency. More talk, less shooting.

Now you may disagee with any of these ideas, but they form the basis of a plan that is different than Shrub's plan.

[Jacobin]

109. Please make sure you have enough helicopters to evacuate everyone

quickly.

Hey, I'm not being facetious. It's what we're going to have to do.

The warring parties in Iraq don't want peace (although I'm sure most of the population does) The warring parties want to WIN and they are in a war to win control. Sunnis want it, Shiites want it and the Kurds want the fuck out of Iraq to have their own country.

Any referendum or election will be completely and utterly bombed out. They are already talking about moving the January elections.

Hell, I'm glad someone is thinking about how to "fix" Iraq, I have no answers, that's for sure. Its the biggest screw up of the millenium, of that we can be certain.

I just don't think Kerry can say much about Iraq other than shake his head and say how fucked up it is.

[hansolsen]

119. What do you think of my idea to withdraw troops to forward bases and

change the rules of engagement so soldiers are not put in a situation where they cannot tell friend from foe and cannot fire unless fired upon first??

[Junkdrawer]

40. Why not Hannity, Limbaugh or Novak?

:shrug:

[Judi Lynn]

41. Since you haven't taken the time to read CatWoman's post

I'll post the rules of LBN here, to make it easier:

Please be aware of the following restrictions when posting in Latest Breaking News:

1. NO opinion pieces, editorials, or other stories that are not news.

2. NO news that is more than 12 hours old.

3. NO duplicate posts of stories that have already been posted.

4. NO polls, petitions, or other action items.

5. All of our other rules for posting apply as well, including copyright rules.

6. When posting articles, please use the published title of the article as the title of the discussion thread.

7. Discussion of Israeli/Palestinian issues is not permitted in the Latest Breaking News forum, and instead must be posted in the Israeli/Palestinian Affairs forum. If, however, the news item is primarily about U.S. policy in Israeli/Palestinian affairs, you may post it in the Latest Breaking News forum.

If your message is not Latest Breaking News, you should post it in the General Discussion Forum or in one of the other forums.

[hansolsen]

104. Woodwards "demand" was breaking news, IMO. Everything else that

followed in my post was my opinion about how to respond to the LBN.

[Jacobin]

49. Woodward is a stalking horse for Smirk

He is a fucking turncoat Likkudnick. He loves this fucking war and the M.E. wars the neo-cons want to start in Syria and Iran.

Everyone knows IraqNam is a fucking quagmire of epic proportions. No one has a good answer on getting out.

Smirk can just be stupid and say "stay the course" and keep his base happy.

Kerry has no fucking solution and Woodward knows that. Kerry is going to have to do a withdrawal as in Viet Nam which which he can't say. Bush is going to have to lose it too, but he can do so after the selection and then just "declare victory" as Iraq goes spinning even further out of control

Don't do it Kerry. Don't be stupid.

[hansolsen]

105. I just listed three or four good places to start in putting this mess

behind us. There are alternatives to the Shrub approach in Iraq. This campaign could command the headlines for weeks if Kerry would climb down off the fence and take a real stand on Iraq.

[Gregorian]

54. Seymore Hersch is saying withdrawal nearly an impossible plan.

Little Boy Bush lit a big fire.

Hersch was talking about this last night, on cspan. He believes the hole we've dug is so huge, that after agonizing brainstorming, noone has a clue how to get out of Nam, er, I mean Iraq. I am just saying this because Kerry may not be able to have a plan. And maybe we shouldn't expect him to have one.

[Nordic]

69. it may be "nearly impossible" but it's the ONLY plan

We have to get out of there, staying is beyond stupid.

The insurgency is fueld by US, not them.

We need to get out of there and let the dust settle as it may.

It was none of our business then, and it's none of our business now.

[hansolsen]

79. Why not put this to the Iraqi people? Why shouldn't this be the first

vote taken.

[PittLib]

87. Because the Iraqi people are hardly united at this point...

it's not like there is any solidarity behind any one ideal. Hell, Colin Powell was asked about the possibility of Iraqi civil war on MTP - he responded something to the effect of "I don't think that's gonna happen". Hmmm, real convincing. I don't buy it. What you suggest is over simplified and cloyingly idealistic. "Hey guys! Sorry about the bombs and war and stuff. Our bad! So what do ya wanna do now?"

[hansolsen]

90. I think there is solidarity in Iraq. I think there is a broad consensus

to throw our asses out. That is why the insurgency has all the sanctuary they need. That is why we are not winning and the casualty count goes up.

And yes, George Bush, at least, should say he is sorry about getting the WMD information wrong.

Idealistic? I plead guilty.

[PittLib]

134. Don't you think that maybe the insurgency has something to do with...

different groups fighting to take control and not merely our presence? Yes, I understand that they resent us ... no doubt. But if we just pull out, they'll resent us a hell of a lot more. Trading out one strong arming dictatorship for another. And expecting an apology from GW, while never gonna happen, isn't idealistic - but your notion that his mess will be easily cleaned up is.

[hansolsen]

106. I'm offering free of charge three or four good ideas on where to begin.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hansolsen]

107. I support Kerry and am trying to be helpful. I happen to believe Kerry is

going into the scheduled debates with a weak and indefensible position on what he will do differently in Iraq, and he will be pressed on that positon by both Bush and the moderators.

And I'll take bets that I'm right about that. So if you think my suggestions are off base, attack them, not me. Thanks.

[Bo]

71. I'm now convinced Gen. Clark should have been

Our man

[robbedvoter]

88. yeah, but this thread is trash anyway. Sounds like O'Riley: "Appear on

my show or you're a coward" BS

[kentuck]

75. Screw Bob Woodward...

Tell him to go back and do another interview with George W Bush and do it right the next time....and keep his nose out of his ass.

[hansolsen]

78. Woodward is offering Kerry an opportunity if he has the balls to take it.

No risk, no gain. What has Kerry to lose, anyway. The no risk, balls on the fence strategy Kerry has taken so far has him trailing Bush in every poll and down by about 20 points on Iraq and war issues.

There is no where to go but up.

[kentuck]

81. I don't know that Bob Woodward is the best place to risk it...

just my opinion.

[oasis]

82. Should Woodward appeal to Bush's "balls" to have a town hall debate?

[hansolsen]

91. There are three debates scheduled and Kerry will lose all three if

he doesn't come down off the fence on Iraq.

[oasis]

116. Kerry will continue to play it smart and let Bush's own dismal record sink

the short lived dynasty. Kerry's the best at playing it close to the vest.

[hansolsen]

121. "Close to the vest" has Kerry down 20 points on the Iraq issue. N/T

[oasis]

135. Kerry won't panic. BTW, "the Iraq issue" is a liability for Bush."Mission

Not Accomplished".

[hansolsen]

136. You and I might think it is a liability for Bush but the polls don't

reflect it.

[robbedvoter]

86. Woodward Is an institution: winner, mediawhore of 2001 hands down

kerry should however give Sy Hersch an interview.

[hansolsen]

93. In either case, Kerry needs some bold new plans for Iraq or he might

as well save his breath to cool his soup.

[cheshire]

92. Woodward then: good Woodward now: right wing and iffy at best.

[bokanist]

96. propagandizing

MTP was today incredible. What started out as a report on the administration fostering prison abuse turned into Woodward's favorite rap -- What a decisive leader * is. Then it moved on to what a terrible leader Kerry is. From * war crimes to Kerry not granting an interview to Woodward in about 30 seconds. An amazing display of propagandizing pulled off by Woodward and little Russ.

[hansolsen]

108. Woodward did come awfully close to saying Shrub personally approved

abusive interrogation techniques. (you and I would call it torture)

The chink in Shrub's armor here is that half the country knows Bush approved torture and actually applaud him for it. The key is these are the same people who think Bush is God's candidate.

Kerry should confront Shrub voters and ask them straight out, what makes them think Shrub's policies are "Christian".

[AntiFascist]

97. or...

within the next two months the fact that Al Qaeda supports the Bush campaign because "an extended war is a great way to recruit terrorists" needs to become a major media issue. Also, several of our allies could come forward and actually begin to lay out their plans for what they would do to cooperate with the U.S. if it began making plans to pull out of Iraq (underlying implication being that of cooperating with Kerry's plan for Iraq). If the rest of the world and particularly our allies really want this to happen, then they need to start cooperating with Kerry NOW!

[hansolsen]

110. The rest of the world will never help America execute Shrub's grand plan

for the middle east. In particular, the rest of the world will never line up to support the Sharon / Bush / Kerry plan to turn the West Bank "Holy Lands" over to Zionist Settlers.

The rest of the world will never send troops to Iraq because they don't have any troops to send, for openers.

The Kerry plan layed out so far is a limp dick and the world knows it. If that is all he drags into the debates, this election is all over.

[oasis]

127. The "world" overwhelmingly would approve of a regime change in America.

[hansolsen]

133. Which won't help Kerry win. It actually might work against him. Kerry

can win only if he convinces the U.S. electorate he knows what he is doing in Iraq. So far he hasn't done that.

[robbedvoter]

130. Are you Bob's agent? was it easier with W?

Did you start 2 threads on it to make sure you get our attention?

[hansolsen]

131. I am John Kerry's agent, and I will start 200 threads to get this campaign

to announce a real plan for what to do next in Iraq. I believe Kerry will get killed in the debates if he goes in there with just the pablum the campaign has served up so far. Internationalizing Shrub's war is a loser.

That's what I think, and I feel strongly about it.

I am posting similar threads on the Kerry campaign forum and in letters to the editor. Call me crazy but please don't accuse me of disloyalty.

[incapsulated]

103. Not if he says what you want him to say...

Yeah, let's just pull out and have Iraq and very likely the surrounding countries to go up in flames. That will get him LOTS of votes, for sure.

Kerry will get international support because he isn't Bush, he is Kerry. He will have his hands full and there is no guarantee of success because Bushco. has fucked things up so badly. But he will have the best people with the best intentions working for him. He will have the gratitude and support of our allies, who despise Bush.

There are many things that can be done, practically, on the ground that aren't under this moronic admin. Like taking the dollars out of Haliburton's pockets and putting Iraqis to work rebuilding their own country. Like giving the Iraqi forces the training and weapons and armor they need, instead of running the operation like a miser who wants it to fail. Like using our forces effectively, instead of moving them all over the country to put out fires, and moving in as many of the diplomatic core as possible to work on local government.

Most people have no idea how badly this operation is being run, and how much better we can do.

[hansolsen]

112. Giving Iraqi forces training and weapons is just about the dumbest thing

Shrub is doing in Iraq. There is an 80% dessertion rate among those "forces" Those weapons and that training is just turned around and used to kill American soldiers.

The idea that Kerry can train Iraqi forces better than Bush can is so absurd, and ass backwards, it defies description. If I thought that was all that Kerry might do in Iraq, I wouldn't vote for him.

The Iraqi people want us to hell out of there. Anybody who thinks the insurgents in Iraq will suddenly love America just because Kerry wins the election is living in lala land.

[incapsulated]

113. If someone other than these assholes

Were running it, things could be A LOT different, that's what you don't get. When you pick up anyone off the fucking street and give them a gun and authority, including Bathist Generals, yeah, that is a major mistake. But Iraq NEEDS it's own forces or we will be there FOREVER.

Iraqis want us out of there because we are doing such an awful job and getting them nothing but killed, unemployed and without a future. They were willing to give us a chance, at first, to help them rebuild and secure the country while they did so. All we can do is hope that they give us a second chance with a new man in charge.

Kerry cannot, and will not, unilaterally pull out of Iraq as a first resort.

[hansolsen]

117. I strongly disagree. I do not believe we were ever welcomed by a majority

of the Iraqi people. There was never a ground swell of Iraqi nationalists intent on overthrowing Saddam Hussein and willing to partner with the U.S. military to kill their fellow Iraqis. This has been a neo-con wet dream gone bad, wrapped in a pack of self serving lies served up by Iraqi exiles.

Even tearing down Saddam's statue was staged. This has been a fucking mess from day one, and it has gone hill from there. I still say the idea that American soldiers can train Iraqi forces to fight along side our soldiers against their own countrymen is so fundamentally stupid it makes my head hurt.

There is not one shred of evidence that training and equipping Iraqi forces has worked or can work. It is a discredited idea. It has been shot in the ass. Give it up.

[incapsulated]

125. Look.

I wouldn't have gone into Iraq even if the fucker HAD nukes, period.

Nobody here is propping up this stupid war. The FACT IS that if Kerry is elected he will be responsible for it's outcome, fair or not.

He can cut and run and allow the entire mess to meltdown into open civil war and spread into neighboring countries and that may be the inevitable no matter what he does. But that wouldn't be good for anyone, least of all the Iraqi people, who have seen enough war and death don't you think? Don't you think it's worth a shot to try to fix this mess without a bloodbath that will make what is going on now a fucking giggle?

There isn't a "shred of evidence" that training and equipping Iraqi forces can't work, either. It is not "discredited" because it hasn't been done in way that isn't just a CYA by Bush before the elections or to cover up the fact that this is a full scale occupation.

The Shiites in the south and the Kurds in the north, as well as Iraqis who wanted to hope for some future without a dictator, Iraqi OR American, did indeed hope that something could be salvaged from this mess, this is their real future we are talking about. We had a small window of opportunity and blew it, not only because Bushco. was incompetent and had no plan, but because a "free and democratic" Iraq was never in their plans to begin with. So, there is no point arguing over what has been done, because of who did it and why. The point is, Kerry will inherit this mess and just walking away from it without even attempting to change course it is not an option, not as a first choice.

[hansolsen]

126. To be clear, I am not advocating walking away. I am advocating having

a national referendum in Iraq on the question of whether or not they want us there.

If they say no, then we should leave.

If they say yes, then we should stay, but the Iraqi people, by a clear majority, need to say they will serve along side American soldiers against their own countrymen. If they say they will do that, then there may be some sense in staying.

Over all I believe the Iraqi people want us out of there now, regardless of how livid you get at the prospect. I trust the Iraqi people to make that determination more than I trust you.

Good night for now.

[Doctor_J]

111. Probably can't hurt, but

lie down with whores, wake up with crabs. the media is so hostile to hostile to Kerry it could be a trap. Whew. Wish we had some sycophants in the media like * does.

[hansolsen]

122. Avoiding the media is not a winning strategy for a candidate wh is

having trouble defining himself in the face of a furious effort by Bush / Rove to redefine him. Kerry must seize the initiative. This is a classic way to do it. -- bring forward his plans for Iraq now. He has to do it in seven weeks anyway. What's he got to lose?

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hansolsen]

124. Well, I'm kinda round like a mole, but lots bigger. I will admit to

being old and senile, and prone to take great risks with someone else's campaign. But no, I do have Kerry's interests at heart. I want him to win. He is not clearly winning now, and he is clearly losing the debate over Iraq. I want to change that.

I am a former Dean supporter who has opposed this war from day one, and my frustration level with the DLC, be nice to Bush, wing of the Dem party is driving me up a wall. I'll plead guilty to that.

But I am dead serious about these ideas.

1. We should leave if the Iraqis don't want us there. What is so radical about that???

2. We should stop sending American soldiers into battle when they cannot fire until fired upon and they cannot tell friend from foe. I'll bet every soldier's mother would agree with that. Don't you??

3. I believe leaders should engage other leaders, even enemy leaders, in dialog. Kennedy did it with Kruschoff. What is so unimaginable about that??

Are you sure you haven't internalized Shrub's world vision of how to fight terrorism? I haven't. I'm trying to think for myself.

[AnnitaR]

120. FUCK Woodward!

Haven't seen him DEMANDING a sit down with the current President! Once he does that... then he can demand one from Kerry!

These bastards are really a piece of work!

[Doctor_J]

123. where do you think

"Smirk At War" came from? that was as "hard-hitting" a piece on * as you are likely to see from anyone in Big Media. If Woodward gets another sit-down with *, we're liable to discover that Smirky was in CIA black-ops, and single handedly won the wars in Grenada, Nicaragua, and Bosnia.

Kerry should agree to meet with Woodward IF * will also submit to a town hall meeting WITHOUT loyalty oaths.

[John_H]

129. Sure Bob, a big time exclusive is possible--why don't you write a few

smaller apieces first and we'll give you a call when the Senator has some time to sit down with you.

He'll get the message.

[truthspeaker]

132. OK, but only if Bush agrees to an extended interview with Sy Hersh