Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=156238&page=3>
> 2008: Democrats: Vilsack vs. Edwards on Iraq:
>
> The Des Moines Register's Tom
> Beaumont Notes, however, that the former North Carolina senator
> "stopped short of calling on Congress to refuse to pay for combat in
> Iraq — as former Gov. Tom Vilsack has done — saying to do so would
> further destabilize Iraq." LINK
Under any conceivable conditions Iraq is going to be fundamentally "destabilized" when U.S, troops leave -- just as it will continue to be fundamentally "destabilized" while U.S, troops remain there.
Hence no call for withdrawal or even for troop reduction is honest if so qualified. The only honest demand is that troops leave now regardless of the results. Other positions, I would assume, are disguised proposals for u.s. victory.
Carrol