I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…

But I don’t believe that the average mainstream democrat ‘thinks’ at all.

I think 1 in 5 feel very strongly that America must lose in Iraq ‘cuz Bush reminds them of their daddy, or they don’t like jews or something.

I think the other 80% feel very strongly that America ought to just give up in Iraq so that Uncle Sugar will have more money to give them instead of paying for the war.

@ Laura
Sally, if you are going to make this argument, please back it up. Can you site actual proof of any American wanting defeat? This argument is used time and again without any salient example of who exactly these people are, these traitors.
There is a poll that Fox News took in September, which is cited in the Weekly Standard article that poster Tap linked to @ 11:10 p.m. on Nov 26.

I provide you actual proof of any American wanting defeat, as you requested.
Your reply shows that you do not accept the Fox News poll as valid proof:

Surely Gringo you jest if you think that I would take anything that Fox news says seriously.

I go into an extended on how and why one should evaluate the credibility of polls/surveys.

You reply:

Gringo, 80-20. Which is the larger number ?I rest my case.

In summation. At the beginning, you ask Sally for “actual proof of any American wanting defeat”. You stated there was no “salient example” provided to support such a claim. I provide the proof, the “salient example” . You then state that the Fox News poll is not valid proof. I go into an extended discussion of polls. In your “rest my case” reply, you then quote the results of the poll: 80-20. By that statement you accept the validity of the poll, which you previously denied. At no time did you ask for proof that MOST Americans or Democrats wanted US defeat in Iraq. You asked for ANY. I provided it. Your stating that 80 is greater than 20 is an example of changing the goalposts.

You “rest your case”, but you lost it, as your 80-20 statement accepts the validity of the poll and of evidence for “actual proof of any American wanting defeat.”. Your initial claim that there is no “salient example” provided to support the “wanting defeat” statement is refuted.

I rest my case.

You’re point was only that someone, somewhere had said they think a U.S. “loss” in Iraq would be good.

You may want to think about why you’ve been dwelling on what a small minority within the left thinks, rather than what the average, mainstream Democrat thinks.

The idea that foreign wars and occurences do not impact upon American interests and security, is a bit obsolete post 9/11.

Does not the Left advocate social harmony and cooperation? How will people learn to cooperate if they simply let other people fight things out across the oceans?

The Leftist version of socialist utopia does not include resolving the problems that make people fight. No, the Leftist version of socialist utopia forwards the proposal that fights can be avoided by removing the beliefs that caused the fight in the first place. Like the belief that you can win in someone else’s war. Without such a belief, less wars would occur and less fighting would occur, at least to the Left.

This cannot be “safely” presumed. I seriously doubt American forces are responsible for most of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis that have died in the war; mostly that has come at the hands of insurgents and al Qaeda and the militias and whatnot. However, it’s impossible to argue that the majority of deaths are “bad guys” when our forces are most certainly responsible for a incredible number of deaths in bombings, roadblock shootings, convoy shootings, raids into homes at night, ground operations such as that carried out in Fallujah, and so on. I don’t presume to know the numbers, but neither should you.-X

There is an incredible amount of cognitive dissonance here, X.

I won’t speak for bunkerbuster, but for myself and many other liberals, the problem is we believe that we are not capable of remedying the situation in Iraq, no matter how long we stay. This is what eventually persuaded me into thinking that withdrawal is our only recourse. I d

That’s certainly an honest philosophical position. Every other argument should take this into consideration when speaking about Iraq events.

Admitting defeat, meaning letting it in not just recognizing it when it occurs, does indeed cause people to favor withdrawal as the only recourse. That is just a fact.

And by withdrawing, therefore, we prevent….what?-S

It isn’t about prevention so much as ignoring problems until they get big enough that you can smash them with extreme methods.