DNC Leader Howard Dean on Iraq:

  • “[The] Idea That We’re Going To Win The War In Iraq Is An Idea Which Is Just Plain Wrong.”
  • “I’ve Seen This Before In My Life. This Is The Same Situation We Had In Vietnam.”
  • The White House Wants Us To Have A Permanent Commitment To Iraq. This Is An Iraqi Problem”
  • “I Think We Need A Strategic Redeployment Over A Period Of Two Years … Bring The 80,000 National Guard And Reserve Troops Home Immediately. They Don’t Belong In A Conflict Like This Anyway. …


Even if you accept the premise that the decision to go to war was flawed, even if you accept the premise that the President is prosecuting the war ineffectively, is it a good idea for the leader of the party to compare the Iraq war (and, presumably, the actions of the troops there) to Vietnam? Should the DNC leader be announcing that we shouldn't be in Iraq at all?

And, most importantly, what sort of propaganda victory/encouragement does it give the terrorists (and what sort of slam is it to the troops) to announce publicly that we can't and won't win the war?


Not surprisingly, Dean's counterpart in the Republicans, Ken Mehlman, thinks the message Dean is sending is a bad one:

    In predicting that America will lose the war in Iraq, Howard Dean is the latest national Democrat leader to embrace retreat and defeat in the central front in the War on Terror.

    His outrageous prediction sends the wrong message to our troops, the enemy, and the Iraqi people just 10 days before historic elections.

    Democrats across the nation should stand up and reject the pessimism of their chairman and strategy of defeat by their Congressional leaders.