Democrats: all politics and no principle on Iraq

For quite some time now, I’ve been writing that the Democrats’ failure to articulate a position on Iraq is an abrogation of leadership. Now the WashPost acknowledges as much in “Democrats find Iraq alternative is elusive”:

Around the country, many grass-roots Democrats are clamoring for a quick withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. On Capitol Hill, Democratic politicians have grown newly aggressive in denouncing the Bush administration's war strategy and outlining other options.

But among the Democratic foreign-policy elite, dominated by people who previously served in the top ranks of government, there are stark differences -- and significant vagueness -- about a viable alternative.

In interviews, veteran policymakers offered no end of criticism about how President Bush maneuvered the United States into its present predicament, but only one had a clear vision of what he would do if the Iraq problem were handed over to a Democratic administration tomorrow. Several accept Bush's premise that a rapid withdrawal anytime soon would leave Iraq unstable and risk a strategic disaster in the broader Middle East.

The Post identifies Zbigniew Brzezinski as the one with an “unambiguous alternative” of (surprise!) rapid withdrawal. Over at InDC Journal, Dorkafork reviews the “National Security Vision” cooked up by some Democratic congressmen and concludes: “This is the same as the Republican plan. Except the Democrats are going to train Iraqi units faster, somehow. Maybe with magical troop training rays.” Also, be sure to read the simultaneous endorsement/condemnation of the United Nations.