Biden emerges as Dems' foreign policy expert

[1corona4u]

(or, as it should have been titled, Biden now recgonized as Dem's foreign policy expert)


By Rod Boshart

The Gazette

DES MOINES — Six-term Delaware Sen. Joe Biden is aware he might not score the win in Iowa's leadoff Democratic presidential caucuses in January, but he hopes to grab a much-coveted bounce.

For a politician struggling to keep pace with his party's well-funded rock stars, Biden knows that wearing the better-than-expected label out of Iowa sometimes can catch the fancy of independent-minded voters in follow-up primary states, create national media buzz and propel an also-ran to the top tier.

Key to his success in mustering that slingshot effect in Iowa will be his ability to persuade war-weary caucus-goers to focus their choices on which 2008 candidate offers the best hope, expertise and experience for stabilizing an unstable world.

If he can do that — given that as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee he is regarded as having the best foreign policy and national security credentials among the Democratic field — Biden likes his chances come Jan. 3.

"The best thing I could possibly do is try to establish as my franchise that I have the greatest depth and breadth of knowledge about the things that worry the public the most," he said. "I've kind of captured that ground."

The political veteran said he can sense "there's pace on the ball" in Iowa, but whether that support builds fast enough or far enough remains to be seen during the crucial decision-making window.

"I have no doubt in my mind we're moving," Biden, who turned 65 on Tuesday, said in an interview. "There's something real. It's happening. It's tangible. ... I'm a street politician. I'm telling you it's real. They (his rivals) know it's real, too."

Biden's Iowa supporters point to recent debates where other Democrats defer to his foreign policy stances — especially his plan to bring a political solution in Iraq — as evidence he is emerging as the right choice at this volatile juncture in U.S. and world history.

"Iraq is by far the single most important issue facing America today, and Joe Biden has the most credible plan to get us out without causing further chaos," said Iowa House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, D-Des Moines.

McCarthy, one of 13 Iowa legislators to endorse Biden, said he was sold on the Delaware senator because of his "unmatched" foreign policy experience, his expansive Senate record, his passion and the fact that he just plain likes the guy.

Paulee Lipsman, a highly regarded Iowa Democratic operative and former national committee member who backed Biden's ill-fated 1987 presidential bid, said she realized he was the best choice again 20 years later after watching debates with her 91-year-old father and noticing he kept commenting that Biden was doing the best job and offering answers that made the most sense.

"There are times when your father's right and this is one of them," she said.

Biden ran for president in 1987, but that bid fell victim to controversy over an Iowa speech in which he was accused of plagiarizing and embellishing material from British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock. After withdrawing from the race, it was established that he had properly credited Kinnock in other speeches but failed to do so in an Iowa address that was recorded and made available to the media by aides of a Democratic rival.

But it was the way he handled that controversy and personal challenges in his life that landed him the endorsement of the Storm Lake Times, which editorialized that Biden showed himself to be a person of integrity because he "did not run and hide and deny and hedge."

"We will never forget the classy way in which he ended that race," the Storm Lake newspaper stated. "What appeared to be his major political foible is to us one of his strengths: humility, and a surprising lack of vanity."

After that disappointing experience, Biden said he focused on making an impact in the Senate via policy. He worked on landmark bills on crime, violence against women, civil rights and education, and became his party's chief spokesman on foreign policy.

The aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks convinced him the Bush administration was taking America "in a direction that was disastrous" internationally, and he worked hard to get 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry elected with an expectation he would become Kerry's secretary of state.

With a wide-open presidential race in the offing, Biden said his family convinced him "it was either put up or shut up" in 2008. "I made the decision that if I lose, I'm going to lose on my own terms," he said.

Family holds a special place for Biden, the product of the working-class coal towns of Scranton, Pa., and Claymont, Del.

He often quotes his parents and grandfather during his stump speeches and speaks fondly of his first wife, Neilia — who was killed, along with their daughter Naomi, in a car accident shortly after he was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1972 — and rebuilding his career and his life with his wife of 30 years, Jill, and his family. His sons, Beau and Hunter, were seriously injured in that accident but made full recoveries.

Biden was sworn into office from their bedside at age 30 as the fifth-youngest U.S. senator in history and began a practice of making daily train commutes from his home in the Wilmington suburbs to Washington.

He also faced and survived life-threatening surgery for a brain aneurysm — events that shaped who he is today and how he approaches life's challenges.

"It's reinforced my faith. It has given me a sense of equanimity and proportion that I don't think I would have had otherwise, and it's given me confidence that I can handle any crisis — any crisis, any," Biden said.

"These things either make you stronger or they break you, and it's not unique to me," he added. "It's given me a clear sense of who I am and what's important."

http://www.gazetteonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071124/IOWACAUCUS/711240023/1011/IOWACAUCUS

[KingOfLostSouls]

1. We need a foreign policy expert

cause lord knows we've seen how badly "on the job training" can fail america.

with joe biden, theres no such thing as a "a 90 day training period." he's the real deal and I'm excited to see a Biden debate against the republican roadkill in the general election





YO JOE!!!!

[K Gardner]

2. The article says it all. K&R

[justinrr1]

4. We need Biden as our nominee

and as our President

[Wetzelbill]

3. He is, and he's smart...

but he definitely has questionable judgement on foreign policy. His knowledge is impressive, but what he sometimes does with it, not so much. All in all, I like the guy. but I wouldn't vote for him in a Dem primary.

[1corona4u]

5. Funny....

I don't question his foreign policy at all. I'm one of those people who think his plan for Iraq, is the viable one....not that anyone else even has one yet. I like his stance on China, Pakistan, Iran, and since he already knows all of the world leaders, he's a shoe-in. No OJT needed.

[Wetzelbill]

6. it's not a viable plan

not really. And his idea of leaving that many residual troops is pure folly. Biden doesn't take into account certain things, like he understands the differences in the country, but they aren't as clear cut as he says they are. Partition is too risky, it would creat mini-states that would have incentives to war with each other, amd may induce more violence in the end. It may not, but it probably isn't worth the risk. And any mini-warring states would then create problems for their natural allies or enemies in the region. For example, a warring Kurdistan would have an even bigger problem with Turkey, and the ally of any mini-state they war with, such as Iran or Sauda Arabia. The de facto partition brought about in the Balkans by the Dayton Agreement, and a basic model of how Biden wants to do things, was set about under different circumstances and in a different situation. So yeah, it might work, maybe, but it probably isn't worth the risk. Not a good idea overall.

But if you unquestioningly follow the foreign policy word of a guy who voted for the Iraq War resolution, well, that says quite a bit. I don't think anybody should blindly follow any politician's word, even ones with much more credibility than Joe Biden has on these issues.

[1corona4u]

7. So, what's your solution...

you seem to see all the alleged flaws...how about you throw out a viable plan...

[Wetzelbill]

11. there isn't a good one

But Kucinich for four years has consistently had the best idea. But, they aren't alleged flaws. They are simply flaws. And when you look at the viability of a plan, which I was doing, that's what you point out. I thought the partition might work, well before Biden advocated it, I was for the general idea for a long time, and to an extent, I still am. But you have to take into account certain relationships between the various factions. For example, the country isn't clear cut set into three different groups. They are intermarried etc. What happens to those families when two mini-states have a conflict with each other? Those mixed families, wherever they end up living risk getting caught up in a bad situation, possibly even genocide. That's what happened in the Balkans too, until eventually the population was sufficiently ethnically cleansed that a partition worked. Oh that's it, that's how Biden's plan will work, we'll wait another few years until the ethnic cleansing is complete, so that a clean soft partition will be viable. Good idea. Although, I'll give the Bush Administration credit, they've already let enough go so that Biden's plan might have a shot of working right now.

[1corona4u]

14. Ahh....

fuzzy picture getting clearer now....you support DK.

Conversation over.

[Wetzelbill]

15. why because he's been consistently right

and Biden has been consistently wrong?

So what part of not going to war with Iraq in the first place is bad judgement? Sure Biden can talk all day about stuff, but in the end when you make the wrong decision, that doesn't truly matter. But you never seriously challenged anything I said, so yeah, it is over.

[1corona4u]

16. No....

because DK supporters are relentless in their pursuit to make every other candidate look bad, or unqualified. DK couldn't even manage the city of Cleveland, and yet, he thinks he's qualified to be pres. I have no intention of arguing back and forth all day, with people who's minds are closed to any other candidate. DK has a couple of things right, but the way he goes about it is wrong. He has as much chance of winning the presidency this year, as he had the last time.

[PatSeg]

17. It is NOT a partition

Some commentators have either misunderstood the Plan, or mischaracterized it. Here is what the plan is - and what it is not:

1. The Plan is not partition.

In fact, it may be the only way to prevent a violent partition - which has already started -- and preserve a unified Iraq. We call for a strong central government, with clearly defined responsibilities for truly common interests like foreign policy and the distribution of oil revenues. Indeed, the Plan provides an agenda for that government, whose mere existence will not end sectarian violence.

2. The Plan is not a foreign imposition.

To the contrary, it is consistent with Iraq's constitution, which already provides for Iraq's 18 provinces to join together in regions, with their own security forces, and control over most day-to-day issues. On October 11, Iraq's parliament approved legislation to implement the constitution's articles on federalism. Prior to the British colonial period and Saddam's military dictatorship, what is now Iraq functioned as three largely autonomous regions.

But federalism alone is not enough. To ensure Sunni support, it is imperative that Iraqis also agree to an oil revenue sharing formula that guarantees the Sunni region economic viability. The United States should strongly promote such an agreement. The final decisions will be up to Iraqis, but if we do not help them arrange the necessary compromises, nothing will get done. At key junctures in the past, we have used our influence to shape political outcomes in Iraq, notably by convincing the Shiites and Kurds to accept a provision allowing for the constitution to be amended following its adoption, which was necessary to secure Sunni participation in the referendum. Using our influence is not the same as imposing our will. With 140,000 Americans at risk, we have a right and an obligation to make known our views.

3. The Plan is not an invitation to sectarian cleansing.

Tragically, that invitation has been sent, received and acted upon. Since the Samarra mosque bombing in February, one quarter of a million Iraqis have fled their homes for fear of sectarian violence, at a rate now approaching 10,000 people a week. That does not include hundreds of thousands of Iraqis - many from the professional class - who have left Iraq since the war. Only a political settlement, as proposed in the Plan, has a chance to stop this downward spiral.

4. The Plan is the only idea on the table for dealing with the sectarian militia.

It offers a realistic albeit interim solution. Realistic, because none of the major groups will give up their militia voluntarily in the absence of trust and confidence and neither we or the Iraqi government has the means to force them to do so. Once federalism is implemented, the militias are likely to retreat to their respective regions to protect their own and vie for power, instead of killing the members of other groups. But it is only an interim solution, because no nation can sustain itself peacefully with private armies. Over time, if a political settlement endures, the militia would be incorporated into regional and national forces, as is happening in Bosnia.

5. The Plan is an answer to the problem of mixed cities.

Large cities with mixed populations present a challenge under any plan now being considered. The essence of the Plan is that mixed populations can only live together peacefully if their leadership is truly satisfied with the overall arrangement. If so, that leadership will help keep the peace in the cities. At the same time, we would make Baghdad a federal city, and buttress the protection of minorities there and in the other mixed cities with an international peacekeeping force. Right now, the prospect for raising such a force is small. But following a political settlement, an international conference and the establishment of a Contact Group, others are more likely to participate, including countries like Saudi Arabia which have offered peacekeepers in the past.

6. The Plan is in the self-interest of Iran.

Iran likes it exactly as it is in Iraq - with the United States bogged down and bleeding. But the prospect of a civil war in Iraq is not in Tehran's interest: it could easily spill over Iraq's borders and turn into a regional war with neighbors intervening on opposing sides and exacerbating the Sunni-Shiite divide at a time Shiite Iran is trying to exert leadership in the Islamic world. Iran also would receive large refugee flows as Iraqis flee the fighting. Iran, like all of Iraq's neighbors, has an interest in Iraq remaining unified and not splitting into independent states. Iran does not want to see an independent Kurdistan emerge and serve as an example for its own restive 5 million Kurds. That's why Iran - and all of Iraq's neighbors -- can and should be engaged to support a political settlement in Iraq.

7. The Plan is in the self-interest of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.

The Sunnis increasingly understand they will not regain power in Iraq. Faced with the choice of being a permanent minority player in a central government dominated by Shiites or having the freedom to control their day-to-day lives in a Sunni region, they are likely to choose the latter provided they are guaranteed a fair share of oil revenues to make their region viable. The Shiites know they can dominate Iraq politically, but not defeat a Sunni insurgency, which can bleed Iraq for years. The Kurds may dream of independence, but fear the reaction of Turkey and Iran - their interest is to achieve as much autonomy as possible while keeping Iraq together. Why would Shiites and Kurds give up some oil revenues to the Sunnis? Because that is the price of peace and the only way to attract the massive foreign investment needed to maximize Iraqi oil production. The result will be to give Shiites and Kurds a smaller piece of a much larger oil pie and give all three groups an incentive to protect the oil infrastructure.

http://www.joebiden.com/issues/?id=0009

[1corona4u]

9. You also said;

But if you unquestioningly follow the foreign policy word of a guy who voted for the Iraq War resolution, well, that says quite a bit. I don't think anybody should blindly follow any politician's word, even ones with much more credibility than Joe Biden has on these issues.

Yeah, like who?

[Wetzelbill]

12. well,anybody who had the great foresight to vote for the IWR

Might have suspect judgement to start off with. Unless you think the war was a good idea, because Joe still does, he just thinks we should have had more troops to begin with, and that was another poor idea. At least compared to the right idea anyway.

Well lots of people have more credibility on certain issues than Joe Biden does on FP, and I don't take their word as gospel. If you think that no politician out there on any issue has as much credibility on Biden does on FP, well, good luck with that. I'm not into dogma, I question everything. And I know whose judgement I trust more on any issues, mine, and I guarantee you this, I've been a helluva lot more right about Iraq than Joe Biden has been.

[1corona4u]

13. In further detail, Joe Biden, On Iraq;

JIM LEHRER: Now, the third of our senator conversations this week on leaving Iraq. Judy Woodruff has talked with Democrat Carl Levin and Republican Lindsey Graham. Earlier this evening, she interviewed Joe Biden, Democrat of Delaware, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Senator Biden, thank you for joining us.

SEN. JOE BIDEN (D), Delaware: Happy to be with you, Judy.

JUDY WOODRUFF: The future of Iraq, you spoke on the Senate floor today about the Levin-Reed amendment. It didn't pass, but it would have by next April have all U.S. troops out except for three specific purposes: to defend against al-Qaida; to protect diplomats; and also to train Iraqi troops. How many U.S. troops would it take to do that?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: Probably close to 50,000, Judy, but it's hard to tell. That would be a military decision. When I first wrote that legislation back in January, which became -- it was originally the Biden-Hagel, then it became Levin and Biden, and now it's all the same thing, which is basically to say: Get out of this civil war.

When I spoke to the military, it would be somewhere between 30,000 and 50,000 for a while, assuming you've got a political settlement in addition to getting us out of the cities and the civil war, to just do those functions.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And how long would they have to stay?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: Well, it would depend on how sure the political settlement was. If I can make an analogy, Judy, look at what we did in Bosnia. There was more sectarian violence in Bosnia from Vlad the Impaler to Milosevic than in 5,000 years of history in what's now called Iraq.

And what did we do? We had a thing called the Dayton Accords. We separated the parties. Everybody bought onto the separation, that is the Bosniaks were Muslims, the Croats, and the Serbs, and they bought onto it. We've had for 10 years -- NATO has roughly averaged 20,000 people there. Not one single solitary troop has been killed, thank God, in 10 years. And now they're uniting to become part of Europe.

So it depends on how solid the political agreement among the parties is in order to determine how long or if it makes any sense in keeping any forces there to try to maintain a political settlement, not trying to enter in the midst of a civil war.

The fatal fundamental strategic flaw everybody is making is to think that there's any combination of actions we could take to generate a strong central government, representing all of the factions in Baghdad that was trusted by the Iraqi people.



Challenge of leaving smaller force
JUDY WOODRUFF: But you're aware of the skeptics who say leaving a force behind, whether it's 30,000, 50,000, that size or smaller, invites its own problems, because the challenge of defending themselves would be that much harder?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: Well, I think that's true. Look, Judy, absent something along the lines of a so-called Biden-Gelb plan, where you let Iraq become what its constitution calls for, a federal system, where you separate the parties, give them breathing room and control over their own areas, with a limited central government, but allow local police forces and the Sunni, Shia and Kurdish areas, you give them the control over their education, jobs, et cetera, absent that kind of political settlement, including the equal distribution based on population of the oil, then, in fact, they're right, you'd have to get all troops out.

This is not one of these things -- well, look, here's my problem, Judy. When you listen to a lot of Democrats, they say, "Let's leave and hope for the best, because maybe that will get the Iraqis to come to their senses." And you hear the president say, "Just do more of the same and hand it off to the next guy." None of them offer a political solution.

What is the political solution? As General Hayden said -- and I want to quote him, the head of the CIA -- he said, "The inability of the central government to govern is irreversible." I've been saying that for three years. The fatal fundamental strategic flaw everybody is making is to think that there's any combination of actions we could take to generate a strong central government, representing all of the factions in Baghdad that was trusted by the Iraqi people. It will not happen in your lifetime or mine.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, then, how do you create this three-part government, divided into three provinces, Shia, Sunni and Kurds? How does that get created? Is it done by the Iraqis themselves? Does it have to be imposed from the outside?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: Well, first of all, it's what the Iraqi constitution calls for. The Iraqi constitution in Article One says, "We are a decentralized, federal system." Then in Articles 15, 16 and 17, if I'm not mistaken, it says, "Any one of the 18 governates," the 18 political subdivisions of Iraq, "can join with any other or on their own and become a region." The comparable example would be like a state in the United States of America.

If you become a region, you write your own constitution that can't supersede the federal constitution, but gives you control over your security and all of the apparatus like you do in a state, like the state of Delaware, the state of New York. And so the constitution already says it, number one.

Number two, because we have no credibility any longer in the region, I believe this can only occur -- and I suggested this to Secretary Rice today in my meeting -- if, in fact, you've got the permanent five of the Security Council to call for a regional conference on Iraq, including bringing in all of its neighbors, like we did in Dayton to settle the situation in Bosnia, and agreed on the constitutional construct that the Iraqis have, and have the imperator of the international community.

That's the only way it will be brought about. Absent that, Judy, absent a political settlement, it's either all or nothing. You either get completely out, which is the only option I would choose, or you put a considerably greater number of American forces in there, which is not within our capacity to do so.



Sen. Joe Biden
D-Del.

We try to stay there with 160,000 troops, which we can't. We leave. The place splinters. It won't splinter in three neat parts. It will splinter in six, eight, ten parts. It will splinter along tribal lines.


Consistent with the constitution
JUDY WOODRUFF: So you're talking about a political solution imposed by a U.N.-sponsored regional conference?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: No, not imposed. No, a political solution consistent with the Iraqi constitution. What do you have now? You have a group of leaders -- Sunni, Shia and Kurds -- who have a vested interest in each trying to struggle to gain total control. Yet there are a number of people with -- my eight trips in and out of Afghanistan and Iraq -- a number of Sunni, Shia and Kurds, tribal leaders, who are very interested in the idea of having more local control, as long as there is a central government that has control over the army, the borders, and the distribution of the oil revenues.

Now, you say they won't do that. Well, they will do that if they understand that getting -- the Kurds get 50 percent of $10 now, figuratively speaking, whereas if there were a political settlement, they could get 40 percent of $10,000, because no major oil company is going to invest in Iraqi oil in those wells, which need $60 billion put into the ground over time in order to be able to generate the kind of wealth that's there. But we have no imaginative diplomacy, Judy. We're doing none of this.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And, Senator, you're not concerned -- and just quickly here, there's so many questions about this -- but about the Shia province aligning itself with Iran?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: No, I'm not.

JUDY WOODRUFF: The Kurdish province becoming a problem with Turkey?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: No, it's a problem with Turkey only if it splits up. Here's the alternative, Judy. We try to stay there with 160,000 troops, which we can't. We leave. The place splinters. It won't splinter in three neat parts. It will splinter in six, eight, ten parts. It will splinter along tribal lines.

And then that's when the Kurds declare independence, and that's when the Turks attack them. But if they're a republic within a country with defined borders, that's the only hope for Turkey and the only hope for the Kurds. And if you take a look at what's going on with the Shia, the reason why it makes sense to localize it is you have five different militias or Shia battling with one another. Here you have Sadr in a life-and-death fight with the other militia in that area, and they're not all going to side with or even a majority of them with Iran.



Sen. Joe Biden
D-Del.

God only knows what happens between Barzani and Talabani in the north with the Kurds. So you're going to see chaos, and there's going to be a lot of people that will die.


Ultimately leaving Iraq
JUDY WOODRUFF: So how do you decide, Senator, whether to leave U.S. troops there or not?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: If there's a political settlement and the international community's imperator is on it, and it's real, I leave troops there. If there is no political settlement, all the king's horses and all of king's men can't put Iraq together. My son, whose likely to be going over there with his unit next year, they've gotten the notification as a captain, I don't want him going.

But guess what? I don't want my grandson going 15 years from now. And how we leave, what we leave behind will determine whether our grandkids go. But we'll have no choice, in my view, absent a political settlement, no choice but ultimately completely leave Iraq.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And what responsibility do you think the United States has to the people of Iraq after it leaves, whether there's a U.S. troop force left or not?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: It has a serious responsibility it will not be able to meet. It will not be able to meet. Let's be honest with one another, Judy. When the American forces leave, absent a political accommodation among the parties, with the international community signing onto it, which is the reason why it could be enforced, just like it was in Bosnia, without that, what's going to happen?

You're going to see the fraction -- you're going to see four or five major Sunni militias killing each other. You're going to see -- I mean, Shia. You're going to see a couple in Anbar province. God only knows what happens between Barzani and Talabani in the north with the Kurds. So you're going to see chaos, and there's going to be a lot of people that will die.

But the flip of it is, there's not enough American forces, absent a political settlement, to prevent that from happening. And one thing the American people won't tolerate, Judy, they will not tolerate losing their sons and daughters just to keep things from getting worse. They'll tolerate losing their sons and daughters if you're making things considerably better and safer for America and the region in the long run.

Sen. Joe Biden
D-Del.

Well, for this president, information is like the pupil of the eye. The more information you give it, the more tightly he rejects it. He is living in an unrealistic fantasyland about the state of affairs on the ground in Iraq.


The need for accommodation
JUDY WOODRUFF: And finally, what do the Iraq people have to look forward to?

SEN. JOE BIDEN: The Iraqi people have to look forward to a prayer that their leaders begin to understand the need for accommodation, and that the American government will rally the international community to help them enforce their constitution. And right now, with this president, it does not give them much hope. This president seems impervious to the facts.

There's a famous justice, Oliver Wendell Holmes, who once said, "Prejudice is like the pupil of the eye. The more light you shine on it, the more tightly it closes." Well, for this president, information is like the pupil of the eye. The more information you give it, the more tightly he rejects it. He is living in an unrealistic fantasyland about the state of affairs on the ground in Iraq.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Senator Joe Biden, we thank you very much for being with us.

SEN. JOE BIDEN: Thank you, Judy.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Thank you.

JIM LEHRER: Tomorrow night's senator conversation will be with Tennessee Republican Lamar Alexander. He's a co-sponsor of legislation calling for the president to implement the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group.

[ginchinchili]

18. What's Kucinich's plan for Iraq?

You express a concern for the people in Iraq and how Biden's plan leaves them in jeopardy, how does Kucinich's plan alleviate that problem?

Biden is a smart guy and does his research. You say he doesn't take certain things into account. For example, you suggest that Biden thinks that all the groups making up Iraq are clearly distinguishable from each other. We both know this isn't the case with our astute senator. There are very few countries like that anymore. You know that, I know that, and, of course, Sen. Biden knows that. Sen. Biden knows better than you and I that the differences within the Iraqi population involve a lot of overlapping. He envisions something more like we have here--not 3 hard partitions--to be decided by the Iraqi people and is already sanctioned by the Constitution which the Iraqi people's representatives created. Biden's plan allows for as many optional mixes of people as the Iraqis themselves want. The idea is to give the Iraqis as much of the decision making as possible in determining how they'd like to be governed, and since there are so many differing opinions, Biden's plan allows for different locals to be governed differently, with a weaker central government with limited, but specific, responsibilities.

Biden admits that there are plenty of potential pitfalls to this plan, but far fewer than Bush's current "strategy" or just irresponsibly pulling out. It's as viable a plan as any other option available to us, because right now we are stuck, and stuck is where we'll remain until we do something different. At least he's trying and this is not something he scribbled down on the back of a napkin at a bar one night. But you are suggesting that Kucinich has a better idea. Please share it. I'm particularly interested in how he intends to secure the Iraqi people's safety, a major concern you also share.

[NI4NI]

8. good article!

one minor tiny correction.

Claymont De. where I live, is a steel town, and the mill I worked in was where I first met Joe in the parking lot campaigning for his second term.

Later, Joe worked to help keep us from going under like all the Pittsburgh mills did, but it closed down for a few years, until a Chinese Bank re-opened it in the 80's.

[kad7777]

10. JOE BIDEN the right choice for America

I know many of you are sick of this response, but it's critical that I make people aware of Joe's value as our next President. I believe we cannot lose sight that Joe Biden has so much to offer. Much more than any candidate running. Democrat or Republican.

*******************************************************************
In these troubled and dire time we live in, Joe Biden, to me, encompasses all that we desperately need for our nation:

1) Intelligence
2) Experience in ALL phases of government
3) Strength
4) Respect from world leaders
5) Diplomacy
6) Command of issues
7) Solutions to problems that face our nation
8) Honesty
9) Integrity
10) Respect and trust from his peers
11) Respect and trust from the people who follow him
12) an EXPERT in foreign policy

Joe Biden certainly meets ALL of the criteria above.

I pray and hope every day that Mr. & Mrs. America, the people of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina know in their hearts, that if we lose Joe Biden, we'll have lost one of the best Presidents our nation will ever have.

Please watch a video I produced to show my support for Senator Biden. If you support him, please send the link below to family and friends, and ask them to do the same.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4