Just a thought.... 
Q To sum up, your description of Congress and some of the actions being taken -- would it be fair to say that congressional Democrats are being irresponsible on this?... won't negotiate... they're wrong... safe haven... blah ... defeatocrats... blah blah...MR. SNOW: I will let you play politics with it. I'm telling you what the description is. Let me also note something that does not seem to be open to analytical dispute, the idea of precipitate withdrawal -- it was described in the Baker-Hamilton report, the National Intelligence Estimate. The idea of simply saying at some early date we are simply going to get out -- that has been described as a policy that would have devastating consequences, creating a vacuum within Iraq, making it very difficult for the government to survive; also creating the possibility of a safe haven for al Qaeda within Iraq, creating opportunities for the terror network, and in addition, creating aftershocks in the war on terror that would make our lives less secure from a personal safety standpoint, economically. It would also weaken the United States diplomatically around the world.
blah blah blah...
"Well DUH!", you're thinking. "Get 'em out of there - and Afghanistan too - NOW!"
Part of the frustration that we defeatocrats feel is that no one in the opposition leadership is offering any real resistance to the neocons - no real counterpoints or plans. Nothing with which to battle the con's brazen daily bullshit.
Their assertions: Devastating Consequences, Vacuum in Iraq, Difficult for the Government to Survive
Okay - let's roll these into one argument. It seems to me that what they're trying to convince us of is that if we just pull out, Iraq will devolve into a smoking hole of anarchy. Or worse, a caliphate ruled by religious whackos (which is their implication).
Well it's kind of hard to argue with this because we all know that that's exactly what will happen. Is likely to happen. Will probably happen. And it's their knowledge that we know this that keeps the Democrats back on their heels and scrambling for footing.
But what if, what if we tried it and Cheney's worst nightmare came true: the insurgency simply hid out and waited for us to leave?
Wow! What an opportunity! I mean if we setup, say, an 18 month timetable to be gone, we could build all kinds of hospitals and schools and power plants and water plants and oil pumps and an enormous number of infrastructure type "things" that would go a long ways toward "fixing" things.
More assertions:
Safe Haven for al Qaeda in Iraq™, Terror Networks, Aftershocks in the War On Terror®
Let's give Cheney some credit for knowing "stuff" - he's been privy to a LOT of intelligence in his life so maybe, just maybe he knows what he's talking about. Let's set a deadline and when the Iraqi militants kick back for that short period before All Hell Breaks Loose™ let's rebuild the damn country like we said we would - like the average Joe Iraqi assumed we would.
And when we're done spending another ½ trillion or so (and as a taxpayer I feel it's an investment worth the risk) on making things work and making Iraq again livable (like with running water and stuff) - we'll see just how willing the Iraqi people are to live under a theocracy. We'll see if what the Iraqi people really want are terrorists living amongst them, blowing 'em up.
Because it seems to me that if we're gone, and the Iraqi nation once again has something to be proud of (like jobs) and has a period of relative calm (Cheney said so!) the Iraqis themselves can then make a realistic determination on their own future.
So Mr. Cheney (I know one of your minions is reading this) put up or shut up. Try some form of this idea or stop saying that a deadline is bad simply because the "insurgents will just wait for us to leave".
