After returning from his fourth trip to Iraq:

"It is a war between 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists ... who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern" - Senator Joseph Lieberman in The Wall Street Journal

What are your thoughts?

At the rate we are killing them ("about twenty enemy dead for each American loss" according to a quote supplied by Scotty), we have already killed about 40,000 of them. This last 20% is certainly doing the work of many times their actual numbers, or just maybe somebody's numbers are wrong. The Iinsurgency's activities don't seem to be slowing down, do they? Of course, if we create more terrorists by our own activity, as many in and out of the government (our government, that is) say we are doing, then defeating the insurgency by military means appears to be impossible. Of course, we always have the option of jsut leaving and saying we accomplished our objectives, whatever they may be at that time. (Our objectives do seems to change, don't they.)

Lieberman is just giving his opinion and his opinion doesn't mirror those of many Democrats -including myself.

I have a good bit of respect for Lieberman at this point. I've heard enough people who just want to shoot down every possible approach. He is a democrat and voted for sending troops to Iraq and now he seems to be doing something to help the effort. I'm really sick of partisan politics... I may despise the Bush administration but this mess has to be cleaned up by someone.

Senator Lieberman is a very good senator, and he is a very good man from what I know of him. (Living very close to his state) I hold a lot of respect for the man. He does not play partisan politics often, and stands up for what he believes to be right.

I have always thought Lieberman to be a good man, as are many Congressman ( but not all) on both sides of the aisle. However, good men can make mistakes, just as bad men can. I feel he is wrong now. I do want to clear up a misconception however. Lieberman did not vote to send troops to Iraq. No Senator did. What he voted for was to give permission to the presdient to use his own judgement in deciding whether or not to send troops to Iraq. Basically, the vote was to trust or not to trust Bush to make a rational decision based on facts. Whether you feel, at this point, if the Senate made a good decision in that vote depends on how you feel about information that has come out after the invasion. But the Congressional vote was most certainly not a delaration of war. Votes in favor of giving Bush the authority could have been cast with the intent of showing Saddam just how serious the US was.

Only a fool pulls a gun without the intent of using it if necesary, and only a fool doesn't recognize that fact when the gun is pointed at him. There are a great deal of dead people who made one of those two mistakes, and even more innocent victims who had no say in the matter.