This issue has alredy been touched on by member ToddHill but I wanted to also add my own two cents into the issue:

The Democrats have finally come out with a national security plan, and it's only, you know, about two years late to save them from being labeled weak on security during last years elections. You would never know that the democrats released anything out into the public , even though they had a good, 40 minute press conference on this very subject yesterday, because as O'Reilly screams, the media is so liberally biased. But at least there is a platform now that state democrats can take to their local races and use as a way to shove down the all too predictable Republican Orwellian doublespeak claiming 'If you want to keep the terrorists away and save your little children! Vote for us!' you can bet they are going to be spewing to save their majority come this November's election. The Republicans sure must have thought they had the whole security debate shored up after the last election because there sure haven't been any raises or drops in the color coded terror alert system in the past year and a half.

However, I'm not going to give the democrats too much credit for their plan. If anything, in my opinion, it doesn't go nearly far enough.

Democrats surely get kudos for these sections of their National Security Plan:

• Enact a GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century that guarantees our troops -- active, reserve, and retired -- our veterans, and their families receive the pay, health care, mental health services, and other benefits they have earned and deserve.
• Eliminate Osama Bin Laden, destroy terrorist networks like al Qaeda, finish the job in Afghanistan, and end the threat posed by the Taliban.
• Immediately implement the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission including securing national borders, ports, airports and mass transit systems.
• Prevent outsourcing of critical components of our national security infrastructure -- such as ports, airports and mass transit -- to foreign interests that put America at risk.
• Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds by combating the economic, social, and political conditions that allow extremism to thrive; lead international efforts to uphold and defend human rights; and renew longstanding alliances that have advanced our national security objectives.



I personally think these are great ideas that have been thrown around before, usually on the fringe of the debate, but are lost in the shrill attack dog mentality the Republicans have used to control national security discussion. I love how they mention Osama Bin Laden in there, because catching him was not only one of the initial purposes of the war on terror, but also reminding the American people that Bush has all but forgot about Bin Laden and rarely mentions him anymore will dramatically affect the republicans stance All of these are great ideas, and even though I know to deal with the average joe America you need to reduce political plans to near slogan like statements, I would definitely like more specifics on how they are going to implement these things.

Democrats however, definitely have a few weak spots/unrealistic spots in their plan I do not agree with:

On Iraq they would:

• Ensure 2006 is a year of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with the Iraqis assuming primary responsibility for securing and governing their country and with the responsible redeployment of U.S. forces. Insist that Iraqis make the political compromises necessary to unite their country and defeat the insurgency; promote regional diplomacy; and strongly encourage our allies and other nations to play a constructive role. Hold the Bush Administration accountable for its manipulated pre-war intelligence, poor planning and contracting abuses that have placed our troops at greater risk and wasted billions of taxpayer dollars.


While they mention a responsible redeployment of US forces, does that mean they are going to follow Senator Murtha's plan and withdraw troops and redeploy them to Kuwait and other areas off the coast of the gulf? This doesn't say. I also think defeating the insurgency is a highly unrealistic plan if we are going to keep American forces in Iraq at all.

On Energy Independence:
• Increase production of alternate fuels from America's heartland including bio-fuels, geothermal, clean coal, fuel cells, solar and wind; promote hybrid and flex fuel vehicle technology and manufacturing; enhance energy efficiency and conservation incentives.


That's nice but there are smarter ways of saving energy and reducing our dependence on Mideast oil. How about reviving our cities and making them more livable thereby reducing the need for a McMansion suburban, commuter lifestyle. One of the biggest wastes of energy I believe our nation faces is so many people flee cities to live 10, 20, 30 or more miles away. America needs to face the fact that we as a people destroy our own country, and increase our dependence on oil, through our insistence that we should have huge houses and acres upon acres of lawn, and that we shouldn't need to have a neighbor near us for miles if we so choose. While the suburban lifestyle has surely spread to other countries, this doesn't excuse America for its flagrant waste of energy and the pollution it creates by encouraging such a uneconomical lifestyle. What's worse, is that as more Americans move out of the cities, people keep moving farther and farther out sot that they can have the room they so crave. It's been shown countless times that the 8million plus populated New York uses far less electricity than entire states in the Southeast and other areas.

I'd like to see democrats bring up legislation that will increase mass transit, economic incentives for businesses in cities; and legislation that help city councils and mayors with proposals that will help in crime reduction, in affordable housing, in cultural opportunities, in progressive education for kids, amongst other things. That's an important energy idea that is missing in the debate today.

Also some issues not even mentioned in the Democratic Plan I'd like to see included are:

• A renewal to international law and treaties such as the Geneva Convention that have been flagrantly disregarded under the Bush Administration.
• Create a multinational alliance of nations, similar to NATO that would assist each other in working to eliminate terrorist groups upon multiple levels, including influencing the political, economic, and cultural scene in regions of hostile activity-as well as militarily..
• The elimination of the idea that America must spread democracy as its legacy, but rather should allow nations and the people to choose their own type of government
• Paying back foreign debt and the trade deficit, especially loans given to us by hostile regimes and China so that we will be less at risk for a foreign government being able to dictate policy issues in our country simply because they own so much of us.
• Closing Guantanamo bay and the prison camps in Eastern Europe.
• Dispute and change the debate back from a good versus evil war to a war faught on rational thought.

These are just a few ideas of mine. I am glad the democrats are out there with a platform that can battle the Republican national security vision and hopefully remove their last stronghold on the body politics support, but I really do think we need to farther, that we could go much farther into reshaping America and how we handle the threats of the 21st century, At least though, this is one step there.