It's nice to hear politicians talking about ending the occupation, but we're not going to be able to to deal with the disaster we've created until we face the fact that our nation has illegally and immorally invaded and occupied a sovereign nation for no better reason than taking control of their resources & building military bases on their land so that we can control their neighbors.
We need to stop whining about our good intentions and the sacrifices of our "heroes" and acknowledge that we've made some grave & dangerous mistakes. It's painfully clear that we cannot solve these problems when we can't even accurately identify what they really are!I'm afraid the statesmanship necessary to heal these wounds no longer resides here.
I myself would support Edwards; he thinks! And that's a start

More pompous, calculated, triangulated, vacuous blah-blah from another politician...

Two notable, laughable, remarks:

"democracy is also a responsibility. Brave Americans have fought for it again and again..."

With the arguable exception of WWII, can you give me any examples?

"...we should take action to support our troops, end the war, and bring them home to the heroes' welcome they deserve..."

They aren't heroes, they are victims - of our education and indoctrination systems, of our race-to-the bottom, unlivable-wage economy, and of ideological charlatains and swindlers.

The "heroes" are the millions who risked livlihoods and lost friends taking a stand against this vile war from the very start. Will the ever get recognition?

I agree with PJD but would add one thing.
Those who opposed this latest or any of the other wars have all been vindicated by the US losses of those senseless, costly, vain and inglorious endeavors.
If you are "right" you need no recognition from anyone else but yourself.

Yellow Horse

This isn't a war, its organized assassination against a helpless country. The only heroes in American wars were those who fought in the Revolution and the Confederates who fought valiantly for four long years in a lost cause. We have never run the risk of ultimate disaster, but if we keep this one up, we may lose what's left of our rights and democracy on our way to the fall of a military empire.

"This isn't a war, its organized assassination against a helpless country."

I see it more as a mugging.

There are no good wars. None of the people over there are heroes. They're just dupes and fuel for a war-mongering money machine.

I want to like John Edwards, but I just don't think he takes a strong enough stand on anything and thusly wouldn't really bring about much if any positive change.

Such pretty words. I think I'll send another email to my Reps, and maybe leave a comment on a board somewhere, right before I fill my Hummer with Exxon gas on the way to a FOX lecture on balanced journalism, which will be followed by a quick McMeal, a few hours of TIVOed "Idol," and a handful of Latest Sleep Aid. Everybody now: "God Bless America. Land that I love..." Oh, and don't worry, we'll talk about that so-called war thingy after the summer. Right, Mr. Edwards?

"That's why I am asking the American people this weekend to give something in return for the sacrifice of the fallen...and to let our government know we want to honor our troops by ending the war and bringing them home."

This is John Edwards right? John Kerry's running buddie in last years elections. John Kerry, the war vet, who knows all about the hell and destruction that war brings. John Kerry, who voted for the this illegal and immoral war, and when he was called on that vote during the elections, could only come up with something like this:

I voted for this war because it was the right thing to do. I agree with George Bu$h on going to war, but not on the actual way it was executed. I would have used diplomacy; gone to the United Nation and had a concerted effort to attack Iraq (Even though the UN flatly refused to sanction the war, which makes the war illegal and Bush a war criminal. John Kerry actually thought the world was going to support him and join him in this war against a defenseless country that had no nuclear weapons or links to terrorist and September 11th) No, John Kerry would have done it right, He would have invaded Iraq with more troops and with these two elements in place, Iraq would have been a resounding success, Iraqis would be happy and grateful for being occupied and the whole world would have been in harmony.

Now John Edwards is criticizing George Bush for keeping the troops there. Now he wants "to honor the memory of the fallen by acting, as patriots, to honor troops today-to end the war and bring them home."

What can I say? Where was his concern for our troops during the elections? As our troops were dying, he was supporting John Kerry's way of "winning" the war. Flip Flop according to the political environment. Sad really, but what can we expect from a politicians.

No, those people did not and are not "fighting for our freedom." They are killing machines out destroying the world. They have been sacrificed; most of them from birth by the beatings of their ignorant, disgusting parents; but they do not deserve to be celebrated. In fact, what they do need is some actual recompense against the politicians, parents, teachers et. all who conspired to steal their lives from them; I'm not going to pretend it was my fault, and that I did it because of my desire for "freedom." The military is scum, and I really wish the left would feel free to fucking say that more often like they used to. In fact, I also wanted to vomit when the last presidential election was made into a big case about draft-dodging and going to Vietnam; personally, if I was alive then, you better beleive I wouldn't have gone; and you were a really fucking weak person if you did. The draft-dodgers were the heroes, and that is who I would want to vote for. Damn that war...

http://www.dreamingearth.net

"Oh my gosh! Jingoism isn't the problem... It's the solution!"

:->

Honor, sacrifice, patriotism, bravery will just be transmuted into ruthlessness by the next jacka**.

What this country needs is compassion.

Self serving treacle. The blood is still all over your hands, Mr. Edwards.

This kind of opportunistic rhetoric shows why we need Kucinich and Gravel in the race.

It seems to me that Edwards is trying to use a national holiday that has people's respect to basically get out an anti-Iraq war message along with a support-the-soldiers message. What other candidate for 2008 has spoken so clearly, early, loudly against the war, except for Kucinich? (Yes, Kucinich was against it in 2002 and 2003 and I applaud that. Edwards voted for it, but has has the capacity to admit he was wrong.I like that in a leader.) I say, give John Edwards some credit and respect.

You really are a pomous, vapid ass aren't you? I have sent more that one e-mail to you directly and have not once had you address any of the issues that I presented, other than skirting them in true politician style. I for one am not going to cast another vote for another issue-skirting, word-pandering, self serving politician.

All this Edwards berating is not going to help elect Kucinich. Thinking back, in the Iowa caucus of 04 their campaigns directed their supporters to support each other. So you see politicians are much less pure than some of their followers.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0119-07.htm
The result was Edwards benefited as far as I can tell. He received 32% of the delegates behind Kerry's 37%.

I for one will be going for Edwards in the Iowa caucus of 08 again.

Hey Reaper, here's another yes for Edwards-Obama '08.

Who can tell me how many congresspersons did NOT vote for this war? And how many of us agreed with the hype about WMD? If you read the newspapers, you know Hussein was an evil dictator. Most of us bought into the Cheney/Rove/Rumsfeld and their illustrious mouthpiece, PODUS, hype that it was our duty to eliminate Hussein, find those weapons, the ones the UN envoys couldn't locate because they weren't there, and eliminate all those AlQuaeda cells being protected by Iraq's leadership.

After all, we'd been attacked. We needed to get our minds (hearts?) focused back on Bush's agenda and off the fact that our troops were ordered to stop pursuing Bin Laden and focus on the Bush family nemesis.

So can we please get over who voted for this war and who didn't, and start listening to the future leaders of this country?!! Of course, those of you who have never made a mistake in your lives, who are perfect and without need to justify some lame decision (remember college? High school?) please continue to speak freely and loudly about Kerry and Edwards and whomever else you choose.

I prefer to spend my time and energy focused on who can lead our great nation into a positive future.

All of this sh** gives me agita. I voted for Dennis Kucinich in the '04 primary and I'm so glad that I did. This time around however, a ticket with Edwards/Obama looks better and better to me. I've never been this partisan in my freakin' life. George Wallace, that ol' scumbag, (till a bullet to the spine strightened him out) said that there wasn't a "dime's worth of difference between them." At this juncture, I'd say there is about $500 billion dollars worth of difference! We need to (unfortnately) elect the electable. And to my way of thinking, Edwards is the most progressive of the top tier candidates. I'm now running for a couple of antacids because, in a way, I'm ashamed of myself. However, I think we must do what we must do. Peace.

"It has been said that dissent is the highest form of patriotism."

Tell me , Mr Edwards , is there a more effective and unequivocal expression of dissent aimed at the Iraq Occupation than mass desertions by those soldiers making the occupation operational , accompanied or predicated by mass expressions of praise and approval for desertions by all honest Americans , public servants and private citizens?

Using your own words, "direct-action democracy", what could be a more direct challenge to the decider/dictator than a mass , publicly-supporterd desertion.

The sad fact of the matter is that the 'people' who rule the U.S. are corporate, not human. Until something happens to change that, I think there will continue to be very little difference between Republican and Democrat in terms of how they vote, whatever pieties might come out of their mouths.

Those who want Obama as a VP ought to stop and think about what that job means. He might be better as a President, but then what would we do with John Edwards?

Blood IS on Edwards' hands -- but I dare say he's doing the right thing to rectify it here. He's come out clearly to the left of Hillary and Obama and though I'm a Kucinich supporter, I have to say that Edwards would still be a positive force in our political climate.

None of these guys (including Hilary) gives a rat's ass about the troops. They will let them die, three or four a day, for the next ten years in order to get their way in the Middle East. Meanwhile, the Iraqi people bear the brunt of this madness.

I like things about both Edwards and Obama, but I'm not sure which one I lean toward more. I would prefer Kucinich to either of them, but given our system, I don't know if it'll happen. Between the two, which one looks better at this point? I like Edwards the best so far on economic, working-people's issues.

It better not be Hilary, that's all I gotta say. If Hilary is nominated, I'm gonna wrip up my Democratic voter registration and become an independent.

Mr. Edwards would be better off reading Howard Zinn and developing a better understanding of the "honorable troops".

John Edwards is a fraud and a DLC sell out dawg like all the other Democrats in the presidential race except Dennis J Kucinich and Mike Gravel. But Gravel is surely too old at 77 right now to even be considered for all the top office with all its pressures.

It makes me really sad to accept the fact that Kucinich will not receive the nomination from the Democrats even though he is the only voice of sanity in the entire Government. Bill Maher asked him why he was the crazy one and that is the truth - People like Kucinich are assumed to be crazy because he maintains if he becomes President, war will not be an option. Americans find this hard to digest because the culture of war and militarization of our lives is so deeply embedded within the American psyche that they are not willing to support someone who disagrees who heartedly with bloodshed.

Obama has been against war and was protesting the war right at the begining when he was not a Senator. So I will give him a benefit of doubt and hope that he continues his campaign against our tyrannical foreign policies against nations of the world. I sincerely hope though that Clinton does not make it through because we will be facing another war by the end of 2008.