It is absolutely stunning what the Democrats' new arguments and talking points are. While Kerry has still not said it directly, Edwards implied what the new position on Iraq is: sanctions were working, and all we had to do was keep on going the way we were going. Doug Hattaway, a Kerry surrogate, just said exactly that on the Hannity and Colmes TV show. Obviously, the end result of this argument is that Saddam should have remained in place. This is despite the fact that the Duelfer report explicitly stated in its Key Findings
Saddam Husayn so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent was his alone. He wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when sanctions were lifted.
It may be too long ago for some people to remember, but France, Russia and China, the "allies" that Kerry so loves and respects, were fighting tooth and nail to end the sanctions so that they could once again restart trade with Iraq - not that they ever truly stopped, it turns out.
So Kerry's prescription for Iraq was to let the sanctions expire, let Saddam rearm, and then see what happened. In a post-9/11 world this is about as dangerous a foreign policy as one could propose. Kerry's election, assuming that he governs the way he campaigns, would be disastrous for the Middle East and the United States.