Also appearing on the show are David Brooks of The New York Times and EJ Dionne of the Washington Post. Topics discussed by Senator Reed: the fact that one way or another, the Senate needs to have a debate about Iraq. Reed also spoke of concerns that the Republicans are going to use delay tactics to put off a vote on Iraq. Reed respectfully disagrees with Senator Joe Lieberman, that the non-binding resolution will have “significant consequences.” He also criticized the President’s State of the Union address, stating that the President “lost his last chance to rally public support” in his “my-way-or-the-highway” tone.

As to the situation in Iraq, Reed contended that we need to begin withdrawal in Iraq by centralizing troops within Iraq, keeping some forces in place so that “neighbors won’t take advantage of the instability.” He also talked about the “ethnic cleansing that we’re all concerned about.” Reed criticized the McCain-Graham resolution, which calls for moving more troops in, as “lacking consequences.”

David Brooks had some interesting comments about starting from the ground in rebuilding Iraq at the grassroots level — acknowledging that you are starting with a “psychology of trauma” in dealing with the Iraqi people. He also asserted that if the Republicans were willing to offer a “regional conference” as part of their plan for Iraq, they would have 70 votes on any resolution. It was not clear (to me) what he meant by that — but it seemed he meant any Republican resolution that called for eventual withdrawal, even if it initially called for moving more troops in.

EJ Dionne talked about long-term concerns of Southern Iraq becoming a close ally of Iran. He also suggested that the US Senate needs to “be abolished or radically reformed.” Brooks asserted that the US Republican party does not want to engage in war with Iran.