Friedman in the Sunday Times:
I was worried this op-ed would only repeat some of Friedman's discussion on the nation-building project ahead of us in Iraq- but for whatever reason, the article put together thoughts in a nice way, very balanced.
My confusion, though, is this- Friedman's primary point is that this is not the time to abandon Iraq. Clear enough. But his analogy is of parents- Dems and Repubs should not "divorce" now. But later, he stresses the need for a clear, Democratic alternative to the Conservative's plans:

"This administration, with its deep mistrust for diplomacy and diplomats, may be way too ideological and Pentagon-centric for nation-building. We need alternative voices. What is the Democratic view on the proper role of the U.N. or NATO in rebuilding Iraq? How much emphasis do Democrats believe the U.S. should put into the Arab-Israeli peace process to support peace in Iraq? Is a principled and muscular internationalism now the private property of the Republican Party?"

So Democrats should feel free to "divorce" from the Bush plan- in order to construct their own plans, right?
"One senses, though, that liberals so detest Mr. Bush that they refuse to acknowledge the simple good that has come from ending Saddam's tyranny � good for Iraqis and good for America, because it will inhibit other terrorist-supporting regimes. Have no doubt about that. If Democrats' whole analysis of this war is determined by whether or not it helps Mr. Bush, then they are never going to play the role they must play � constructive critics of how we rebuild Iraq."

I think the point is that Democrats should not be overly concerned with how their position on Iraq will play out in the press. I fully agree.
But not all the Dems are so concerned. John Edwards, for instance. More, maybe, in him later.
Finally though, Friedman points out the problem of oversimplification.
"We have not fully liberated Iraq yet � we have created the conditions for its liberation. That is still hugely significant. But the feelings of Iraqis right now are a jumble of liberation, hope and gratitude, mixed with anxiety, humiliation, fear of lawlessness, fear of one another, grief for sons killed in the war and suspicion of America. Conservatives, though, are so intent on proving George Bush right and liberals wrong � so the Bush team can drive its radical right agenda at home � they have rushed to impose a single liberation story line on this much more complex reality."

If we have a media that allows such oversimplification, though, how are the Democrats ever going to present the subtle and complex ideas that are needed in times like this. Iraq presents a problem that will be solved only by such measures...ie, something beyond dragging statues around. I have confidence serious Democrats, (and well meaning Republicans) would like to present the complexities needed. I doubt the media, nor their campaign advisors, will let them.