Senator Jay Rockefeller is suddenly worried that the US shouldn't be using harsh, condemning language against Iran. He says we have weak intel and do not understand the Iranians. It reminds him of the rhetoric used in the run up to the invasion of Iraq.
Harry Reid has also warned the President not to take action against Iran without first seeking Congressional approval.
Newsweek's Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball shed some light on why the Democrats seem suddenly concerned about Iran:
Jan. 24, 2007 - Why is the Bush administration escalating its accusations that Iran is backing Shiite extremists inside Iraq?
One reason: mounting intelligence indicating Tehran has been supplying insurgents with electronic sensors that trigger roadside bombs used against U.S. troops.
More precisely, these passive infrared sensors will allow the insurgents to stay one step ahead of our ability to detect the deadly IED. The cheap little killing and maiming opinion maker is too valuable a tool for the enemy to guit using. The most expensive thing about an IED is the human expense of paying someone $200-$300 to bury one on a roadside. The rewards of a successful IED attack far outweigh the costs. Targets are either killed outright or severely injured. Either way, it's very costly to the US and its allies both in money or morale. The enemy gets a lot of bang for its buck. A lot of bang.
A case is being made against the Iranians and the Democrats are alarmed. What would George Patton think? Yellow cowards?