"Our soldiers are unqualified to combat the freedom fighters who see us as hostile invaders and ruthless killers that we are. We need to convince the insurgents that we love them, rather than alienate them with bullets and what not," the letter stated, proposing to replace U.S. troops in Iraq with a small contingent of Care Bears who would send a message of love and caring throughout the Middle East.

Many in the military and in the Bush White House have cast an immediate and abruptly skeptical eye on the plan. While we have seen no official comment from the Pentagon, several issues have been raised by laymen that require further analysis.

"The success of the Care Bears in dealing with Professor Coldheart has been well documented, but will they succeed in Iraq?" says Wesley Clark, a retired four-star general who currently leads a political action committee Securing America. "I'm not even sure the Care Bears would want to leave Care-a-lot for deployment."

Every Care Bear wears a bright-colored tummy picture that tells the world its name and special area of caring. While this is helpful in civilian areas, it may prove a hindrance in a combat zone. In addition, the patented "Care Bear Stare," so often used to great effect by the squad, may be in conflict with the Geneva Conventions.

Herb Finkler of the non-partisan ACLU states, "The Care Bear stare is clearly a psychological weapon with a severe long-term effect. To use this weapon on men whose only crime is desiring to detonate themselves in a crowded market is unconscionable."

While the details and efficacy of the plan remain up in the air, one thing is clear. The Democrats are not the party of "cut and run," but are indeed the party most interested in an effective and humane outcome in Iraq.