The rubber is hitting the road for Democrats and Iraq.

With Dubya about to announce an increase in troops for Iraq, much of the public will be looking to the Democratic Congress to do something, anything, to stop us from digging deeper into civil war.

But if the something isn't well thought-out, it could result in some blowback: Democrats looking like they are clumsily hamstringing the commander-in-chief and making things worse.

For example, there's talk now of legislation requiring congressional approval for troop increases, or a cap on troop levels.

There's a danger here in getting bogged down in tactics, instead of articulating alternative strategic goals for the entire region.

The tactical path is full of potential traps.

Insist on congressional approval for troop increases? Bush could call the bluff, and probably peel off enough Dems to get approval -- now it's a bipartisan escalation.

Cap troop levels? Now you're open to charges (already leveled by Pat Buchanan on MSNBC last night) of micromanaging the war and worse, "staying the course" by allowing troop levels to stay the same.

Bush is announcing a tactical shift, so it's tempting to respond in kind.

This is not to say that recent comments by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Ted Kennedy are wrong. They are at least showing that Democrats are looking to use whatever power they have to change course.

But a narrow discussion about tactics will confuse the public about what Democrats would do if they were fully in charge and could implement their own strategic vision of promoting credible democracy and eradicating poverty abroad. The discussion must be broadened.

Ideally, Democrats shoud respond by passing defense budget legislation that spells out such a strategy: renouncing permanent bases, refocusing troops on counterterrorism, supporting Iraqi-led reconstruction, beefing up regional diplomacy.

Of course, Bush will ignore such legislation and spend the money as he likes.

But Bush will ignore whatever Democrats do. That's not the point. He's going to keep us in Iraq come 2008 no matter what, so long as he's President.

The point is to make it clear to the public that Democrats are trying to change the course, have a plan to change the course, and if the course isn't changed, that's all on the shoulders of Bush and his supporters.

Then the public knows what it has to do to change the course. Change the occupant in the Oval Office.

And if the public is real fed up, that could even happen before Election Day.