Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Chutzpah

AP is reporting that Kerry has argued that Bush’s policies encourage terrorism:

"The policies of this administration, I believe and others believe very deeply, have resulted in an increase of animosity and anger focused on the United States of America," Kerry told reporters after a campaign meeting with first responders. "The people who are training terror are using our actions as a means of recruitment."

His answer to this and every foreign policy question appears to be greater multi-lateralism, but to what end. He claims to have supported removal of Saddam, but seems unwilling to do anything without the support of the UN, and therefore of the French. But the French were doing quite well with their Oil-for-Food kickbacks from Saddam, and were enjoying the ability to buy oil at submarket rates, so they were surprisingly unwilling to consider removing Saddam.


The real chutzpah, however, came in a statement from Kerry’s spokesman: "I was not a mistake to remove Saddam," Kerry spokesman Phil Singer said. "What was a mistake was the fact that George Bush went to war without our allies, without properly equipping our troops and without a plan to win the peace." No allies? How about Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Thailand, United Kingdom, and Ukraine? Time to invest in a fact checker. That statement, however, was simply an old canard. The real hypocrisy was blaming Bush for failing to equip the troops. After all, it was Kerry and Edwards who voted against the supplemental appropriation that bought body armor for the soldiers. I have yet to see a reasonable explanation of that vote from Kerry or Edwards. They claim it was complicated, but from talking to the troops who depended on that body armor, the vote seems far more simple. The real reason for Kerry’s vote seems obvious: he was getting engaged by the rising Howard Dean anti-war element of his party as the vote approached, and was attempting to appeal to that segment of his party in order to position himself to garner the Democratic nomination. He put politics above the lives of troops on the ground. He is, quite simply, unfit to lead.

Discussions - 8 Comments

By the way, did anybody see Kerry’s "secret plan" for Iraq?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32898-2004Aug1.html?nav%3Drss_politics/elections/2004

"I know what we have to do in Iraq . . . [but] I’m not going to play them in public. I’m not going to play them before I’m president."

Good one. Kerry is such a waffler that he will not even offer a proposal until after the election, for fear of actually having to take a side on the central issue of his campaign. This tells me all I need to know about the kind of "leader" he would be.

This is nonsense. Al Qaeda is starting to eat its own. Who are the terror strikes against? The Iraqis, the Saudis, etc. As we have dialed up the pressure, the terrorists have struck out blindly against other Arabs. Al Qaeda’s popularity as dropped from 96% of Saudi admiring them to less than 25% of that today. Any rational discussion of the effect of our war in Iraq has to include this.

Even though I am pretty sure you will not post this I must say my piece of mind. You mentioned all of these countries that "supported" us in going to war against Iraq, in regards to Spain, you failed to mention that over 90% of Spaniards did not support their prime minister in supporting the U.S. In regards to Honduras, you also fail to mention that the U.S. pretty much controls Honduras with approximately 16 military bases in the country. And trust me, it is not a big country. And in regards to El Salvador and the Dominican Republic, these countries are so dependent in U.S. economic aid that what choice did they have but to support the U.S.

Loren I am looking for some logic here. China is a big country. Since size is the criteria, we should be more concerned that this communist totalitarian state did not support us ? Why is size a criteria? I thought the statement was we did it without allies?

How about you did it without the verbal support of France, Germany and Russia? Isnt that your real complaint. Two of those three could not offer much military support even if they were inclined to do so. The other one is struggling to keep from slipping into a third world economy.

How about the UN being a cesspool of graft in the oil for food mess? Does that bit of mutilateralism impress you? Or how about the vote on the defensive wall for Israel. Who wants allies who cant stand up for a democracy trying to protect it’s people from suicide bombers.

Go vote for Ralph. He clearly better represents your leanings than J fing K.

These countries did not only support the war, but sent troops. Countries that may be heavily dependent on US commerce or aid may nonetheless choose not to send troops, as many did. But given the number of nations that sent troops, it is simply erroneous to say that we went in without allies, unless France has now become the sine qua non definition of our allies.

I just wanted to say, I really like the way Jim thinks. See Jim is a neo-con and they belive that we should take this fight to the shores (so to speak) of the enemy. If all the bombs go of over there, no harm no foul, its all good.
To me thats the real America spirit, not in my backyard!

I got an Idea, Lets do a preemtive strike on the .........um......oh well it dont really matter, we’re Americans and if you dont like it Bring it on Buddy!!!!

P.S. A heart filled thank you to Jim and all those neo-cons out there just like you, if it wern’t for your dilligent efforts that evil Dictator whould surly have killed me in my sleep by now!

You’re welcome. It’s my pleasure. And what have you ever done for life and liberty while pursuing your own personal happiness?

Sleep well, parasite.

Oh, I know its your pleasure LT Naum, I would venture to say its your extreem pleasure.
And as for what have I ever done for my country, I’m doing it right now.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/4710