"A thing is, what it is." -Aristotle
Posted on 10/04/2004 7:22:08 PM PDT by FairOpinion
John Kerry has finally settled on a position, sort of. Kerry informed us during the first presidential debate that he has had one clear and consistent stance on Iraq all along. This came as a big surprise to anyone actually watching the debate, because none of us had any clue at all. I had infiltrated a “debate party” hosted by local Democrats and even they seemed stunned to discover this.
John Kerry’s newest answer is that Hussein was evil and should have been taken down, just not by force. Although he voted for force, he never thought anyone would actually use it. Kerry essentially stated that if he were president he would have held multinational tea parties until Hussein decided to peacefully remove himself upon coming to the conclusion that we meant business. The threat of force would be used only as a tactic for convincing the enemy that we did mean business.
And for the record, Mr. Kerry, it is probably unwise to show your hand to the enemy. But if you are elected president, terrorists will now know that anytime you mention the use of force you are only doing so as a method of persuasion. If this is how you are going to run your foreign policy, it probably is not a great tactic to broadcast it for everyone. The next time Kim Jong-il hears you threaten force all he has to do is rewind that debate tape where you say your strategy is to merely threaten force, but never use it. If the “W” stands for wrong then the “F” stands for foolish.
Kerry also added that Iraq was not an important enemy in the War on Terror, an astonishing assessment considering the thousands of terrorists who are “flooding over the border” into Iraq. To have such a large number of outside terrorists fighting in a country of little or no importance in the War on Terror is a fascinating development. We are obvioulsy wasting our time. After all, Osama is still running around in the mountains (quick, divert the troops!).
After stealing Jimmy Carter’s copy of "Foreign Policy for Dummies," Kerry decided to take the wise strategy of calling our allies names. Great Britain? Worthless. Australia? Coerced. South Korea? Confused. Italy? Meaningless. The leader of Iraq? A stooge. This is what Kerry considers “coalition-building.” Complaining about the allies we do have while praising the ones who are doing nothing is Kerry's idea of "leadership." Estonia, Moldova, and Tonga have provided more troop support than his beloved France ever will and Kerry thanks them by throwing egg in their faces. But because Azerbaijan surprisingly cannot commit the number of troops and equipment that the United States does we should throw them under the bus.
But oddly, while there is not enough of a coalition in Iraq, there is too much of a coalition dealing with North Korea. Kerry would exchange the talks that now include China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea for talks that only include the United States. This was a strategy used by Clinton that obviously failed. But then, maybe Kerry will send Jimmy carter on yet another useless envoy. No word on whether ending multilateral talks would pass Kerry’s “global test.” If the talks fail, maybe Kerry will threaten force. (Wink, wink.)
Aside from constantly demeaning our allies, criticizing our troops, and conceding defeat to terrorists, the Democrats have also jumped on the conspiracy theory train. Unbeknownst to millions of young men and women, Bush is planning a back door draft, a side door draft, a front door draft, and elevator drafts. This time even women and college kids will be included.
To date, Bush has said there will never be a draft and that the military would remain voluntary, Rumsfeld stated that he thinks a draft would ruin the military, and every Republican of any importance has balked at the idea of one. Liberal democrats have drafted the only bills regarding a draft and liberal democrats are the ones who are constantly pushing one. This leads to the obvious conclusion that Bush wants there to be a draft. Even MTV has jumped on the draft-wagon. A recently aired television ad informs us that this election will determine whether or not there will be a draft. Bush says no draft, liberals say yes to the draft, and Bush gets accused of wanting a draft. The cycle of violence never ends.
Kerry may be a good debater, but his foreign policy sucks. He criticizes our troops' efforts and our allies’ assistance. He ridicules the progress made by the Iraqis and attacks their leader. Prime Minister Allawi has enough to deal with without having to worry about a presidential wannabe who constantly calls him a puppet. He complains that we are training too many Iraqi troops when we lack policemen at home, but then complains that we are not training enough of their troops. He wants to kick nations out of the talks with North Korea and handle the talks unilaterally, a strategy that has failed over and over.
Kerry says he has a plan for Iraq. But it is the wrong plan, at the wrong time, and in the wrong place. Especially since we are fighting the right war, at the right time, and in the right place.
And he assumes the we're all just a stupid...
Good article, and a fair description of Kerry's position(s)!?!?etc.
Very interesting. I refresh my screen and you're there. I refresh it again and you're gone. Just like your candidate. The two of you need to decide on one and only one course of action.
Get the hell out of here you jerk. Stupid asshole.
How the heck does that work? Sometimes when I refresh 2 and 6 are there and other times they are not. ????
Kerry put forth the most outrageous and inconsistent positions during the debate alone, never mind his other various positions.
Can you imagine the disaster, if someone like this would become president?
How can people think the his nonsensical idiocies delivered with assurance constitute "winning the debate"?!
Good article. Righteous, factual observations by the author. More on flipper kerry's foreign policy:
flipper's cheat sheet may have said, "Nukes for arabs." Did anyone catch flipper's preposterous idea to give cutthroat terrorists fissionable nuclear material and/or technology?
Is that supreme stupidity? Or, is it just me being short-sighted?
It also accused W of allowing north korea to grow to maturity its nuclear bomb program during the last 4 years.
Q: How long does it take to build a nuclear facility -- if all goes smoothly?
A: About 10 years.
Q: How long does it take to start up and commission a nuclear facility if all goes smoothly?
A: About another year.
Q: Can you breed & enrich fissionable bomb material and make nuclear bombs overnight?
A: No.
Let's see . . . 10 + 1 + 1 = 12 years
Who was President in 1992/93?
Oh, that was the changeover from papa Bush to bubba clinton.
It was really weird. They were two different screen names that appear and disappear when I refresh the screen. Never seen anything like that before.
I can't get them to appear, all I see is the two posts that the AM removed.
I wonder if they are using two servers, and if you get one of them, the posts are still there, but there were removed from the other.
Yeah, JohnRob just upgraded over the weekend and I've been getting some weirdness too. First two times I refreshed my last post didn't show up and I almost committed the sin of a double post. Whew!
When I got your post, 2 was there but 6 was removed. LOL. Reviewing my posts on this thread, I sound like I was hearing voices.
"A thing is, what it is." -Aristotle
I never thought he won the debate. But, I was listening to what they said, not how they said it.
bttt
That sounds like a reasonable explaination. BTW, it's occuring on another thread where the same jerk posted.
I like this guy Hawkins.
I need to see more of him.... off to Google...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.