| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Home Front: Politix | |||
| Kerry, Edwards defend their agenda | |||
| 2004-08-02 | |||
EFL: After having the luxury of talking virtually unchallenged about their politics at the Democratic National Convention, John F. Kerry and John Edwards found themselves defending their records and their plans for the country yesterday, while their campaign planned what it deemed a ''truth" offensive.
The launching point was Kerry's admittedly vague references lately that ''I have a plan for Iraq," where about 140,000 US troops are stationed and Bush is facing questions about postwar violence and long-term stability. Speaking on the ABC news program ''This Week," the Massachusetts senator declared: ''I've been involved in this for a long time, longer than George Bush. I've spent 20 years negotiating, working, fighting for different kinds of treaties and different relationships around the world. I know that as president there's huge leverage that will be available to me, enormous cards to play, and I'm not going to play them in public. I'm not going to play them before I'm president."
Asked whether he would promise to have US troops home from Iraq by the end of his first term, Kerry replied: ''I will have significant, enormous reduction in the level of troops. We will probably have a continued presence of some kind, and certainly in the region. If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world -- in the Korean Peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps."
| |||
| Posted by:Steve |
| #10 I concur. My best guess is that if Kerry is elected, one or more of our cities is likely to get obliterated by jihadis encouraged by our frivolity and armed with nuclear weapons supplied by Iran-- maybe even manufactured using Uranium or Plutonium derived from nuclear reactor fuel supplied by Kerry and his own foreign policy geniuses. And in response, the American president-- knowing the American people lack the staying power needed to pull off the kind of reformative effort we are engaged in now-- will just say "Fuck it" and order the destruction of the entire Arab world in a war that will last barely 20 minutes, but will leave a half a billion people dead. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-08-02 9:03:13 PM |
| #9 Dave, as most of us recall, after 9-11, the President told everyone this would be a long, hard war. Most of the folks were on the bandwagon except for the typical LLL morons. When we went to Iraq he again reaffirmed that Iraq was but one stage in the WoT - again, most of the folks were on the bandwagon except as mentioned above. I believe you may be right, in the long run, constant media barages of bad news and twisted reporting has sucked the life out of a lot of un-informed Americans. I also am feeling more and more that a lot of Americans are candy asses. Maybe we've had it so good for so long people have forgotten what it means to truly endure in strife. Plus, the 24 media coverage has created fiascos and blown certain situations way out of proportion (abu ghraib). If we had this type of media stupidity during WWII I'm convinced we would've fought Japan for another 5 years because no Pres would've had the nutz to drop the bomb. If people are stupid or apathetic enough to elect skerry then we deserve what we get. Just my $.02, I could go on but you get the drift. |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-08-02 8:26:34 PM |
| #8 "...indigenous allies, like the ones who are probably going to stop trusting us if he's elected president." Now, that is a damn good point. And it leads to an important question: What conclusions would be drawn from a Kerry victory by our allies and enemies? And more important still, what will our allies and our enemies do as a result of the conclusions they've drawn? Will the jihadis conclude that bin Laden was right, that America really doesn't have the stomach for a long, tough fight? If so, what will they do? Will the Chinese Communists conclude that their long-ago assessment of us as a "paper tiger" was correct? If they do, what will their next action be? Will Israel conclude that America really cannot be counted on as an ally when the going gets tough? If they do, what will they decide regarding the growing Iranian nuclear threat? What will any future American president (including Kerry himself) conclude about the willingness of the American people to back a wartime president through a long period of struggle in the face of cynical, calculated political opposition to the war? In the event of another 9/11-style terrorist attack, how many months will a future president figure he has to bring the matter to a decisive conclusion before the American people lose interest or are distracted by the political opposition? Based on that calculation, what means will he chose to fight the war? I've been struggling a lot with these questions lately, and I'm not able to conjure up a lot of pleasant answers. What do you all think? |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-08-02 5:28:09 PM |
| #7 Then what do you need that additional 40,000 troops for, Senator Kerry? You remember, the ones you promised to add during your speech last week? I also want to know what the purpose would be of doubling the size of the special forces; their primary mission is working with indigenous allies, like the ones who are probably going to stop trusting us if he's elected president. |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2004-08-02 5:07:55 PM |
| #6 If we elect this lying, fatuous jackass as our President, we will richly deserve the dhimmitude he will bring upon us. Or, I should say, those who vote for him will deserve it. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-08-02 5:05:14 PM |
| #5 CF, I think he's talking about the plan he came up with at a secret summit with Daniel Ortega. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-08-02 4:59:50 PM |
| #4 Oh, and since when do Senator's negotiate treaties? Perhaps Kerry is referring to the time he met with Madam Binh, then Foreign Minister of the North Vietmanese / Viet Cong during the Vietman war. Soon after he joined the VVAW who later signed the Peoples Peace Treaty. Or maybe its his settlement of the Vietnam MIA issue...... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-08-02 3:40:04 PM |
| #3 first prong- secret! ...secret prong! |
| Posted by: Comment Top 2004-08-02 3:16:09 PM |
| #2 John, your lack of a plan is showing. oops... *zzziiippp* |
| Posted by: jojo the amazing circus boy 2004-08-02 3:02:28 PM |
| #1 "I've spent 20 years negotiating, working, fighting for different kinds of treaties and different relationships around the world." I bet the President and the State Department would be interested in what negotiating Senator Kerry has done on behalf of the U.S. The full statement makes it sound like he knows where all the bodies are buried and will use that to blackmail foreign leaders. I love the idea of a secret plan after he told everyone how his admistration won't be conducting business in secrecy. But then that was Thursday and this is Monday, times do change. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2004-08-02 2:56:59 PM |