Sen. Kerry, It's French for Kiss Off

The Los Angeles Times ^ | August 1, 2004 | Clark S. Judge

[quidnunc]

Throughout the last week and in his acceptance speech Thursday night, Sen. John Kerry charged that the Bush administration should have — and could have — won greater international support before it launched military operations in Iraq. Few presidential challengers have offered such a telling and disturbing critique of an incumbent's foreign policy — telling and disturbing not for what Kerry said about the president but for what he said about himself.

The lament of international isolation echoed the Democratic presidential nominee's concerns about the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Then, despite backing for the United States from virtually the entire world, Kerry contended that with more time we could build more support.

This time, the coalition was again large but missing France and Germany. After Social Democratic pacifism prevailed in its last elections, Germany was not a serious prospect for participation, so the real issue was France.

Kerry argued that we would have been immeasurably stronger in Iraq, and throughout the world, if President Bush had given the State Department time to move France toward our position. "We need a president who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side," he told the delegates, adding, "that won't happen until we have a president who restores America's respect and leadership — so we don't have to go it alone in the world."

Coming in the midst of the stirring oratory of a convention, it sounded right, but the Kerry critique implicitly assumes that the only issue moving France was the issue moving us — Iraq and the war on terror — and that the only reason for French intransigence was bungled U.S. diplomacy. As anyone with Kerry's long experience in foreign affairs should know, both assumptions are flat-out wrong. That he apparently doesn't know it is what made his convention speech so disturbing.

-snip-

[Logical me]

You might know the Times would spin this. France decided not support the Iraqi war because of the Oil for Food it was involved in. Kerry is a dope if he thinks he would have any more influence than the totally competent US officials both in the UN and the Administration have done. This liberal thinking is the same as a killer not responsible for killing someone, but it was the environment he lives in. Bullshit.

[bitt]

wow...
'As experienced as he is, Kerry should know all this. Maybe on Thursday night he was simply threading the political needle, finding a way to favor a war for which he had voted while joining most of his party in strongly opposing it.

But if not, he was displaying a nationalistic narcissism rarely seen in major party candidates for our highest office. And he was setting up a Kerry administration for far greater international isolation that any we have ever known.'

---

missing in this discussion is:

Regarding France's part in the Oil for Food scandal and their selling weapons to Iraq up until the very month that we invaded Iraq.......

why is that never mentioned as a reason for them not wanting to be part of the coalition?

[Stallone]

The French would never be so self-serving.

They are known for their courage, sacrifice and willingness to do what is right.

...


BWHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHA

[Condor51]

No offense but did we read the same article?

1. I didn't see the Oil for Palaces (food) program mentioned once.
2. I read that if Kerry really believes what he's saying, he's either a fool, politically naive, or just stoo-pid
3. I read that France's hatred for us has zero to do who is POTUS, but is basically jealously, and the antagonism goes back to Napoleon.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I sure got a different take than you. And I'm surprised that this is in the LA Slimes! Now to me that indicates that 'The Beast' and her minions are already trying to sink Kerry. This is a scathing hit piece.

[Prime Choice]

Whaddya expect from a Frog like Kerry anyway?   ; )

[Mike Darancette]

You might know the Times would spin this. France

LAT got it right this time. Kerry is alluding to personal negotiations that he has or will have with our "allies", Kerry is famous for talking for himself against the interest of America.

[Peach]

Amazing that in 1997 Kerry told Crossfire host that Clinton would show leadership if he dealt with Iraq regardless of whether the UN Security Council approved or not. He also had harsh words for France and Germany.

How things have changed since 1997.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1087918/posts

[river rat]

Kerry constantly allows his alligator mouth to overload his hummingbird ass..

He remains a self serving liar.
A liar that puts "international" interests before America's best interests..

Even if France had joined us in Iraq -- they would have already pulled a Spanish or Philippine retreat..

Face it folks, we're in a war for the survival of civilization..
It is as simple as being a war between Militant Islam, and the rest of the world..

If the "peace loving" Muslim world doesn't get more involved in destroying the enemy within -- MILLIONS may have to be destroyed to rid the world of the problem..

Semper Fi

[ridesthemiles]

France decided not support the Iraqi war because of the Oil for Food it was involved in.

I believe that France also was trying to stall and protect itself over the illegal missles and other armaments it had continued selling to Iraq after the embargo of the Gulf War.
Has everyone forgotten the MIG's found buried in the Iraq desert that had brand new Frence Exocet missles dated less than 3 months before we bombed Baghdad???? The pics were on Free Republic, I remember. Can anyone repost them?

[NRA2BFree]

No offense but did we read the same article?

I didn't see the Oil for Palaces (food) program mentioned once.

I read that if Kerry really believes what he's saying, he's either a fool, politically naive, or just stoo-pid. I read that France's hatred for us has zero to do who is POTUS, but is basically jealously, and the antagonism goes back to Napoleon.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I sure got a different take than you. And I'm surprised that this is in the LA Slimes! Now to me that indicates that 'The Beast' and her minions are already trying to sink Kerry. This is a scathing hit piece.

That's what I read too. I read it in disbelief that the Slimes would write such a hit piece on Kerry. I also agree about the Clintons. I think we're right. :-)

[lonevoice]

From the LA Times??? I read another thread about CNN starting to go negative on Kerry too. Are pigs flying??