Posted on 09/02/2004 3:44:58 PM PDT by PhilipFreneau
Sen. John Kerry's campaign defends his proposals to eliminate major U.S. weapons systems during his career as a senator by claiming Vice President Dick Cheney proposed similar cuts as secretary of Defense during the first Bush administration. The spin-doctors in the Kerry campaign responsible for these claims obviously know nothing of history. These claims are baseless for the following reasons:
(1) Mr. Kerry proposed eliminating 65 major U.S. weapons systems in 1984, including the ships, planes and missiles we currently have in our inventory that are the backbone of both our nuclear and conventional deterrent. If these proposals had been adopted, we would not now have a deterrent sufficient to defend America. It would be obsolete and ineffective.
(2) Mr. Kerry proposed these foolish cuts at the height of the Cold War, at a time when the United States faced its most serious peril in its history in the heavily armed and aggressive Soviet empire.
(3) Mr. Kerry asserts he learned important lessons from his service in Vietnam that provide him the basis for leadership in defense and foreign policy. However, when he proposed these cuts, most members of his own party ran in the opposite direction.
(4) In 1991, then-Secretary of Defense Cheney proposed cuts in our defense inventory at the end of the Cold War. He proposed reductions in the U.S. military in the context of the most sweeping arms-control agreements dealing with both conventional and nuclear weapons, including the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty and START I, the treaty eliminating nearly 6,000 nuclear weapons.
(5) Mr. Cheney also proposed replacing some of the reduced weapons with more modern weapons, such as the C-17 and the F-22, while also proposing to cut weapons that were over budget and not meeting technical expectations.
(6) On the other hand, ...
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Looks like the democrats prefer a race between Cheney and Kerry. Wonder why that is.
Chrissie tried that last night.
Then his "water carrier" O'Donnel was on with Hewitt trying the same thing.
O'Donnel also said that Chrissie is the best political talk show host EVER! (Barf!)
This is the key - Kerry voted against the BUILD-UP of Reagan era defense in the heat of the cold war.
To compare that to Cheney's work to realign the military AFTER the fall of the Berlin Wall is to compare apples and oranges.
Dem Talking Points = Knowing Lies
For anyone to pretend that Kerry has supported our weapons systems is assinine. I remember him fighting against them in the 80's. My memory works, Kerry's campaign lies.
Will this be the comparison any time his senate record is brought up? This should be smacked down asap or they'll use it again
"O'Donnel also said that Chrissie is the best political talk show host EVER! (Barf!)"
Matthews did one of the most unproffesional interviews ive ever seen. He literally rolled his eyes when Miller answered a question.
BTTT. I'm always hearing this Dem talking point. Glad to have the proper info.
Cheney voted to modernize the military. Kerry voted to decimate it.
>> I'm always hearing this Dem talking point. Glad to have the proper info.
Same here. I heard this talking point so many times today I suspected it was a lie.
>> I'm always hearing this Dem talking point. Glad to have the proper info.
Same here. I heard this talking point so many times today I suspected it was a lie.
"1991, then-Secretary of Defense Cheney proposed cuts in our defense inventory at the end of the Cold War
This is the key - Kerry voted against the BUILD-UP of Reagan era defense in the heat of the cold war."
I frankly don't remember and am too pressed to look it up right now but wasn't this in the middle of the huge debate about the "peace benefit"? The legislative branch generates the revenue expenditures and, under the circumstances, if Cheney had a Democrat controlled Congress imposing cuts on him, he had to cut something, right?
The Dems love a no-win situation. For everybody else.
There is nothing wrong with this. In case no one has paid any attention, even in the midst of the current wars, Mr. Rumsfedl is also desperately trying to cut a military establishment that is bloated with many pieces ill-suited for modern missions. The problem with Kerry is that he never saw a weapons system that met his approval.
There is also nothing wrong with trying to cut back and dismantle the nuclear junkpile we had accumulated. We had no use for all of those weapons and trying to guard and maintain them is a enormous burden and distraction on a military whose chief missions have moved on to other things.
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.