Posted on 09/24/2004 3:08:03 PM PDT by Pokey78
WE REALLY DON'T KNOW what a President John Kerry would do about Iraq. His flip-flops about the war, his inconsistencies, the ambiguity of his current position (win or withdraw?)--all of these mean we can only guess about a Kerry presidency. He would probably be inclined to get out of Iraq as soon as possible; it might be the case, however, that as president he would nonetheless find himself staying and fighting. Who knows?
What we do know is this: Kerry and his advisers have behaved disgracefully this past week. That behavior is sufficient grounds for concern about his fitness to be president.
On Tuesday, President Bush spoke to the United Nations General Assembly. Senator Kerry decided not to say anything supportive of the president as he made the American case to the "international community." Nor did he simply campaign that day on other issues. No. Less than an hour after President Bush finished speaking in New York, Kerry was criticizing his remarks in Jacksonville, Florida: "At the United Nations today, the president failed to level with the world's leaders. Moments after Kofi Annan, the secretary general, talked about the difficulties in Iraq, the president of the United States stood before a stony-faced body and barely talked about the realities at all of Iraq. . . . He does not have the credibility to lead the world."
So Kerry credits Kofi Annan--who a few days before had condemned the "illegal" American war in Iraq--as a more accurate source of information on the subject than the president of the United States. Kerry also seems to think it significant that the General Assembly sat "stony-faced" while the president spoke. Would the applause of delegates from China, Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and, yes, France, have made the president's speech more praiseworthy in Kerry's eyes?
Then Kerry was asked about Kofi Annan's description of the war in Iraq as an "illegal" invasion. Kerry answered: "I don't know what the law, the legalities are that he's referring to. I don't know." So the U.S. government is accused of breaking international law, and Kerry chooses not to defend his country against the charge, or to label it ridiculous or offensive. He is agnostic.
Then Kerry continued: "Well, let me say this to all of you: That underscores what I am saying. If the leader of the United Nations is at odds with the legality, and we're not working at getting over that hurdle and bringing people to the table, as I said in my speech yesterday, it's imperative to be able to build international cooperation." It's our fault that the U.N. is doing almost nothing to help in Iraq. After all, according to Kerry, "Kofi Annan offered the help of the United Nations months ago. This president chose to go the other way."
Leave aside the rewriting of history going on here. The president of the United States had just appealed for help from the United Nations and its member states to ensure that elections go forward in Iraq. Kerry could have reinforced that appeal for help with his own, thereby making it a bipartisan request. He chose instead to give the U.N., France, Germany, and everyone else an excuse to do nothing over these next crucial five weeks, with voter registration scheduled to begin November 1. If other nations prefer not to help the United States, the Democratic presidential candidate has given them his blessing.
Two days later, Iraqi prime minister Ayad Allawi spoke to a joint meeting of Congress. Sen. Kerry could not be troubled to attend, as a gesture of solidarity and respect. Instead, Kerry said in Ohio that Allawi was here simply to put the "best face on the policy." So much for an impressive speech by perhaps America's single most important ally in the war on terror, the courageous and internationally recognized leader of a nation struggling to achieve democracy against terrorist opposition.
But Kerry's rudeness paled beside the comment of his senior adviser, Joe Lockhart, to the Los Angeles Times: "The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips."
Is Kerry proud that his senior adviser's derisive comment about the leader of free Iraq will now be quoted by terrorists and by enemies of the United States, in Iraq and throughout the Middle East? Is the concept of a loyalty to American interests that transcends partisan politics now beyond the imagination of the Kerry campaign?
John Kerry has decided to pursue a scorched-earth strategy in this campaign. He is prepared to insult allies, hearten enemies, and denigrate efforts to succeed in Iraq. His behavior is deeply irresponsible--and not even in his own best interest.
There is some chance, after all, that John Kerry will be president in four months. If so, what kind of situation will he have created for himself? France will smile on him, but provide no troops. Those allies that have provided troops, from Britain and Poland and Australia and Japan and elsewhere, will likely recall how Kerry sneered at them, calling them "the coerced and the bribed." The leader of the government in Iraq, upon whom the success of John Kerry's Iraq policy will depend, will have been weakened before his enemies and ours--and will also remember the insult. Is this really how Kerry wants to go down in history: Willing to say anything to try to get elected, no matter what the damage to the people of Iraq, to American interests, and even to himself?
You only like those who blow up airplanes. How much are you paid by Libya?
lol...very true!
...so what does Libya's oil have to do with Kristoff's article? It's about what Kerry's proposal of pulling troops out of IRAQ, and has nothing to do with LIBYA.
Look dude, I'm sorry if you lost someone, but you really gotta get out of the past and look at the world's future.
Not sure what sarcasm's problem is. But even Reagan didn't finish him off. Bush 41 did nothing. Clinton couldn't find it on a map, but hey, take nukes away from the guy and you do something wrong, I guess.
Take out "Iraq" and insert "Vietnam." Sounds familiar doesn't it? Once a treasonous snake, always a treasonous snake. I can't believe a man like this can even be considered a viable candidate for president in this country. It's a shame and disgrace that this is the "best" the Democrats have to offer.
You're an appeaser - you don't give a crap about dead Americans. How much does Libya pay you?
So sorry, Libya is a terrorist state and GWB capitulated to a murderer. What is the difference between Hussein and Qadaffi - none.
I tried a dialogue but you're spamming and saying nothing. I can't even express how idiotic you are on this thread. I'm at a loss.
Yep, you're an apologist for the murderers of Americans.
One of the main problems Liberals have with running campaigns, let alone Wars and Presidencies; is they are incapable of delegating. They have been programed to believe that the Centralized Planning Model is the only way to organize. This is why they believe that the Gummit is better at spending our money than we are. When they become Candidates for a national office like President they cannot take advice and have their hands on everything. The reports of Yaaaawn writing his own boring run-on speeches is proof of that weakness. No political advisor equipped with two firing brain cells would have told Yaaaaawn to go out and attack the Prime Minister of Iraq. This is a truly historic disgrace of epic proportions. Kerry went out on his own because the PM gave him a minor shot about Yaaaawn always downplaying our successes and turning them into failures to the benefit of our enemies. In response Kerry goes nuts and accuses the Leader of a newly born Country a liar...Monumental!! Nobody on that Rubber Bus would have suggested anybody do this. Only the knee-jerk; heavy on the jerk, main Candidate.
Prime Minister Allawi is a man of integrity and bravery that can is matched by very few men in World History. This man defied Saddamn and received an axe to the head. He is number 1 on the Terrorist hit parade in a country filled with terrorist scum attracted like moths to a zapper. His death will bring a month long celebration in this turd century pit, and Kerry has the nerve to degrade and disrespect this hero? This amounts to calling Lech Walesa or the Pope lying cowards in Poland during the Soviet crackdown.
How can he do this utterly despicable action. Easy, he hates America and it’s closest allies! During Vietnam, which is his entirety; he called the South Vietnamese Govt a puppet of the United States. He vilified and degraded that Govt when we were winning the war while he professed the Communists in N. Vietnam the liberators and freedom fighters. The liberators ended up murdering over 10 million civilians after Kerry coerced "Peace with Honor". So attacking Iraq’s new Govt is his first step. His strategy is to disgrace the bravery of the country’s interim officials who are being murdered for taking their stand for Freedom. His next step in Vietnam was to attack our soldiers after he declared the newly formed Govt illegitimate. He declared the war illegal and “the wrong war, at the wrong time in the wrong place”. If the war is wrong than it follows that our soldiers are fighting the wrong war. This is his seditious strategy and why he was called a traitor then, and is a traitor now. And yes Yaaaawn we are questioning your patriotism, which is what you do to people who are betraying their country for their own benefit.
If this man will not stand shoulder to shoulder to a statuesque MAN like Allawi than who will he stand with. Allawi is the George Washington of Iraq. The only difference was Washington had to fight the British and Benedict Arnold, while Allawi has to fight barbaric terrorists from a dozen neighboring scorpion nests. Kerry doesn’t understand the honor and history of freeing 25 million people from a tyrant who had already killed nearly a half million people, and he will never will. The leaders John Kerry has stood shoulder to shoulder were Ho Chi Min 10 million murders, Lenin-Gorbachev 50 million murders, Mao Tse Tung 70 million murders, Fidel Castro 1 million murders, Daniel Ortega 20,000 murders, Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge 5 million murders, Yasser Arafat 1000s of murders. John Kerry’s respected leaders do have a pattern which helps explain his admiration for Saddamn’s killing fields.
Prime Minister Allawi just doesn’t have the numbers it takes for Yaaaawn Cut and Run Kerry’s respect.
Pray for W and Our Troops
I figure he's figured out that being president is a 24/7 job, and he has a "Do not disturb" mentality.
I can only assume that you lost your moral compass long age. How much are you paid by the Libyan government?
Somebody needs a time out.
I'm glad you just said what I was thinking? I was wondering who this bird was???
Why are you still talking about Libya? Qadaffi gave up because he saw that both he and his country was better off by admitting he was was not going to be successful by going the route he had taken. Aside from bombing a couple of palaces 10 years ago, we didn't have to fire a shot. Chalk one of for Colin Powell.
Hussein thought he'd "get away with it", because he knew he was supplying oil to France and Germany, and thought they'd step in on his behalf. Saddam may have seemed indignant, but it was more because his "friends" in the west left him swinging in the wind when the US came a knockin'.
When is Qadaffi going on trial?
AC, you're asking the wrong man. The man you should be questioning is Kerry.
How many Americans did Qadaffi murder? Why isn't he being held to account?
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.