Is Kerry fit to be a War Time President?

JohnKnight77

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Country
llUnited States
http://www.washtimes.com/national/pruden.htm

Is war a place for a tofu president?
By Wesley Pruden

Britain, alas, may one day be part of the European Union, but the good news is that you probably can't make Europeans out of Englishmen.
The spaniels nip at Tony Blair's ankles just the way the terriers scratch at George W.'s shins, and the prime minister stands fast, demonstrating anew why we regard our English cousins as "the old reliables."
And just in time. Tony Blair, like George W. Bush, labors under the burden of a spoiled, arrogant and self-satisfied opposition, driven by a know-it-all media and cheered on by whiners, layabouts and assorted malcontents. No British prime minister nor any American president is ever again likely to enjoy the broad public support for sacrifice that earlier presidents and prime ministers could count on in times of great national peril, and we might as well get used to it. If CNN's cameras and correspondents had been positioned at Omaha Beach on June 6, the pressure on FDR and Winston Churchill to negotiate a cease-fire by nightfall, "to give peace a chance," would have been irresistible.
John Kerry continues trying to have it both ways — he's against the war in Iraq, but he wouldn't change much about it. He might bring the troops home if he could figure out a way to do that and keep them there, too. He doesn't agree with the elderly hysterics in his party, notably Teddy Kennedy and Robert Byrd, that Iraq is "another Vietnam," but, who knows? It could be. He has a plan for "a broader approach in Iraq," but he's on record (in the Boston Globe) conceding right now that "maybe it doesn't work."
If Ronald Reagan was the Teflon president because nothing stuck to him and Bill Clinton was the Velcro candidate because everything did, Monsieur Kerry is "the tofu candidate," with no flavor of his own, ready to absorb every flavor, taste, spice or savory, piquant or not, that touches him. He's the long, tall hunk of tofu that neither America nor its friends or the friends of friends could easily survive.
Monsieur Kerry is under considerable pressure now to tear himself away from ski slope and sick bed to say, exactly and precisely, what and how he proposes to take charge of the war in Iraq and how he would array his nuances, niceties and moderations for the battle that, like it or not, will be the lot of American presidents stretching from here to the horizon. The best he has come up with so far is a strategy of turning it over to the United Nations. But the U.N. bugged out of Baghdad when the first bomb exploded, and it's difficult to imagine Kofi Annan's warriors in pastel marching toward the sound of popguns.
Nobody knows this better than the embattled Tony Blair, who has every selfish reason to cut his losses and scuttle toward placation and mollification. But he repeated his vow over the Easter weekend to stand up to the clear and present challenge to civilization. In a stirring and eloquent message all the more powerful for appearing in London's Guardian, a leading British voice of appeasement, he set out the stakes in a struggle that won't be cheap, quick or easy.
"We are locked in a historic struggle in Iraq," he wrote. "On its outcome hangs more than the fate of the Iraqi people. Were we to fail, which we will not, it is more than 'the power of America' that would be defeated. The hope of freedom and religious tolerance in Iraq would be snuffed out. Dictators would rejoice; fanatics and terrorists would be triumphant. Every nascent strand of moderate Arab opinion, knowing full well that the future should not belong to fundamentalist religion, would be set back in bitter disappointment. ...
"The terrorists prey on ethnic or religious discord. From Kashmir to Chechnya, to Palestine and Israel, they foment hatred, they deter reconciliation. In Europe, they conducted the massacre in Madrid. They threaten France. They forced the cancellation of the president of Germany's visit to Djibouti. They have been foiled in Britain, but only for now.
"Of course they use Iraq. It is vital to them. As each attack brings about American attempts to restore order, so they then characterize it as American brutality. As each piece of chaos menaces the very path toward peace and democracy along which most Iraqis want to travel, they use it to try to make the coalition lose heart, and bring about the retreat that is the fanatics' victory.
"They know it is a historic struggle. They know their victory would do far more than defeat America or Britain. It would defeat civilization and democracy everywhere.
"They know it, but do we? The truth is, faced with this struggle, on which our own fate hangs, a significant part of Western opinion is sitting back, if not half-hoping we fail, certainly replete with schadenfreude at the difficulty we find."
Wesley Pruden is editor in chief of The Times.
 

Churchill

Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Good Reading

Great analysis. Presumes a thing or two, but certainly promotes questions as to Kerry's fitness. Of course the reality is that neither of the two choices is suitable to be a "wartime" President. Both have substantial character flaws, one in particular appears to have had a certain lack of intestinal fortitude in his past. Neither seems to arouse great confidence or displays exceptional mental skills. They are, at best, mediocre men facing a job requiring a high degree of common sense, which is another quality to which neither can subscribe. Once again the American people get the short end of the straw.
 

chrisvalla

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
645
Reaction score
1
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Country
llUnited States
I'd be interested to see a decent left-handed analysis of Bush's approach myself without all the " he's driving us to WWIII rhetoric".

Common sense isn't anymore, especially among politicians who have too many special interest dollars 'buying' their intelligence for them.
 

Andrey

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Location
Omsk, Russia
Country
llRussia
Hey, all you are radicals.

Do you want to be at war? Vote for Bush and you will at war soon. You are at war even right now.

John Kennedy didn't begin war during Caribbean Crisis in 1963 (or 1962???). If Bush was president in that time Earth had to be radioactive desert now.

Actions of Bush are able to make enemy from any friend. Vote for Bush and you will get enough enemies for long war.

To play "in war" is not like to fight in real war. To fight in street combat is not like to press key in bomber for launch of "Tomahawk".

Kerry knows what is war, he was awarded some times and he is real hero. Bush never fought in battlefield, his Dad saved his from Vietnam.
 

Aubrey's Pet

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
East Of The Sun, West Of The Moon!
Country
llUnited States
We are FREE radicals

Originally posted by Andrey
Hey, all you are radicals.

Do you want to be at war? Vote for Bush and you will at war soon. You are at war even right now.

John Kennedy didn't begin war during Caribbean Crisis in 1963 (or 1962???). If Bush was president in that time Earth had to be radioactive desert now.

Actions of Bush are able to make enemy from any friend. Vote for Bush and you will get enough enemies for long war.

To play "in war" is not like to fight in real war. To fight in street combat is not like to press key in bomber for launch of "Tomahawk".

Kerry knows what is war, he was awarded some times and he is real hero. Bush never fought in battlefield, his Dad saved his from Vietnam.
Yeah True.

Some notes...

Kerry did win medals, and he protested against the war in Vietnam, and made friends and alliances with other protesters, in particular Jane Fonda. Kerry did not rebuke or criticise Jane Fonda for going to Hanoi, North Vietnam and publicly castigating captured American servicemen that were being tortured by North Vietnamese, Cuban, Chinese and Russian interrogators. An effort by the POW's to pass secret messages to her basically to tell their families that they were still alive unravelled when Jane Fonda got the messages and gave them to the captors. What happened was after she and all the world media left the POW's involved were severely tortured once more.

I don't like Kerry because like every politician he is full of grand promises that he would find hard to keep without making compromises that will hurt rather than hurt in the long run. In other words he is no different from the rest, Republican or Democrat.

Do you seriously think that Al Qaeda will stop if Kerry becomes President? I don't think so.

Do you think America will have no enemies after Kerry wins, if he wins, the election and runs the country? I don't think so.

Do you think the world will be a better place with Kerrey as President of the USA? I don't think so.

Do you think Kerrey will keep all or most of his campaigne promises if he becomes President? I don't think so.

Do you think Kerrey would stop supporting American interests and friends in the Middle East? He says to the effect that America should stop supporting countries that have been friends of America that happen to not have the western values of democracy and freedom and put pressure on them to change their ways. Case in point: Saudi Arabia. Other potential cases in point: Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain.

Once America is out, the Europeans won't hesitate to step into the void. They've already prostituted themselves for years, and they'll do it again in the future as they are doing right now.

Do you think Kerrey will follow through on this? I don't think so.

Is he any different from Bush? No. He is the same shit but of a different smell, nevertheless the same shit.

America will always have enemies no matter which President or party is in office.

American Voters don't really have any good alternatives other than these two people.
 

GeorgiaDixie

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2004
Messages
254
Reaction score
0
Location
Savannah, GA
Country
llUnited States
One of the main reasons Kerry wouldn't be a good war-time leader is that he seems to waffle on too many issues. He wants to have it both ways on most of the issues. Well, in a war situation you have to make one decision and stick with it. Bush has shown that he will do this. It requires a person to be somewhat bull-headed, but at least it shows some fortitude. Bush may or may not have made the wrong decision to go into Iraq in the first place, but he has shown a dogged determination to see it to the end, even if it means his political end. Kerry hasn't shown me that he would be able to make those kinds of decisions as a leader.
 

paul mullin

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Location
new york
Country
llUnited States
What happened, did we go to war while I was sleeping?
Last time I checked only congress can declare war, and I thought you needed someone to declare it against. We have gotten sloppy in the last 50 years.
 

Andrey

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Location
Omsk, Russia
Country
llRussia
Originally posted by GeorgiaDixie
One of the main reasons Kerry wouldn't be a good war-time leader is that he seems to waffle on too many issues. He wants to have it both ways on most of the issues. Well, in a war situation you have to make one decision and stick with it. Bush has shown that he will do this. It requires a person to be somewhat bull-headed, but at least it shows some fortitude. Bush may or may not have made the wrong decision to go into Iraq in the first place, but he has shown a dogged determination to see it to the end, even if it means his political end. Kerry hasn't shown me that he would be able to make those kinds of decisions as a leader.
If you want to check who is good military leader and who is bad you have to see on results of their actions.

Actions of Bush are not effective, he speaks nice words but America under Bush command didn't reach any success, moreover, situation is extremely bad for US now.
 

Andrey

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Location
Omsk, Russia
Country
llRussia
Re: We are FREE radicals

Kerry did win medals, and he protested against the war in Vietnam, and made friends and alliances with other protesters, in particular Jane Fonda. Kerry did not rebuke or criticise Jane Fonda for going to Hanoi, North Vietnam and publicly castigating captured American servicemen that were being tortured by North Vietnamese, Cuban, Chinese and Russian interrogators. An effort by the POW's to pass secret messages to her basically to tell their families that they were still alive unravelled when Jane Fonda got the messages and gave them to the captors. What happened was after she and all the world media left the POW's involved were severely tortured once more.
We speak about Kerry, not about Jane Fonda.

Kerry is hero who has real combat experience and who knows what is war.

I don't like Kerry because like every politician he is full of grand promises that he would find hard to keep without making compromises that will hurt rather than hurt in the long run. In other words he is no different from the rest, Republican or Democrat.
One year ago I read excellent speech of Kerry in Congress (or Senate???) when he spoke against invasion in Iraq. As I remember only he and Edvard Kennedy were against this invasion during these debates. All other supported Bush. All words of that speech of Kerry became truth.

Do you seriously think that Al Qaeda will stop if Kerry becomes President? I don't think so.

Do you think America will have no enemies after Kerry wins, if he wins, the election and runs the country? I don't think so.

Do you think the world will be a better place with Kerrey as President of the USA? I don't think so.

Do you think Kerrey will keep all or most of his campaigne promises if he becomes President? I don't think so.

Do you think Kerrey would stop supporting American interests and friends in the Middle East? He says to the effect that America should stop supporting countries that have been friends of America that happen to not have the western values of democracy and freedom and put pressure on them to change their ways. Case in point: Saudi Arabia. Other potential cases in point: Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain.

Once America is out, the Europeans won't hesitate to step into the void. They've already prostituted themselves for years, and they'll do it again in the future as they are doing right now.

Do you think Kerrey will follow through on this? I don't think so.

Is he any different from Bush? No. He is the same shit but of a different smell, nevertheless the same shit.

America will always have enemies no matter which President or party is in office.

American Voters don't really have any good alternatives other than these two people.
You look on your enemies but you do not think what is reason that all these people became your enemies.

Truth is that you made your enemies yourself.

Do you suppose that people will like Americans if you will bomb civilian houses?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will teach these people how they must to live?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will try to force other peoples to make anything with might of weapon?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will ignore international laws and opinion of other countries?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will use forbidden types of weapon against civilians (cluster bombs in El-Falludga)?

Current situation is such than America under command of people like Bush, Ramsfeld and so on is threat for independence and safety of people in other countries. Actions of America (under Clinton and Bush command) made such situation.

Many Arabians fight against America because America is threat for their style of life and directly for their lifes. And they supprt "Al-Qaeda" because this organization is enemy of USA.

Stop hostile actions and amount of your enemies will decrease. Kerry is excellent for this task.
 

Aubrey's Pet

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
East Of The Sun, West Of The Moon!
Country
llUnited States
Re: Re: We are FREE radicals

Originally posted by Andrey
We speak about Kerry, not about Jane Fonda.

Kerry is hero who has real combat experience and who knows what is war.



One year ago I read excellent speech of Kerry in Congress (or Senate???) when he spoke against invasion in Iraq. As I remember only he and Edvard Kennedy were against this invasion during these debates. All other supported Bush. All words of that speech of Kerry became truth.



You look on your enemies but you do not think what is reason that all these people became your enemies.

Truth is that you made your enemies yourself.

Do you suppose that people will like Americans if you will bomb civilian houses?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will teach these people how they must to live?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will try to force other peoples to make anything with might of weapon?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will ignore international laws and opinion of other countries?

Do you suppose that people in other countries will like America if America will use forbidden types of weapon against civilians (cluster bombs in El-Falludga)?

Current situation is such than America under command of people like Bush, Ramsfeld and so on is threat for independence and safety of people in other countries. Actions of America (under Clinton and Bush command) made such situation.

Many Arabians fight against America because America is threat for their style of life and directly for their lifes. And they supprt "Al-Qaeda" because this organization is enemy of USA.

Stop hostile actions and amount of your enemies will decrease. Kerry is excellent for this task.
Were do I begin...
:rolleyes:


Kerry and Jane Fonda are like-minded ppl. Why didn't Kerry stop Fonda or even criticise her for calling his fellow military service personnel, his so called "Band Of Brothers", who were suffering at the hands of their captors a bunch of baby killers and human rights violators.

Kerry has always been of a "political mind" from the outset. He never was going to make a full lifetime career out of the Navy. He viewed it as a stepping stone to his political career.

I always view these ppl with suspicion. They are artificial.

As I recall, Kerry VOTED FOR THE WAR IN IRAQ!

Like all politicians, when things look sour, they try to distance themselves from the problem, much like cowardly Captains being the first to get off a sinking ship.

Kerry was no exception.

You mentioned Senator Edward Kennedy. Do you think he's a great moral man or something? Thin one word: CHAPPAQUIDICK!

Cluster Bombs dropped at Fallujia? Are you sure? Was it a CNN exclusive?

Much as I might agree with you on why nations should not imbue their values on other nations, you seem to think America is the only country that does this? Why?

The French did it. The Russians tried and failed in Chechnya, had sucesses in the Soviet era in Hungary and Checoslovakia, not to mention most of the other countries that were part of the Eastern Bloc at the time. The Chinese really wanted to have a go at it with Vietnam, and are currently doing it to Tibet and covertly in Nepal.

It seems you focus only on America breaking international law and ignoring other countries opinions. You and I know very well that the stone-throwers out there are not without guilt themselves. I can give you examples but I fear the moderator would edit my post as it will be too damn long. So I will limit it to a few very good examples:

1) The French nuclear weapons test at Muroroa Atoll in recent times. France did not care and still doesn't care now what other countries think! And not to mention the French government Terrorist action in the form of the bombing of the Greenpeace ship "Rainbow Warrior" in New Zealand. Count those atrocities that they did to the Algerians. Once there was a protest by Fench Algerians on the streets of Paris...it was brutally put down with alot of deaths.

2) German companies selling equipment and knowhow to make Chemical and Biological weapons for Saddam Hussein in the 80's.

3) The Russians at Chechnya...self explainatory. Not to mention all those things that happened in the Soviet Era. Did you know that the Russians have not given back the northern parts of the Kuril Islands, that belong to Japan, that was taken from the Japanese in WW2? The former owners want it back BTW.

4) The Chinese and the Tienamen Square Massacre. Their secularisation of Tibet. The persecution of the Phalong gong (I think thats hwo it's spelt, I don't know) religious sect. The active support of Maoist rebels in Nepal etc etc.

5) The Indonesians at the breakaway province of Aceh as well as provinces such as Irian Jaya and formerly East Timor.

...get my drift?

To believe in someone like Kerry is to have someone blindfolded driving you around town.

With Bush his eyes are open but he doesn't really know were to go, so you have other passengers in the car, like that tech-loving gun-running arrogant bastard Rummy and Condie, Wolfie, Cheney and Powell, that will give him directions.

Just because Kerrey is in your words "a hero with real combat experience" does that necessary translate to being a great president? Not in my opinion.

H Norman Schwarzkopf is "a hero with real combat experience", more than Kerrey, I might add. He's been in combat for far more extended durations that Kerrey. He knows war better than Kerrey. Real Frontliners like Stormin Norman hate politics. Kerrey is not a real "Frontliner" in my opinion.

Kerrey is opportunistic. I shit on him.

Much as I'm angry at Bush, and in particular Rummy and Cheney, I find it not a comfort at all to find John Kerrey as a possible alternative.

Poor America.
 

Aubrey's Pet

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
East Of The Sun, West Of The Moon!
Country
llUnited States
Originally posted by Andrey
If you want to check who is good military leader and who is bad you have to see on results of their actions.

Actions of Bush are not effective, he speaks nice words but America under Bush command didn't reach any success, moreover, situation is extremely bad for US now.
Good military leader? What are u talking about?

Kerrey the politician is not a military leader. He's a political leader, whowould be making political decisions not military ones, should he become President. He left the military a long time ago.
 

Andrey

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Location
Omsk, Russia
Country
llRussia
Originally posted by hellodoggie
Good military leader? What are u talking about?

Kerrey the politician is not a military leader. He's a political leader, whowould be making political decisions not military ones, should he become President. He left the military a long time ago.
1. Do not mix troops commander and military leader of all country. War is not only frontline combats.

2. Kerry is more experienced in military questions than Bush. Question was to compare only real candidates to the President, not all possible generals and politicians.
 

Andrey

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Location
Omsk, Russia
Country
llRussia
Re: Re: Re: We are FREE radicals

Originally posted by hellodoggie
You mentioned Senator Edward Kennedy. Do you think he's a great moral man or something? Thin one word: CHAPPAQUIDICK!
As I remember, it was Kerry (I read it one year ago) who made excellent speech against war in Iraq.

Cluster Bombs dropped at Fallujia? Are you sure? Was it a CNN exclusive?
Most part of world mass media speaks about it. I saw about it in official Russian TV news, I read about it in Internet. And I am not amazing that US mass media doesn't speak about it.

If to be more correct, civilians from El-Falludga and reporters who were inside El-Falludga speak that US troops dropped cluster bombs in residential areas of El-Falludga.
 

GeorgiaDixie

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2004
Messages
254
Reaction score
0
Location
Savannah, GA
Country
llUnited States
Originally posted by Andrey

2. Kerry is more experienced in military questions than Bush.
Oh really? How many military campaigns has Kerry commanded? How many companies or battalions has he even commanded? Bush has been the commander-in-chief during the War on Terrorism. I don't doubt that Kerry knows more about veteran's affairs, but on upper-level leadership experience Bush has the edge. Kerry seems to shift blame for all of his decision on others. When he didn't vote for the $87 billion for our troops in Iraq he said it was because of the way about $20 million are going to be spent. You can't have a perfectly-packaged decision to make. You have to make a decision and stand by it, with explanations and not excuses.
 

Aubrey's Pet

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
East Of The Sun, West Of The Moon!
Country
llUnited States
Re: Re: Re: Re: We are FREE radicals

Originally posted by Andrey
As I remember, it was Kerry (I read it one year ago) who made excellent speech against war in Iraq.

Cluster Bombs dropped at Fallujia? Are you sure? Was it a CNN exclusive?
[/QUOTE]

Most part of world mass media speaks about it. I saw about it in official Russian TV news, I read about it in Internet. And I am not amazing that US mass media doesn't speak about it.

If to be more correct, civilians from El-Falludga and reporters who were inside El-Falludga speak that US troops dropped cluster bombs in residential areas of El-Falludga.
[/QUOTE]

If they dropped cluster bombs as you allege from the suspect info you read from then there should be examples of Bomblets lying around. Where are they?:rolleyes:
 

Andrey

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Location
Omsk, Russia
Country
llRussia
Re: We are FREE radicals

Originally posted by hellodoggie
America will always have enemies no matter which President or party is in office.

American Voters don't really have any good alternatives other than these two people.
It is very dangerous position. You suppose that many people hate America only because they hate America and that they will hate it in any case with any President of America.

You are wrong.

Most people see threat for them in ACTIONS of America. If they will see that America doesn't want to force them to do anything they will stop to be enemies of America.

Peaceful President of America means large decreasing of American enemies.
 
Top