Young Kerry

Kerry will stay true to his liberal leanings and allow foriegn governments make his decisions for him. First thing he will do is call his buddy Chirac and make some sort of deal. You will soon see French companies taking over some of the responsibilities in Iraq and fare no better than any one else, but at least the smell will be different.

Kerry knows an immediate withdrawl is not possible, but he will make it appear that he is appeasing the terrorists by sacrificing a small American cities to terrorist attacks.

Nadi
Kerry has no choice. The US has destroyed the Iraq government and we will be required to stay in Iraq untill thier government is repaired. He will get us out of there as soon as he can unlike Bush who will probebly start a second war with Iran.

Initially, let me say Kerry was NOT a spokeperson for Viet Nam Vets when he misrepresented the actions of 2.5 million soldiers suggesting they ALL were war criminals, including himself. I find it disgraceful that he did ANYTHING he could to get enough Purple Hearts so he could get out of harms way. How can you get 4 Purple Hearts in his ONLY 4 month tour?

Secondly, who knows HOW Kerry will handle the war as he seems unable to communicate a consistant policy on this issue? That makes him dangerous should he be elected as Commander in Chief.

I'm not a liberal...so I really hate to speak for him...but, McG wrote:



C'mon, McG!

Getting other governments to sign on to something like a preemptive war is a far cry from allowing foreign governments to make decisions for us.

If Bush...and his handlers...had taken care of that part instead of doing what they did, perhaps this enterprise would be in better shape now.

As it is, whatever administration follows this one will have to clean up one of the worse messes we've ever gotten into.

Hi, Nadi. Welcome to A2K. As you may have noticed, a couple of the people that have responded to your question so far are Bush supporters, and not very well informed ones at that.

If you want to learn more, and get the facts rather than biased personal opinions, here are a few links you might want to check out.

Some information on PNAC, which is the group of highly placed Bush administration personnel that, prior to Bush's taking of our government, decided war in Iraq was needed for their own personal gain. The suggested PNAC policies are being played out in the current administration. http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=PNAC

Kerry fought in Vietnam and upon returning to the US, was outspoken about what was wrong with the war. He said some things which other vietnam veterans became angry about, but it wasn't just about their honor. Politics played an important part, too. The leader of the current Swift Boat Veterans for Truth goes way back in the Republican Party. http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=John_E._O'Neill

After Kerry's Anti War protesting days, he was elected to the US Senate. Fresh into politics, and with his skills as a lawyer/ prosecutor, he tackled two of the largest, most intricate scandals in US history - which by the way, also dealt with busting terrorists AND the Republican Party AND several Bush family members.

The two scandals were Iran Contra and the BCCI, the latter being a terrorist front for laundering money (including Iraq arms sales) as well as having ties to the eventual failing of Savings and Loan companies across the country. Several Bush family members were caught with their hand in the cookie jars of the Savings and Loans.

BCCI Info can be found at:

http://fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/ (Note Kerry's lead role)

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.sirota.html

Iran Contra / Bush Sr. / Kerry's role in outing the illegal arms trade: (Take your pick... There's lot's of information here)

http://websearch.cnn.com/search/search?Coll=cnn_xml&QuerySubmit=true&Page=1&source=cnn&sites=web&query=Iran+Contra

In short, Kerry has already proven that he is tough on terrorism. He broke the terrorist funding scandal 15 years ago while Bush Sr. was befriending the enemy. He does not have ties to Carlyl Group, Halliburton, oil companies or, most importantly, PNAC, all of which are close to Bush.

Now that we are in Iraq, Kerry will have to take care in making sure Iraq is rebuilt prior to withdrawing troops. There is no choice but to do so. Bush Sr. encouraged an Iraqi uprising against Saddam during the first Gulf War and promised to provide security for Iraqi's trying to overthrow Saddam. There was no protection provided and they were left to die at the hands of Saddam. Kerry will not make that mistake. He has served with honor thus far, and I am confident he will continue to do so. His history backs him up.

Yes, Kerry's history as a lying cheating money grubbing career politician will serve him well.

(So if BPB is out of politics, does that mean we get a lot more Squinney? That'd be good! :-) )

I'm working on him. You know it won't really last. He enjoys the "debate" too much.

I can't believe, and I know I have vowed to stay off the political threads, so I want to make sure I understand that you are saying with conviction that you believe John Kerry a duly elected Senator and publicly elected official of this country, if elected president, will sacrifice a small American city to the terrorists, whoever they may be, in order to appease them.

I personally do not believe you will actually cop to that slanderous and genuinely treasonous remark right out in the open in front of everyone so please do, without spin or retract it.

This accusation is serious and over the line IMO, and should be reported to the authorities.

Kerry surely is representative of the Viet Nam Vets against the War.

I recall having been a McGovern supporter that while the students against the war were accused of "spitting on the vets" the majority were characterized for the actions of the very few, and that in fact when people like Kerry first started showing up who were Veterans and who agreed with us - it was not just a breath of fresh air, but theirs was a voice that actually found ears in Congress if not the executive.

The anti war crowd was treated as a mob by congress and by both presidents - from when LBJ was ignoring it to the time that Nixon was clubbing and infiltrating it.

Add to this the fact that there will always be a layer of Storm Troopers in any military organization. We don't like to admit that it can happen here and to us. But Abu Ghraib is surely a a sore symptom that tells us we have to watch our step if we want to remain a democracy - or to recovery a sense of it if we have already lost ground.