Why do some still speak of Viet Nam as though it was not an ill conceived and untenable situation that never had an end in sight?
It's because they are sore losers, that's why.
Not fifteen minutes ago I passed a member of the Viet Namese royal family on my street. I happen to know some members of the Viet Namese royal family, and have asked what they thought after Daniel Ellsberg leaked the conclusions of the Rand Commission and showed how MacNamara lied through his teeth to the American people.
They were upset and felt they'd been lied to. Wouldn't you have felt that way too? No, you blame the defeat on the anti war movement and not on poor strategy.
Where you miss the point if you think we could have won there was that it was foregone conclusion that we couldn't before Nixon took office and stepped up the genocide. If it were not for Watergate he would have not withdrawn. More of ours would have died needlessly begging for more to die sent after them.
Let's face it, the purpose of war is to bully people first; and the fact that to do so means killing them doesn't matter to a hawk. Killing and abusing is the other purpose - to make an entertainment of domination of the other, preferably some 'barbarian' from another linguistic group.
That these don't see themselves as murderers is ultimately between them and God. And I don't think God is impressed.
Kerry has spoken some sense(Russert interview) but then he flops around in his windsurfing ways.
In 1991 he voted against the war when there was UN approval and a larger coalition. Huh?
On December 16, 2003, at Drake University in Iowa, Kerry asserted that "those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president."
Here he is very clear on what needed to be done, remove Saddam and protect our interest:
NBC'S TIM RUSSERT: "You said this about Howard Dean, and this is, I think, at the core of your candidacy against Howard Dean. '...those who believe we are not safer with [Saddam Hussein's] capture don't have the judgment to be President - or the credibility to be elected President.' As we speak this Sunday morning, Senator, do you believe that Howard Dean does not have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president?"
SEN. KERRY: "I think the judgment of a nominee who doesn't understand that having Saddam Hussein captured will make it extraordinarily difficult to be able to beat an incumbent wartime president who captured Saddam Hussein. And let me tell you why, Tim. Saddam Hussein took us to war once before. In that war, young Americans were killed. He went to war in order to take over the oil fields. It wasn't just an invasion of Kuwait. He was heading for the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. And that would have had a profound effect on the security of the United States. This is a man who has used weapons of mass destruction, unlike other people on this Earth today, not only against other people but against his own people. This is a man who tried to assassinate a former president of the United States, a man who lobbed 36 missiles into Israel in order to destabilize the Middle East, a man who is so capable of miscalculation that he even brought this war on himself. This is a man who, if he was left uncaptured, would have continued to be able to organize the Ba'athists. He would have continued to terrorize the people, just in their minds, because of 30 years of terror in Iraq."
(NBC's "Meet The Press," 1/11/04)
This week he says:Iraq distracted from the war on terror: "The president claims it is the centerpiece of his war on terror. In fact, Iraq was a profound diversion from that war and the battle against our greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden and the terrorists. Invading Iraq has created a crisis of historic proportions and, if we do not change course, there is the prospect of a war with no end in sight."
When Tommy Franks got wind of this he said it was an out right lie and proceeded to make a press release: ''Senator Kerry's contradictions on Iraq are the wrong signal to send to our troops on the ground, to our coalition partners, to the Iraqi people, and to the terrorists seeking our destruction," Franks said. He also said in a radio interview I heard that saying the Iraq war diverted from the Afghanistan operations was a lie, that there were more troops in Afghanistan when the Iraq war started then when the Afganhistan operations began.
Kerry has one position on Iraq alright.....one per day.
Brand - not only that but much of what he's now saying contradicts his past statements on Iraq.
What I'm curious about is a statement he made about six months ago:
""I've met foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy they look at you and say, 'You've got to win this, you've got to beat this guy, we need a new policy.' Things like that."
Did he ever clear this up by naming names? (Who am I kidding LOL).
That was was good for a chuckle. As soon as the questions about 'who' started coming, he dropped that in a hurry.
It's like the new Kerry ad out today claiming that Bush has kept blacks from getting into college and intends to suppress the black vote. Bless their hearts, the media is actuallly asking for names there too and are getting major back pedaling.
And on Iraq, he has on occasion said that he would build a coalition to help there but when asked who he would bring on board, he never seems to have an answer.
George
George wrote: "Cache is not what is required of a leader. Persistence and a willingness to press on in the face of difficulties are usually much more important. I tried to outline the salient defects I see in Kerry in a previous post. Bush spent three years in flight status as a fighter pilot - that beats 13 weeks in swift boats switching band-aids and backdooring Purple Heart write-ups in my book. On critical matters leaders set the agendas for others; followers pay attention to nuances and try to accommodate others. Kerry is a follower."
Oh, George, you just lost at least 50 percent of your cache with me. Hard to believe you really believe what you wrote. Are you just stirring the pot or are you serious?
BBB
