Where does Kerry stand on the issues?

Kerry is pretty liberal. He doesn't deny it.

That means he is pro-choice on abortion.

As for terrorism, Kerry sees more of a surgical strike-type response to terror intelligence rather than regime change and classical warfare. Big difference between the two.

Cycloptichorn

I should have made it clear in my post but what else does he stand for? Right now I will vote for Bush, I want someone to change my mind, not by attacking Bush or telling me that Kerry is better, but by telling me where Kerry stands on issues.

Maybe you have a specific issue in mind? Otherwise maybe you could just check out his web site.

I checked his website and I am more confused than a termite in a yo-yo. Maybe this, if elected President will Kerry wait until we are attacked on out soil again before involving our troops?

The short answer is no.

But your question is odd. Will he wait until we are attacked by whom and before involving our troops in what? Our troops are already committed, overly so. He won't be able to change that in any speedy way. If a new enemy were to come on the scene there isn't much he or Bush could do about it.

Wait until we are attacked by anyone who is a threat to the US. What I am asking is if we have a threat in the world who is making it pretty clear that they intend America harm will Kerry wait until that threat acts to defend us? I know that you say no but what does he intend to do? So far all I have heard is that he has a plan for things like this but what is it? As far as being overly committed I don't agree. I am in the Army reserve and have been for a while. Back from Iraq in Oct. and that's not the way that I see it. America has troops all over who have been taking it easy in Germany and other countries that aren't much of a threat now that the cold war is over. I (and other service people) think that it is time to move these people to a new home and use them for other things.

Sorry I deleted a part of a line by mistake. I was in the Army and now the Reserves for another 6 months.

The problem is, man, that this just isn't that easy to do.

We don't see many classical threats, IE, WWII-style threats anymore; the US is just too powerful to be challenged by a tank-and-plane style army. Not only are we protected geographically by our isolation from other major powers, our forces are head and above - can you see anyone challenging those new Raptor jets we have? I can't, they are bad-ass!

So, the real question becomes, what is the threat to America? Many feel that the biggest threat is terrorism. But terrorists don't just come out and warn you they are going to attack.

Therefore, some amount of offensive needs to be taken in order to curb the problem of terrorism worldwide. Both candidates have stated that they don't think you can outright win the war on terrorism, but you can reduce it to a tiny level.

How do we identify terrorists? How do we react once we have identified them? All these are difficult questions to answer, and not something that can be summed up in a sound byte, though Kerry certainly makes a good attempt: 'we will find terrorists across the world, and KILL them.'

The problem with killing terrorists, is that unless you go about it the right way, you end up making more terrorists - every terrorist out there has a family. Many believe they are fighting for a just cause. The dead become martyrs. It's a real problem.

So, what Kerry has talked about doing (once again I'd direct ya to his website) is using more of a international police-style response to terrorism; go in, get the bad guys, get out, don't bother overthrowing the country that isn't supporting the bad guys on the way. Which is what Bush has done.

Cheers and welcome to A2K, hope you'll stick around - we don't have many voices here that have been on the ground in Iraq. I'm sure my fellow debaters on here would be happy to hear some of your thoughts and experiences on the subject.

Cycloptichorn

I agree with your take on the placement of our troops around the world. But the kind of question you're asking isn't an issue or even a policy question. It's a judgment question. Where do you think Bush stands on this issue? Clearly we can't respond to all threats with force.

I highly doubt that any president would allow this country to be attacked if they had knowledge that an attack was imminent.

I think the question you meant to ask is 'is John Kerry a pussy?' And you'll have to judge that for yourself.

So, where does Kerry stand on the issues?

Just list them off.

http://www.issues2000.org/John_Kerry.htm

Good link FD.

...at your service.