Kerry's plan for Iraq....

[Gop guy]

John Foul Mouth Kerry just can't get it through is dense head that the U.N. IS NOT THE WAY TO GO IN IRAQ! How many times has Koffi Anan told him that he doesn't want his organization involved in Iraq, alot! He knows it's too dangerous for his lightly armed, inexperienced peace keeping troops. Why can't that asshole see this!? Oh and lets not forget that as soon as Iraq would cause his approval rating to erode, HE'D BE OUTTA THERE! Yes, the War on Terrorism is an international one, any country that has the courage to opposse terror is welcome to join it. However, WE MUST LEAD IT! We are the only country in the world with enough military power, money, resources, and courage to truly inflict real damage to the terrorism cancer that plagues this earth.

If there are any independent swing voters on these boards, please read this carefully and consider all that I have said. All the negative things said about John F. Kerry on this board aren't slander, mudslinging, or whatever you would call it, IT'S ALL THE TRUTH! Kerry lies whenever it will further his political career or agenda, unlike our honorable President George W. Bush. I implore you, USE COMMON SENSE COME NOVEMBER!

God bless America and our good President!

 

[no1tovote4]

Actually, if the UN did get control, it would still be US forces dying there. Other countries would send like 12 troops each and the US would be the bulk of the effort as it always is for them. It would be giving the UN veto power over our security that I find to be unforgivable. We cannot allow a President that advocates action only when supported by the UN as the UN does not have the best interest of the US at heart.

The Pres of France is working to make the EU led by France a "counterbalance" to the US. This means he will directly be in opposition to the US regardless of the political reality. We cannot let countries that have no interest in the safety of the US to make Military decisions for us.

 

[Gop guy]

Originally posted by no1tovote4
Actually, if the UN did get control, it would still be US forces dying there. Other countries would send like 12 troops each and the US would be the bulk of the effort as it always is for them. It would be giving the UN veto power over our security that I find to be unforgivable. We cannot allow a President that advocates action only when supported by the UN as the UN does not have the best interest of the US at heart.

The Pres of France is working to make the EU led by France a "counterbalance" to the US. This means he will directly be in opposition to the US regardless of the political reality. We cannot let countries that have no interest in the safety of the US to make Military decisions for us.

All very true, I don't think I've seen you around here b4, welcome man.

 

[musicman]

Originally posted by no1tovote4
Actually, if the UN did get control, it would still be US forces dying there. Other countries would send like 12 troops each and the US would be the bulk of the effort as it always is for them. It would be giving the UN veto power over our security that I find to be unforgivable. We cannot allow a President that advocates action only when supported by the UN as the UN does not have the best interest of the US at heart.

The Pres of France is working to make the EU led by France a "counterbalance" to the US. This means he will directly be in opposition to the US regardless of the political reality. We cannot let countries that have no interest in the safety of the US to make Military decisions for us.

Thank you.

Welcome to the board!