Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
KERRY ON 'MEET THE PRESS': On Sunday, the junior senator from Massachusetts earned the first 'D' given out by OxBlog for a talk-show performance. In keeping with the habits of the blogosphere, I will explain my decision by inserting my comments into the transcript of Kerry's interview:
SEN. KERRY: Tim, its unconscionable that any young American is dying because Iraqis, five months after an election, are dithering and squabbling and cannot find the ability to compromise and come together in a democracy. Our kids didnt die for that. Our kids didnt go over there to do that. Our soldiers have done their job. Theyve given them several elections, three elections. Theyve given them a government, the opportunity to have a government.
Unconscionable? Kerry seems to believe that it was fully conscionable for young Americans to die throughout the first thirty months of the occupation, during which three elections were held. Yet somehow, it has become unconscionable for our servicemen and -women to die now that the formation of a government based on those elections is taking longer than expected.
"The opportunity to have a government." For a long time now, it has been plausible to argue that Iraqis had their opportunity and wasted it. But if Kerry believes the three elections were valuable enough to fight for, how can he advocate walking away if Iraqis won't meet his forty-day deadline?
The only way we made the elections work -- with more voters and fewer attacks on each polling day -- was by waging an unrelenting war against the insurgents for almost three years. None of the political progress in Iraq has come quickly or easily. How can Kerry insist that now it should?
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Joe Biden, your fellow Democrat in the Senate, said this about your proposal: The problem with Johns plan is it sets a date, but it doesnt tell you what happens when the rest of the world falls apart - when you have the Turks and the Iranians in Iraq and theres a regional war. He doesnt tell you that part.
No, of course not. Which is way Kerry had to answer that challenge so evasively:
SEN. KERRY: Well, actually I disagree with Joe. I do set forth what you need to do in that part because theres a complete absence of diplomacy here, Tim. I mean, you remember the times of Henry Kissinger, shuttle diplomacy, an incredibly engaged effort to try to get resolution in the Middle East? Do you remember Jim Baker moving around, talking, unbelievable engaged effort to help build a coalition for Desert Storm? You dont see any of that taking place here. Theres a complete absence of real diplomacy.Kerry insists just a few minutes later that 120,000 American troops "can't do anything about a civil war" in Iraq, but thinks that "shuttle diplomacy" would make a difference?
As for Henry Kissinger, one ought to recall that his strategy for Iraq in the 1970s was to cut a deal with the Ba'athist dictatorship that led to the slaughter of thousands of Kurds who had once believed America was on their side. How appropriate that Kerry is now invoking Kissinger's name to justify another betrayal.
And Jim Baker? He deserves great credit for persuading our allies to form a coalition against Saddam. But I suspect that even the greatest of diplomats could never persuade Iran, Syria and Iraq's other neighbors to behave in a manner consonant with American interests, especially in the event of a civil war.
MR. RUSSERT: The secretary of state went to Iraq and suggested that Prime Minister Jaafari step aside and allow someone else to emerge.
SEN. KERRY: Right.
MR. RUSSERT: An Iraqi said, We resent that American interference."
SEN. KERRY: Thats not the way to do it, Tim. What you need and what Ive suggested is that you have a date in the accordslike summit where you bring all the parties togetherand I mean all the parties. You need to bring Iraqs neighbors together. Khalilzad has now been authorized to talk to the Iranians. Bring the Iranians, bring the Syrians, bring the Jordanians, the Saudis, the Egyptians and others. You have a conference at which you have the United Nations, the Arab League and all of the factions. And you sit there, and you pound out the differences.
Yes, a conference always solves everything. So much for Kerry being a realist. And who has a better track record for resolving thorny international conflicts than the United Nations and the Arab League? (And resolving them in a manner that shows a decent respect for American interests.)
Heck, why doesn't Kerry just suggest that we resurrect the League of Nations and hope that it does a better job now than it did in the 1930s?
SEN. KERRY: ...and if they cant put a government together under the threat that the United States is going to withdraw, theyre not going to do it. Then they want the civil war, then they have to fight their civil war.Kerry is right that Iraqi politicians' confidence that America will not withdraw makes it safer for them to resist compromise. Of course, Kerry doesn't consider the other side of the equation, which is that without America there, the factions might decide that their safest bet is a no-holds-barred war against their opponents. This is the same dilemma we faced again and again during the Cold War and are no closer to resolving now.
But what I can say with a fair amount of confidence is that a threat to withdraw in forty days will never be able to break the habits that Iraqi politicians have developed over the past three years. Moreover, it will be seen as a betrayal by those numerous politicians who have trusted us to see the democratic process through to its conclusion. And it will embolden those who believe intransigence is the best way to get rid of the Americans.
If you were the insurgents, how would you respond to a forty-day ultimatum? I think you would slaughter as many Shi'ite and Kurdish civilians as humanly possible in forty days in order to render impossible the sort of compromises necessary to form a government. Then, after forty days, you would be rewarded with a historic victory over the United States that would ensure your immediate entrance into the pantheon of great Arab heroes.
Now, if you've looked at the Kerry-Russert transcript, you know that I have not yet begun to fight. But it is 1:38 AM and I have an important meeting at 9:00. Tomorrow night I continue.
NATO AIR said:He's an idiot (and far worse I believe) but Bush is not faring much better. This actually depresses me more than anything, considering we had to choose between this jag-off and Bush in 2004....
where are the 21st century trumans, eisenhowers, kennedys, reagans? hell, our scoop jacksons, barbara jordans, sam nunns, barry goldwaters?
Kathianne said:He's doing lots better than THIS. However I'll agree with Reagan, Scoop Jackson, Sam Nunn...
Kathianne said:He's doing lots better than THIS. However I'll agree with Reagan, Scoop Jackson, Sam Nunn...
NATO AIR said:He's an idiot (and far worse I believe) but Bush is not faring much better. This actually depresses me more than anything, considering we had to choose between this jag-off and Bush in 2004....
where are the 21st century trumans, eisenhowers, kennedys, reagans? hell, our scoop jacksons, barbara jordans, sam nunns, barry goldwaters?
