A perfect example of why I am not voting for John Kerry

[Democrat4Bush]

The guy cannot make up his freakin mind. Can you imagine him as CIC?

Kerry, August 9th.

On Friday, Bush challenged Kerry to answer whether he would support the war "knowing what we know now" about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction that U.S. and British officials were certain were there. In response, Kerry said: "Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have."

Kerry, September 29th.

"We should not have gone into Iraq knowing today what we know," Kerry told ABC. "Knowing there was no imminent threat to America, knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, knowing there was no connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein, I would not have voted to support war."


Link

 

[dmp]

The guy cannot make up his freakin mind. Can you imagine him as CIC?

Kerry, August 9th.

On Friday, Bush challenged Kerry to answer whether he would support the war "knowing what we know now" about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction that U.S. and British officials were certain were there. In response, Kerry said: "Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have."

Kerry, September 29th.

"We should not have gone into Iraq knowing today what we know," Kerry told ABC. "Knowing there was no imminent threat to America, knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, knowing there was no connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein, I would not have voted to support war."


Link

I wonder why main-stream media doesn't attack these kinds of things more often?

 

[Palestinian Jew]

I can see what his reasoning is, but his stance on the Iraq war has been nothing but pandering. I'm guessing he'll withdraw, which is what we need to do, and hopefully he will then support an Iraqi army to try to get some stability in Iraq.

 

[no1tovote4]

I can see what his reasoning is, but his stance on the Iraq war has been nothing but pandering. I'm guessing he'll withdraw, which is what we need to do, and hopefully he will then support an Iraqi army to try to get some stability in Iraq.

How do you think they will get and train an Iraqi army if we left? If we left right now the power vacuum would be filled by Zarqawi and his Caliphate-seeking fundamentalist Islamofascist friends who would proceed to create a zone where students are taught by mullahs that hate the US. Great plan.

 

[dilloduck]

How do you think they will get and train an Iraqi army if we left? If we left right now the power vacuum would be filled by Zarqawi and his Caliphate-seeking fundamentalist Islamofascist friends who would proceed to create a zone where students are taught by mullahs that hate the US. Great plan.

Agreed--no doubt in my mind that Kerry will cut and run like he did in Viet Nam and then wanted the rest of the troops to do the same. He has a plan for Iraq alright. It just happens to be one most of the country is against. Why do you think he's keeping it secret??

 

[Palestinian Jew]

How do you think they will get and train an Iraqi army if we left? If we left right now the power vacuum would be filled by Zarqawi and his Caliphate-seeking fundamentalist Islamofascist friends who would proceed to create a zone where students are taught by mullahs that hate the US. Great plan.

What is your big plan? If we stay in Iraq things will keep getting worse and worse. There is no hope in winning while we are there, our very presence causes more insurgents to be created and draws more fighters from accross the border, not to mention this is creating more recruits for terrorist organizations, who in turn send their fighters to Iraq.

There is little hope for Iraq, most likely it will break down into civil war, and in that situation what are we going to do?! Fight four sides at once, five if Turkey wants to get involved.

And it is pathetic that I was able to foresee all of this happening while I was a senior in high school and yet Bush&Co. could not even imagine this happening.

 

[Merlin1047]

What is your big plan? If we stay in Iraq things will keep getting worse and worse. There is no hope in winning while we are there, our very presence causes more insurgents to be created and draws more fighters from accross the border, not to mention this is creating more recruits for terrorist organizations, who in turn send their fighters to Iraq.

There is little hope for Iraq, most likely it will break down into civil war, and in that situation what are we going to do?! Fight four sides at once, five if Turkey wants to get involved.

And it is pathetic that I was able to foresee all of this happening while I was a senior in high school and yet Bush&Co. could not even imagine this happening.

Why do Democrats always run at the first sign that things aren't going exactly as planned? Why is it that liberals have no staying power when it comes to problem solving? Why is abandoning a problem your only solution to that problem? Things in Iraq will not "get worse and worse". That is your leftist propoganda, but it is not reality. There will be an increase in attacks between now and the election. These will probably start tapering off to some extent once the elected government has had a few months in power. Then, as the Iraqi army and police force are trained and equipped, as human rights are established, as the economy improves, then the attacks will diminish and the Iraqis will be able to repulse the enemies of freedom without our assistance.

Your attitude is shared by many Democrats, including Slick Willie Clinton and jacques francois kerrie. As a result of our fickle meddling in Africa and Europe we lost the respect of both ally and enemy alike. We gained the reputation as being a nation of half-assed bullies who will run the first time someone bloodies our noses. Pres. Bush is attempting to see that this nation follows through for a change. But somehow you find that to be problematic. Apparently you prefer Clinton's cut and run tactics.

If Iraq does ultimately descend into chaos, let it be because the Iraqis want it that way - not because we never gave them a fighting chance for a better life.

 

[Democrat4Bush]

Excellent Merlin

 

[dmp]

seems like a great place to remind us:

If D-Day happened today....

Tragic French Offensive Stalled on Beaches (Normandy, France - June 6,
1944) - Pandemonium, shock and sheer terror predominate today's events
in Europe.

In an as yet unfolding apparent fiasco, Supreme Allied Commander, Gen.
Dwight David Eisenhower's troops got a rude awakening this morning at
Omaha Beach here in Normandy.

Due to insufficient planning and lack of a workable entrance strategy,
soldiers of the 1st and 29th Infantry as well as Army Rangers are now
bogged down and sustaining heavy casualties inflicted on them by
dug-in insurgent positions located 170 feet above them on cliffs
overlooking the beaches which now resemble blood soaked killing fields
at the time of this mid-morning filing.

Bodies, parts of bodies, and blood are the order of the day here, the
screams of the dying and the stillness of the dead mingle in testament
to this terrible event.

Morale can only be described as extremely poor--in some companies all
the officers have been either killed or incapacitated, leaving only
poorly trained privates to fend for themselves.

Things appear to be going so poorly that Lt. General Omar Bradley has
been rumored to be considering breaking off the attack entirely. As we
go to press embattled U.S. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt's
spokesman has not made himself available for comment at all, fueling
fires that something has gone disastrously awry.

The government at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is in a distinct lock-down
mode and the Vice President's location is presently and officially
undisclosed.

Whether the second in command should have gone into hiding during such
a crisis will have to be answered at some future time, but many agree
it does not send a good signal.

Miles behind the beaches and adding to the chaos, U.S. Naval gunships
have inflicted many friendly fire casualties, as huge high explosive
projectiles rain death and destruction on unsuspecting Allied
positions.
The lack of training of Naval gunners has been called into question
numerous times before and today's demonstration seems to underlie
those concerns.

At Utah Beach the situation is also grim, elements of the 82nd and
101st Airborne seemed to be in disarray as they missed their primary
drop zones behind the area believed to comprise the militant's front
lines. Errant paratroopers have been hung up in trees, breaking arms
and legs, rendering themselves easy targets for those defending this
territory.

On the beach front itself the landing area was missed, catapulting
U.S. forces nearly 2,000 yards South of the intended coordinates, thus
placing them that much farther away from the German insurgents and
unable to direct covering fire or materially add to the operation.

Casualties at day's end are nothing short of horrific; at least 8,000
and possibly as many as 9,000 were wounded in the haphazardly
coordinated attack, which seems to have no unifying purpose or intent.
Of this number at least 3,000 have been estimated as having been
killed, making June 6th by far, the worst single day of the war which
has dragged on now--with no exit strategy in sight--as the American
economy still struggles to recover from Herbert Hoover's depression
and its 25% unemployment.

Military spending has skyrocketed the national debt into uncharted
regions, lending another cause for concern. When and if the current
hostilities finally end it may take generations for the huge debt to
be repaid.

On the planning end of things, experts wonder privately if enough
troops were committed to the initial offensive and whether at least
another 100,000 troops should have been added to the force structure
before such an audacious undertaking. Communication problems also have
made their presence felt making that an area for further investigation
by the appropriate governmental committees.

On the home front, questions and concern have been voiced. A telephone
poll has shown dwindling support for the wheel-chair bound Commander
In Chief, which might indicate a further erosion of support for his
now three year-old global war.

Of course, the President's precarious health has always been a
question. He has just recently recovered from pneumonia and
speculation persists whether or not he has sufficient stamina to
properly sustain the war effort. This remains a topic of furious
discussion among those questioning his competency.

Today's costly and chaotic landing compounds the President's already
large credibility problem.

More darkly, this phase of the war, commencing less than six months
before the next general election, gives some the impression that
Roosevelt may be using this offensive simply as a means to secure
re-election in the fall.

Underlining the less than effective Allied attack, German
casualties-most of them innocent and hapless conscripts--seem not to
be as severe as would be imagined. A German minister who requested
anonymity stated categorically that "the aggressors were being driven
back into the sea amidst heavy casualties, the German people seek no
wider war."

"The news couldn't be better," Adolph Hitler said when he was first
informed of the D-Day assault earlier this afternoon.

"As long as they were in Britain we couldn't get at them. Now we have
them where we can destroy them."

German minister Goebbels had been told of the Allied airborne landings
at 0400 hours.

"Thank God, at last," he said. "This is the final round."

 

[Palestinian Jew]

Things in Iraq will not "get worse and worse". That is your leftist propoganda, but it is not reality. There will be an increase in attacks between now and the election.

You just contradicted yourself.

These will probably start tapering off to some extent once the elected government has had a few months in power.

I'm basing my assertion that the worst is yet to come, and I'll say that even after today when 30 children died, because the kurd's want their own state, which Turkey doesn't want. The Shi'ite want control over the gov't and so do the sunni, and with extremist on both sides it will be deadly.

If Iraq does ultimately descend into chaos, let it be because the Iraqis want it that way - not because we never gave them a fighting chance for a better life.

They've had that chance and passed. Look at the number of iraqi policemen that ran away from Fallujah. How do we instill the will to fight into people that have already given up?

Apparently you prefer Clinton's cut and run tactics.

I love how Republicans use that. Using some sense and getting out of a situation that offers no hope is cowardly, but throwing away the lives of men and women my age is noble.

Answer me this, why are the insurgents fighting and where do they come from?

 

[Avatar4321]

I love how Republicans use that. Using some sense and getting out of a situation that offers no hope is cowardly, but throwing away the lives of men and women my age is noble.

Answer me this, why are the insurgents fighting and where do they come from?

First, on what rational basis do you conclude that the situation in Iraq is one that "offers no hope" Yeah its going to be tough for a while, but weve done tough things before. How is there no hope?

As to your question. There are no "insurgents." Simply because the media is trying to disconnect Iraq from the war on terror to help the Democrat agenda does not change that these so called "Insurgents" are nothing but terrorist thungs who want to be the next dictators of Iraq and want to maie America turn tail and run, exactly as you are suggesting we do!

Do you comprehend why the Democrat message is not resonating with the American people? Its simply because their message is to do exactly what the terrorists want and capitulate. the party is full of pessimists who have the blame America first attitude. If you continually tell people they are the root of all evil in the world and there is no hope you are going to be rejected.

 

[eric]

A perfect example of why I am not voting for John Kerry

Well I was going to vote for Kerry, then decided I won't pull the lever, now I am not sure, but Bush seems to be more popular now, I think I will vote for Bush, unless I decide not to !

 

[eric]

I hope no one takes that seriously, I would not vote for kerry, even if I had to give up everything I worked so hard for. Which by the way will happen if kerry gets elected !!!!!!!!

But then again >>>> :

 

[Palestinian Jew]

First, on what rational basis do you conclude that the situation in Iraq is one that "offers no hope" Yeah its going to be tough for a while, but weve done tough things before. How is there no hope?

I'm talking about Bush's warped perception of reality. You know, a thriving democracy thats a beacon to all of the Middle East.

As to your question. There are no "insurgents." Simply because the media is trying to disconnect Iraq from the war on terror to help the Democrat agenda does not change that these so called "Insurgents" are nothing but terrorist thungs who want to be the next dictators of Iraq and want to maie America turn tail and run, exactly as you are suggesting we do!

There are fighters from Iraq who are rebelling against authority, hence they are called insurgents, not that hard to comprehend. And you still didn't answer the question, why are they fighting? It is not so simple as "they hate freedom" as Bush&Co. have you believing.

Do you comprehend why the Democrat message is not resonating with the American people?

Last time I checked over 50% of Americans think the War in Iraq was a mistake, considerably higher than just two years ago.

 

[musicman]

First, on what rational basis do you conclude that the situation in Iraq is one that "offers no hope" Yeah its going to be tough for a while, but weve done tough things before. How is there no hope?

As to your question. There are no "insurgents." Simply because the media is trying to disconnect Iraq from the war on terror to help the Democrat agenda does not change that these so called "Insurgents" are nothing but terrorist thungs who want to be the next dictators of Iraq and want to maie America turn tail and run, exactly as you are suggesting we do!

Do you comprehend why the Democrat message is not resonating with the American people? Its simply because their message is to do exactly what the terrorists want and capitulate. the party is full of pessimists who have the blame America first attitude. If you continually tell people they are the root of all evil in the world and there is no hope you are going to be rejected.

I agree wholeheartedly. But, then, I think despair and bitterness are part and parcel of the liberal socialist mindset.

Think about it. Can you name one buoyantly hopeful Democrat?

 

[musicman]

I'm going to have to amend my last statement - at least partially.

Ted Kennedy has most assuredly demonstrated his buoyancy!

 

[CSM]

I'm going to have to amend my last statement - at least partially.

Ted Kennedy has most assuredly demonstrated his buoyancy!

That's not buoyancy, that's bloat.

 

[eric]

Ted Kennedy has most assuredly demonstrated his buoyancy!

Buoyancy ??

That guys so full of Liberal/Socialist hot air he couldn't sink !

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm talking about Bush's warped perception of reality. You know, a thriving democracy thats a beacon to all of the Middle East.

Well thats the goal. The fact that you seem to think its impossible speaks more about your lack of vision then anything Bush has done or said.

There are fighters from Iraq who are rebelling against authority, hence they are called insurgents, not that hard to comprehend. And you still didn't answer the question, why are they fighting? It is not so simple as "they hate freedom" as Bush&Co. have you believing.

The problem is that quite a high number of these so called "insurgence" are not from Iraq. Simply because you dont like the answer doesnt make it less true. The terrorists are fighting to enslave their fellow Iraqi's to their twists version of Islam and to make American turn and run. Something you are more than happy to oblige them with,

Last time I checked over 50% of Americans think the War in Iraq was a mistake, considerably higher than just two years ago.

Id love to see the poll. But does that really matter? hindsight is always twenty twenty. Besides, a majority of people still believe President Bush is more qualified to bring Iraq to its conclusion then Senator Kerry is. Doesnt help your argument now does it?

 

[musicman]

Buoyancy ??

That guys so full of Liberal/Socialist hot air he couldn't sink !

He's such a Chappaqui - dick.