Kerry on Iraq (honestly)

[mozilla]

You're the perfect waste of time, and a ********ing troll. Iggy.

How about you refrain from ad hominem attacks and respond to the question.

Kerry’s heavily nuanced position on Iraq is as clear as mud to me.

[Quaker]

Based on your words it would seem that he would want to bring in UN or other foreign troops as peace-keepers and that would allow the US to remove some of it's troops. While a good plan...in theory, I think the area is too hot for the UN to decide to send troops from other member nations.

Are we talking about the same UN that fled the country (http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/irunaqi.htm) after their headquarters were hit by suicide bombers last year? Yeah, I'm sure Kerry's plan would work. :rolleyes:

Incidentally, I've seen Kerry refer more to getting our "reluctant allies" involved. When he says this, I think France more than UN. Has he specified whether he'd sweet-talk the UN or France or both?

[Matt in the Hat]

To repeat my initial question to all here.

In all seriousness, can someone tell me what Kerry's position is on Iraq?
You are not serious and you are wasting our time.

[Chris M.]

Of the many things that get me about the whole Guard topic, this one really sticks:

The White House, which released the documents shortly after the CBS report aired, said Bush did not take the physical because he was not going to be in a flying capacity with an Alabama National Guard unit where he transferred so he could work on a political campaign.

He still had two years left on his commitment. He was allowed to skip Vietnam so that he could be a pilot in the Air Guard. Then he decides he is not going to fly anymore?

How does that work? He made a commitment to you, me, the taxpayers that fund the Guard etc. The military spent a boat load to teach him to fly. That is what he should have been doing.

I don't buy the whole "they didn't have my plane there" argument either. You simply get rated in a new piece of equipment. Particularly when you still have two years left.

[mozilla]

You are not serious and you are wasting our time.

How 'bout just answering the question?

How can you trust Kerry with your family's safety if you have no idea what his position is?

[bungadiri]

How 'bout just answering the question?

How can you trust Kerry with your family's safety if you have no idea what his position is?
Either put up or shut up. Posters have given specific responses to this question already. You've ignored them because you're only interested in/limited in ability to pasting Republican slogans into your posts.

[Matt in the Hat]

How 'bout just answering the question?

How can you trust Kerry with your family's safety if you have no idea what his position is?
Because, although I live less than 2 miles from the most tragic attack in American history, I do not live in constant fear of attack. It's a pity that you and many others do.

Fear has crippled you.

BTW, here is what JFK thinks
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/c04/c04090804_kerry.rm

[mozilla]

. . . .can certainly figure out how to go here (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/iraq.html), and get the answer without coming here at all.

Nothing there. Sorry. Just some general vague concepts. Besides, all of the initiatives are being currently done, like the training of Iraqis and the debt forgiveness...

However, if you read the links, you'll find the confusion that I can't decode. Some of those positions contradict each other.

[BlueMeanie]

How 'bout just answering the question?

How can you trust Kerry with your family's safety if you have no idea what his position is?
Did you have any idea what Bush's stance on terrorism and "national defense" was prior to the 2000 election? I mean, ********, if I knew his idea of fighting a force of predominantly-Arab terrorists -- who largely hide/train/operate in Afghanistan and Pakistan -- was to invade Iraq, I wouldn't have voted for him.

I'd rather take the chance. Conservatives are trying to scare people about Kerry's potential, when we all know Bush has already fumbled the ball all over the place. Time for a substitution, coach.

[Dan Loney]

Let me be clear, the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies.

Pity that Bush lied about his intentions.

[Finnegan]

John Kerry voted for the 87 billion dollars to fund the Iraq war. He voted for a bill that would have provided an ACTUAL FUNDING MECHANISM for the 87 billion instead of just putting it on the Gov't mastercard. The bill he voted for proposed to *gasp* temporaily roll back the tax cuts on the richest 1% to fund this war.

This 87 billion John Kerry voted for also called for actual oversight of how companies like Halliburton were going to be spening OUR MONEY.

George Bush threatened to veto the 87 billion John Kerry voted for. He choose to recklessly spend our tax dollars and STILL not provide our troops with body armor.

Get your facts straight Mozilla or shut the ******** up.

In times of war we ALL have to make sacrifaces. Unfortunately, Bush believes that only the solidiers and their families should make a sacriface. Halliburton and the richest 1% should be just fine in his world.

[Chicago1871]

I'd rather take the chance. Conservatives are trying to scare people about Kerry's potential, when we all know Bush has already fumbled the ball all over the place. Time for a substitution, coach.
*Put me in coach...I'm ready to play...centerfield...* :)

[mozilla]

John Kerry voted for the 87 billion dollars to fund the Iraq war.

Spin it all you want, he flip-flopped on this royally!

BTW, I actually voted for John Kerry before I voted against him :)

[Attacking Minded]

Sure s/he was. S/He can figure out how to get up on those hind legs, waddle over to the PC, and get on BigSoccer to ask that question, s/he can certainly figure out how to go here (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/iraq.html), and get the answer without coming here at all.

Trolling, plain and simple.

Now, had S/HE given us the above link, and asked for debate/discussion on Kerry's position on Iraq, its feasibility, etc., that would have NOT been trolling.

There's no question that the post that launched this thread was not hunting real debate and discussion.

Unless, of course, trolling in fact CONSTITUTES debate and discussion in the Zilla household.

Which, given her/his post history, may in fact be the case.
Mel I find it hypocritical in the extreme for you to accuse someone else of trolling just because they hold a contrary opinion, one you think is false. I find it hypocritical in the extreme that you would want to silence someone else’s opinion. Voting for Kerry doesn’t have to mean selling out to Kerry. You don’t have to lose your critical thinking skills. You are allowed to make a choice between two candidates and still think for yourself.

The way to handle opinions you disagree with is to calmly discuss them.

To that end, I find Mozilla’s question about Iraq to be an honest one and it has been reflected in Kerry’s opinion on North Korea as given to the New York Times.

Here are two quotes from the NYT:

(He) has said for months that the United States must deal directly with the North Korean government - just as it dealt directly with Khrushchev during the Cuban missile crisis, and directly with China as it became a nuclear power in the 1960's.

When (he) was pressed about how he would handle the threat of a North Korean nuclear test if he was in the Oval Office, he declined to be prescriptive, other than to say that the issue would probably have to be taken to the United Nations Security Council. "Hypothetical questions are not real," he said.

So which one did Kerry say? Trick question! Kerry said both.

I don’t think Kerry is so much a flip-flopper as he is a critic. When his opponent flips, Kerry flops just so he can continue to criticize. I could have also used the issue of troop redeployment to make that point. Kerry is only a critic.

Too bad for Kerry that the American people are voting for president rather than not president.

[verybdog]

How can you trust Kerry with your family's safety if you have no idea what his position is?

It really didn't matter.

It wouldn't make a difference if a monkey was in charge in the WH.