Is Kerry for or against the war?

[qwerty]

At the DNC Convention Kerry was the anti-war canidate.

Then, two weeks ago in Florida he said he would still have voted to authorize the war in Iraq, even knowing no weapons would be found...

However, yesterday  in West Virginia he said it was "the wrong war in the wrong place".

This is getting out of controll.

[John Dibble]

I've figured it out - Kerry has split personality disorder, and both personalities are running for president.

[A18]

I've figured it out - Kerry has split personality disorder, and both personalities are running for president.

lol

[Jake]

Would he have to file seperately?

[qwerty]

I can see it... January 20, 2005

REHNQUIST: Senator are you ready to take the oath?

KERRY: I am sir.

REHNQUIST: Please raise your right hand and repeat after me, I John Forbes Kerry do solemly swear

KERRY: I'm not ready to take the oath

[PrisonerOfHope]

The more Bush keeps harping on this, the more free coverage Kerry gets and the more befuddled Bush looks.   All three major networks were obliged to point out that the resolution was to 'use force to make Saddam Hussein comply with UN inspections'.   CBS also went into how Bush distorted Kerry's vote on the funding.  

Kerry does have a problem in taking 3 minutes to say what journalists can say in 3 seconds, so this definitely helps.  Keep up the good work!  

And please, no whinig about 'liberal' media for accurately citing the full context of remarks instead of spinning snipets.

[A18]

Your candidate is a joke. No one's worried.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

His position is to better handle the war, before and after it began.  Bush made 2 promises to congress when they were asked to give the president the choice to use force in Iraq....building a true international coalition and exhausting all other methods of diplomacy.  Bush broke both those promises (this is something he harped on in the primaries, I have no idea why he's abandoned it).  So Kerry authorized the use of force in the event nothing else worked, and Bush just jumped right in.  

Kerry- for war after all other options were gone

Bush- let's get 'er done!!!

[MODU]

Kerry is for whatever safe action he can take, as long as the polls show they are in favor of it.  The mere fact that Kerry cannot identify his own personal stance on many topics just solidifies my decision to back Bush this year.

[Democratic Hawk]

I just think Kerry would have handled things very differently from the president preferring a broader coalition of our (i.e. USA and UK) allies

Dave

[A18]

Bush prefered the same. Didn't happen because of them.

You're correct though. Kerry wouldn't have gone to war in Iraq, and probably would have just launched a few military strikes on Afghanistan.

[The Duke]

Are you for the war?

Bush can answer this question in one word: Yes.

Can John Kerry?

[The Duke]

Are you for or against the war?

Bush can answer this question in one word: Yes.

Can John Kerry?

Uhhh . . that is a very badly worded question.

Go with "Are you in favor of the war in Iraq?"

They way you have Bush is both for and against the war, which is closer to Kerry's position.

Blargh.  Consider it reworded.

[ATFFL]

Then there is no need for my old post.  

I like our delete function.

[PrisonerOfHope]

This is like asking are you for or against putting out a fire.  Answering yes doesn't remove the responsibility of those who recklessly lit the fire.  It doesn't remove them from being respnsible for those killed as a result.  It doesn't justify treating  those who warned  against the consequences as mortal enemies.  And it certainly doesn't demonstrate a lack of virility in those wise enough to advocate a different course of action.

It seems Bush is capable of only monotone perceptions and monosylabic reasoning.  Terrorism bad.   War good.
If there is anything that demonstrates an incapacity for leadership, this is it.

P.S.  Hope folks are catching the 60-minutes piece on fearless-leader's galant military career, fortuitously timed to air on the heels of the AP FOI suit results.

[Smash255]

First off saying he would have gone through with the Authorization is different than going through the war the weay it was.

Kerry's point is preetty simple only problem is its not a 3 second blurb type answer.  Basically his positon is this he would stil;l authorize the use of war, but that would mean what the authorization actually meant, authorizing the use for war when all other options were used only as a last resprt.  Thats what he was in favor of.  However his point is Bush did NOT use all options, he did NOT use war as a last resort.

[AuH2O]

Kerry: "I would have done everything better."

Wow, frickin brilliant. That's real special. How convincing, "I would have done everything better."

I guess he would have allied with the Borg so we could easier assimilate Iraqis into a democratic state. And then he would have added Arafat to the coalition and possibly deployed the PLO to Najaf.

Before the war he would have pleased the French by promising to pay them off with the money he procured via a massive tax increase.

When equipping the Iraqi army, Kerry would have followed the highly successful model he championed in the US Senate, which is to avoid using weapons in favor of letting the other side win. So when Al-Sadr declared he was in control, Kerry would have tried to add Al-Sadr to the coalition, on the condition Al-Sadr would tell the New York Times he supports Kerry's reelection bid.

Probably Kerry would have caught Bin Laden by now. He could replace Patty Murray as Secretary of Education, maybe HHS if he preferred.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I just think Kerry would have handled things very differently from the president preferring a broader coalition of our (i.e. USA and UK) allies

Dave

Changing your ID hasn't improved your posts.

What did Lucy come to her senses and dump you?

[Democratic Hawk]

quote author=CARLHAYDEN link=board=16;threadid=8711;start=15#msg207231 date=1094730250]

I just think Kerry would have handled things very differently from the president preferring a broader coalition of our (i.e. USA and UK) allies

Dave

Changing your ID hasn't improved your posts.

What did Lucy come to her senses and dump you?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No she hasn't actually!

By the way,  I know a great deal about British politics. Just because the centre-left has become more fiscally responsible than the right, learn to live with it!

Britain is a darn sight better off now than it was under Margaret and America was a darn sight better off under Clinton, both economically and on an international playing field. In all my time in politics, I never heard a bad word said about Clinton. Myself and my father were among the few, who have some good words for Bush. I think the fact that 47% of Brits want a Kerry victory, as opposed to 16% for Bush is testament to that.

Giuliani likening George W. Bush to the great Sir Winston Churchill went down like a load of lead too. Of course, there are American presidents who are comparable with Churchill such as Washington, Lincoln (see I do like Republicans), Wilson and FDR.

Out of 35 countries, only 3 favour Bush: Poland, Nigeria and the Philippines. Why don't you check out the Globescan poll?

You might interpret that as people wanting a weak America. I disagree. Most people I know love America and its people - they just not too keen on your President. Perhaps, non-Americans want a US President who can provide consensual global leadership. Bush had the world at his side on the War on Terror, and rightly so, but blew it on Iraq - an issue on which I actually agree with him and Blair.

Today, even in Britain, the only group which says that the war in Iraq was the right thing to do are Labour voters (by 48% to 40%) of which I'm proud to be one. All other groups have majorities, or larger pluralities, against it. I'm on America's side.

So just because you don't share my opinions, don't scorn mine. I don't scorn yours and I expect reciprocal treatment from you. If I differ, I'll put my case that's all - so don't make it personal.

Dave