Kerry on Iraq

[Backtothemac]

http://www.kerryoniraq.com/default.asp

If anything, this shows just how political the man can be. Sad really. I think the democrats would have been better served with Howard Dean. He has always been anti-war, and I respect him for that. He doesn't flip flop like Kerry.

[IJ Reilly]

Dean would not only lose to Bush, he'd get crushed, and you know it. So no, the Democrats would not be better off with Dean (and neither would the nation). I'll grant that Kerry isn't as detailed as I'd like him to be on the subject of what he'd do with the mess in Iraq, but I this constant "flip-flop" charge from the GOP goes nowhere factually that I can see. It's just so much noise.

[mactastic]

Bush flip flops as much as Kerry and that doesn't worry you? I admit I'd like a little more consistency from Kerry (and Bush for that matter), but you only seem bothered by Kerry's flip flops BTTM. Dubya's don't seem to phase you at all.

[pseudobrit]

If anything, this shows just how political the man can be. Sad really.

Well, you know, he is a politician, not unlike the current president. Don't tell me you still think it's possible to elect a true "political (Washington) outsider" like most of the inexperienced (or unqualified) politicians try to term themselves.

[Backtothemac]

Yea, I agree Bush has flip flopped on some stuff, but nothing to this depth and detail.

If the swing voter sees this video. It's over.

[IJ Reilly]

"Some stuff?" How about nation-building, for one example?

[Leo Hubbard]

"Some stuff?" How about nation-building, for one example?
How about 9/11 being an important unforseen event causing people to change their opinions about such things.

[Bobcat37]

Ah the game of politics is so fun. So do two wrongs make a right? Does crying out that Bush has also flip-flopped make Kerry's flip-flops acceptable? That's the vibe I'm getting (I'm just trying to be the middle man in this instance)

Anyway, I found the documentary very interesting, it's nice to finally have one piece that puts together all of Mr. Kerry's various stances on the war in a nice chronological order.

IJ- did you watch the video, because I'm not sure how you can say the "flip-flop charge from the GOP goes nowhere factually that I can see". I think you need glasses, or in this case a hearing-aide maybe O_o

[LeeTom]

How about 9/11 being an important unforseen event causing people to change their opinions about such things.

How about Yucca Mountain?

[IJ Reilly]

People can have such short and selective memories. During the campaign of 2000 (yes, before 9-11), Bush the candidate was attempting to draw a distinction between himself and the Clinton administration, which had intervened in Kosovo in what Republicans damned as a nation building campaign of the kind the US should not engage (with mandatory flashbacks to Somalia). Evidently the Clinton administration believed even prior to 9-11 that nation building efforts could be justified.

So, apparently Bush "changed his mind" about the value of nation building after it was demonstrated that his previously stated policy was misguided and wrong. Then he not only doubled back 180 degrees from his previously firm position, he got us involved in the largest nation building campaign in modern history, and with completely insufficient planning.

Boast again, Bush backers. I just love to hear you boast.

[Leo Hubbard]

People can have such short and selective memories. During the campaign of 2000 (yes, before 9-11), Bush the candidate was attempting to draw a distinction between himself and the Clinton administration, which had intervened in Kosovo in what Republicans damned as a nation building campaign of the kind the US should not engage (with mandatory flashbacks to Somalia). Evidently the Clinton administration believed even prior to 9-11 that nation building efforts could be justified.

So, apparently Bush "changed his mind" about the value of nation building after it was demonstrated that his previously stated policy was misguided and wrong. Then he not only doubled back 180 degrees from his previously firm position, he got us involved in the largest nation building campaign in modern history, and with completely insufficient planning.

Boast again, Bush backers. I just love to hear you boast.
9/11 changed everything. Now Nation building is in our best interest if it destroys a terrorist regime or a country which support terrorists in the process.

Maybe they won't be stupid enough to play their games in our backyard. Imagine what we will do if they do it again.

[blackfox]

Maybe they won't be stupid enough to play their games in our backyard. Imagine what we will do if they do it again.

No thankyou.

[mactastic]

Ah the game of politics is so fun. So do two wrongs make a right? Does crying out that Bush has also flip-flopped make Kerry's flip-flops acceptable? That's the vibe I'm getting (I'm just trying to be the middle man in this instance)

The only time you'll hear me harping on Bush's flip flops is when someone tries to bash Kerry because of his. Two wrongs definetly do not make a right, but when the GOP spin machine spends millions of advertising dollars and when people come in here harping about how much Kerry flip flops, you'll hear me comparing the two.

Personally I don't care too much about a polititian's penchant for changing their mind. I care what side they are on right now, not how many times they've changed their minds.

[Neserk]

Enough with the damn "flip flop" :roll:

I'd like to see others flip flop more often. I shows they've learned something.

[Backtothemac]

People can have such short and selective memories. During the campaign of 2000 (yes, before 9-11), Bush the candidate was attempting to draw a distinction between himself and the Clinton administration, which had intervened in Kosovo in what Republicans damned as a nation building campaign of the kind the US should not engage (with mandatory flashbacks to Somalia). Evidently the Clinton administration believed even prior to 9-11 that nation building efforts could be justified.

So, apparently Bush "changed his mind" about the value of nation building after it was demonstrated that his previously stated policy was misguided and wrong. Then he not only doubled back 180 degrees from his previously firm position, he got us involved in the largest nation building campaign in modern history, and with completely insufficient planning.

Boast again, Bush backers. I just love to hear you boast.
Let me say this. I am one of those people that prior to 9/11 said for the US to get out of the business of nation building. The reason, we don't know how to do it, and no one does. Well, except W. Germany, and Japan. Anyway, the point is that 9/11 changed everything for me. I know some don't agree, but for me. It changed a lot about the way I feel about things in the world.

So, that being said, Bush did flip flop on the issue of nation building, but it was because of 9/11. Kerry is flip flopping for political gain, and saying what democrats want to hear. That is the difference.

[IJ Reilly]

I've watched most of this little film, and it is in a word, tripe. I find little in the way of contradiction in Kerry's positions, and the most "devastating" thing it reveals is Kerry making nuanced statements, which granted might be a bit too complicated for some people to understand. That is, when it quotes him in more than ten words at a time, which is rarely.

[IJ Reilly]

Let me say this. I am one of those people that prior to 9/11 said for the US to get out of the business of nation building. The reason, we don't know how to do it, and no one does. Well, except W. Germany, and Japan. Anyway, the point is that 9/11 changed everything for me. I know some don't agree, but for me. It changed a lot about the way I feel about things in the world.

So, that being said, Bush did flip flop on the issue of nation building, but it was because of 9/11. Kerry is flip flopping for political gain, and saying what democrats want to hear. That is the difference.

I don't think so. I think Bush's 2000 statements about nation building were made to differentiate himself from the Clinton policy. It was policy tailor-made for political maneuvering. He had to go back on it because it wasn't ever realistic policy, and anybody who cared to know knew it four years ago.

Sorry, but I don't see any flipping on Kerry's position on Iraq. Nobody's pointed it out to me yet.

[takao]

Let me say this. I am one of those people that prior to 9/11 said for the US to get out of the business of nation building. The reason, we don't know how to do it, and no one does. Well, except W. Germany, and Japan.

so shouldn't the working examples be what they are ? examples on how to rebuilt a country ? ....
of course iraq is in a completly different situation...
(personally i think giving reconstruction work towards foreign companies isa big 'no-no'..to change that would be a start..give the know how to the iraqies and let them build it)

Anyway, the point is that 9/11 changed everything for me. I know some don't agree, but for me. It changed a lot about the way I feel about things in the world.

personally i wasn't surprised by the 11the sept. (i keep '911' for Porsche) and it didn't change a thing except that i'm more interested in US politics

the attack and the reaction of some politicians (you know who i mean) and the events untill today _confirmed_ my way how i feel about things in the world


but i will shut up now and listen to my "the (international) noise conspiracy" cds ;)

[davecuse]

Enough with the damn "flip flop" :roll:

I'd like to see others flip flop more often. I shows they've learned something.

Thank You.

9/11 changed everything. Now Nation building is in our best interest if it destroys a terrorist regime or a country which support terrorists in the process.

There was obviously a terrorist threat prior to Sept 11th, what really frustrates me about the situation with terrorism is that no one examines why these people strap bombs to themselves. Most simply write them off as lunatics, while they are slightly demented in my point of view, I'm sure they believe there is a very good idealogical reason behind their hatred towards our country. As the old saying goes, you can't fight fire with fire, that is unless of course you are setting a perimeter fire to prevent the spread. :rolleyes: :confused:

[Leo Hubbard]

Thank You.



There was obviously a terrorist threat prior to Sept 11th, what really frustrates me about the situation with terrorism is that no one examines why these people strap bombs to themselves. Most simply write them off as lunatics, while they are slightly demented in my point of view, I'm sure they believe there is a very good idealogical reason behind their hatred towards our country. As the old saying goes, you can't fight fire with fire, that is unless of course you are setting a perimeter fire to prevent the spread. :rolleyes: :confused:
Why doesn't matter, once they chosen that path. We cannot allow others to see that terrorism works, and the only way to insure it doesn't work, is to not allow it to work.

[davecuse]

Why doesn't matter, once they chosen that path. We cannot allow others to see that terrorism works, and the only way to insure it doesn't work, is to not allow it to work.

However, if you spend time examining why this has happened you can adjust our future foreign policy accordingly. We can always learn from the past. I agree that action needed to be taken against those responsible, however instead of focusing on Afganistan, we are in our current situation in Iraq.

[LethalWolfe]

Why doesn't matter, once they chosen that path.

You break your arm and go to the hospital. You are in serious pain so the doc gives you some pain killers. Now, would you rather take pain killers the rest of your life or would you want the doc to fix your arm? Treating the symptom will never cure the problem.


There was obviously a terrorist threat prior to Sept 11th, what really frustrates me about the situation with terrorism is that no one examines why these people strap bombs to themselves.

Post 9-11 that's all people did. I don't think I'll ever see as many documentaries on Afghanistan in such a short time period as long as I live. But even if you start to understand the why that doesn't meant that you can discover a "solution" in any timely manor. If people grew up thinking that it's normal to gun down women, during half-time of a football match, for showing too much ankle how do you convince them it's wrong? And are you going to be able to do it overnight? W/in the current generation?

Most simply write them off as lunatics, while they are slightly demented in my point of view, I'm sure they believe there is a very good idealogical reason behind their hatred towards our country. As the old saying goes, you can't fight fire with fire, that is unless of course you are setting a perimeter fire to prevent the spread.

People who strap bombs to their chests and blow up bus loads of civilians are more than "slightly demented." I'd really hate to see your idea of truly ******** up. ;) I'm sure they believe their reasons to their very core but that doesn't mean those reasons are logical. There are hordes of people manipulated and brainwashed by a minority of fanatics. The most difficult part is elminating the fanatics so that you can help enable the majority to lead and educate themselves. Superfically it looks like a conflict of interest to say, "We are here to help" as you have a running firefight thru the streets, but you have to eliminate the fanatics before you can help the rest of the population. Unfortunetly many of these leaders have public support (maybe not most but at least some). So it's like trying to seperate someone from a abusive relationship by force. It's never going to pretty, or easy.

You have to wield a sword in one hand and a book in the other. Both have their time and place.


Lethal

[skunk]

You have to wield a sword in one hand and a book in the other.
Which book?

[zimv20]

Which book?
and here i was dozing off, 'til i was woken by my own laugh...

[skunk]

Maybe this one:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=85108

[Leo Hubbard]

However, if you spend time examining why this has happened you can adjust our future foreign policy accordingly. We can always learn from the past. I agree that action needed to be taken against those responsible, however instead of focusing on Afganistan, we are in our current situation in Iraq.
Sorry we are not the worlds wellfare agent. They need to fix their own problems without requiring handouts from governments (private enterprise is fine if available), or resorting to terrorism.

[skunk]

Sorry we are not the worlds wellfare agent. They need to fix their own problems without requiring handouts from governments (private enterprise is fine if available), or resorting to terrorism.
No, more like the world's warfare agent, I'd say. We have to wean ourselves off dependence on middle eastern oil so we don't have to consort so shamelessly with those largely odious regimes who control it at the same time as oppressing and exploiting their own people.

[davecuse]

Sorry we are not the worlds wellfare agent. They need to fix their own problems without requiring handouts from governments (private enterprise is fine if available), or resorting to terrorism.

I was not implying that we should offer handouts to the rest of the world, do you really believe that these people hate us because we're not giving them money? I am saying that we should never have funded any organizations in the middle east, never given them weapons, and never trained them. We had given them boatloads of money in the past, and then spent a boatload more fighting them in recent years.

Rather than perpetuate this cycle, we should be spending this money on research and education in this country. I've always been a fan of being the shining city on the hill, maybe by setting a better example here, middle eastern countries would spend their resources on the same to play catch up, rather than forcing both of our hands to war.

[Leo Hubbard]

No, more like the world's warfare agent, I'd say. We have to wean ourselves off dependence on middle eastern oil so we don't have to consort so shamelessly with those largely odious regimes who control it at the same time as oppressing and exploiting their own people.
Right and that means drilling our own oil while at the same time trying to find better means of transport than the combustion engine. Drill our own oil for use now as we work to wean ourselves off of oil.

[Leo Hubbard]

I was not implying that we should offer handouts to the rest of the world, do you really believe that these people hate us because we're not giving them money? I am saying that we should never have funded any organizations in the middle east, never given them weapons, and never trained them. We had given them boatloads of money in the past, and then spent a boatload more fighting them in recent years.

Rather than perpetuate this cycle, we should be spending this money on research and education in this country. I've always been a fan of being the shining city on the hill, maybe by setting a better example here, middle eastern countries would spend their resources on the same to play catch up, rather than forcing both of our hands to war.
What your saying is we should've stood by and allowed the total genocide of the Israeli race. Or at least that is what it sounds like you just stated?

[mouchoir]

What your saying is we should've stood by and allowed the total genocide of the Israeli race. Or at least that is what it sounds like you just stated?

What is the Israeli race?

[Leo Hubbard]

What is the Israeli race?
OK, I'll play. What is the Palestian race?

[skunk]

OK, I'll play. What is the Palestian race?
Who said there was one? Both Palestinians and Israelis are semitic. Race doesn't work over there, I'm afraid.

[mactastic]

Let me say this. I am one of those people that prior to 9/11 said for the US to get out of the business of nation building. The reason, we don't know how to do it, and no one does. Well, except W. Germany, and Japan. Anyway, the point is that 9/11 changed everything for me. I know some don't agree, but for me. It changed a lot about the way I feel about things in the world.

So, that being said, Bush did flip flop on the issue of nation building, but it was because of 9/11. Kerry is flip flopping for political gain, and saying what democrats want to hear. That is the difference.

OK, let me try asking this again. Even if I grant you that Bush had a 'come to Jesus' moment regarding nation building, please tell me how the 9/11 attacks changed Bush's position on:

1. Whether to testify before the 9/11 commission.
2. Whether Dr. Rice should testify before the same commission.
3. The creation of the 9/11 commission in the first place.
4. Promising not to touch Social Security funds.
5. The formation of the DoHS.
6. His praise of free trade vs. his steel tarrifs.
7. Whether to form an independant WMD commission.
8. Whether or not gay marriage is a states rights issue.

There are others, but I'd be happy if you would go through each of these and explain how you think 9/11 influenced Bush to change his mind on the item in question.

I'd contend that all of these were political calls made to either give the voters what they wanted to hear, or to head off a major issue that would not go well for Bush in the polls. Particularly regarding the steel tarriffs and gay marriage I can't see the possible connection between 9/11 and the flip flop in question.

[Backtothemac]

No, more like the world's warfare agent, I'd say. We have to wean ourselves off dependence on middle eastern oil so we don't have to consort so shamelessly with those largely odious regimes who control it at the same time as oppressing and exploiting their own people.

Ok, I have a question. Think about this. They hate us now, because why? We buy their oil, we exploit them, whatever. How badly do you think they will hate us when we do quit buying their oil and start using better fuels instead.

Then they are going to really hate us.

Terror is formed from radical ideals. Just like someone that will kill their wife. The person has no reguard for human life, and is so radical in their believes that they are terrorist. Tim McVeigh was a terrorist. How do you combat them? Well, some would have you hug them or give them what they want. That will only reinforce the believe that they are right (which they are not), and them terror will have a legitimate place as a weapon.

As long as you don't give in to terror, then it is not valid. It is an outlaw tactic. However when Spain, and other countries tuck tail and run like cowards, they give terrorists a "damn, it actually worked". Quick lets do something else. See they believe that sooner or later the US will cave. They are counting on us not having the stomach to battle it out with them.

They are wrong. Kill them before they kill us. Don't wait for the threat to become imminent, take care of it before it is. That is how you fight terror. Get rid of the governments in Iran, Syria, and N. Korea, and then finally, Saudia Arabia. That would be a good start. So, before you ask, yes, I am saying that I would like to see 4 more regime changes, and if it takes war, so be it.

[mactastic]

Let's see, 4 more regime changes at $250B and spending... That's over $1T.

And wern't you just saying that taxes are too high? How the heck to you plan to pay for 4 regime changes anytime soon? Oil revenues perhaps?

Oh well I guess the bumber sticker was right. "Bush/Cheney - 4 More Wars". :p

[skunk]

Ok, I have a question. Think about this. They hate us now, because why? We buy their oil, we exploit them, whatever. How badly do you think they will hate us when we do quit buying their oil and start using better fuels instead.

Then they are going to really hate us.
They can sell it to China.

However when Spain, and other countries tuck tail and run like cowards, they give terrorists a "damn, it actually worked". Quick lets do something else. See they believe that sooner or later the US will cave. They are counting on us not having the stomach to battle it out with them.
Spain did not "turn tail". They used their democratic rights to punish a government which had taken them into war against their wishes.
And if you do "battle it out with them", where will it get you?

They are wrong. Kill them before they kill us. Don't wait for the threat to become imminent, take care of it before it is. That is how you fight terror. Get rid of the governments in Iran, Syria, and N. Korea, and then finally, Saudia Arabia. That would be a good start. So, before you ask, yes, I am saying that I would like to see 4 more regime changes, and if it takes war, so be it.
Make that five.

[skunk]

if it takes war, so be it.
You volunteering?

[zimv20]

They hate us now, because why? We buy their oil, we exploit them, whatever. How badly do you think they will hate us when we do quit buying their oil and start using better fuels instead.
that's not my read. UBL has specifically stated that the US is being punished because
1) we have troops in the holy land
2) we support israel over the palestinians

both of those can be attributed to, at least in part if not majorly so, our dependence on ME oil.


Terror is formed from radical ideals.
it's formed from desperation, just like the palestinian kids who throw rocks at tanks. do the kids really think they'll take out a tank with a rock? i doubt it. but they feel they're out of options.

if a foreign force came to the US, killed your family, razed your home, denied you rights and forced you to live in a way you're ashamed, how would you respond? if you had nothing left to lose, wouldn't you try your best to take out at least one of their soldiers? would you risk your life in doing so?

[Backtothemac]

You volunteering?

Actually I already have. And would again if I physically could.

[katchow]

So, before you ask, yes, I am saying that I would like to see 4 more regime changes, and if it takes war, so be it.

All hail Caesar! :)

[IJ Reilly]

Spain did not "turn tail". They used their democratic rights to punish a government which had taken them into war against their wishes.

It's like I said in that other thread: The War on Terror is a success so long as the politicians who are waging it are returned to office. If ever they lose elections, the terrorists win.

Democracy? We don't need no stinking democracy.

[katchow]

although i disagree w/ this war...i thought it was wrong for spain to pull out. Afterall, they in part created the chaos in iraq, they should live up to their responsibility.

[takao]

although i disagree w/ this war...i thought it was wrong for spain to pull out. Afterall, they in part created the chaos in iraq, they should live up to their responsibility.

well the spain people never wanted their soldiers to go their in the first place
the government ignored it and paid the price in the election
how many soldiers did spain have in iraq ? very few i think less than 2000 ... to blame spain for the chaos is not very fitting...

every political party (in europe) supporting the war in iraq had massive losses in elections and polls, because the people where everywhere against it

ignore the people and lose elections...at least this applies to europe

[katchow]

i know their role was small (thus the use of 'partly')...but it was still a role.

even if they were against it, that is what their elected gov't. has gotten them into. For me it would be a moral obligation...

just as i wouldn't want us to pull out now...even if we only played a minor part in the toppling of iraq.

[mda01aqt]

well all i have to say is that whoever supports bush is seriously twisted. the rest of the world despise the man, for his stupidity and arrogance........but an american BBC reporter said that desnt harm Bush popularity as people find it easier to relate to him! :D HAHAHAHhahahahahahaha! ........stupid and arrogant?

[mda01aqt]

although i disagree w/ this war...i thought it was wrong for spain to pull out. Afterall, they in part created the chaos in iraq, they should live up to their responsibility.

as far as i know spanish troops did not help invade iraq, they tried to help keep the peace after the americans had invaded and carried on invading further into the country.

It can be equivalent to saying that the UN attacked Serbia over Kosovo.....the reality is they didnt help in attacking serbia, but just helped keep the peace.

[katchow]

It can be equivalent to saying that the UN attacked Serbia over Kosovo.....the reality is they didnt help in attacking serbia, but just helped keep the peace.


i apologize, you are right, they didn't help in the invasion (my face is a little red)...

i still don't know if i would consider breaking a commitment to help keep the peace in iraq an honorable thing...

[LethalWolfe]

Who said there was one? Both Palestinians and Israelis are semitic. Race doesn't work over there, I'm afraid.


Unfortunetly<sp?> "race" is a broad term. Although most people commonly associate it w/skin color.

From Dictionary.com:

1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.


2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race.


3. A genealogical line; a lineage.


4. Humans considered as a group.


Lethal

[takao]

From Dictionary.com:

yikes ... bad bad bad ... suddenly i have a sour taste in my mouth...

seriously the term 'race' outside of zoology is misplaced ...

[LethalWolfe]

yikes ... bad bad bad ... suddenly i have a sour taste in my mouth...

seriously the term 'race' outside of zoology is misplaced ...


What about a race to see who can get from point A to point B the fastest? :D


Lethal

[takao]

What about a race to see who can get from point A to point B the fastest? :D


Lethal

you know how i meant it ...
to talk about 'races' about humans is so completly unacceptable that it isn't even funny