9/28/2004
KERRY'S DIPLOMACY PLAN: For all of Senator John Kerry's inconsistencies on the war in Iraq, he has been steady on one thing: If elected, Kerry will "bring in our allies" to Iraq.
What exactly does he mean by allies? After all, we already have a larger coalition in Iraq than we ever did in Korea or we did at the end of World War II. We have the help of Britain, Japan, Australia, Korea, and on and on. Being that the only major countries to oppose us are France and Germany, we can induce that when Kerry says he wants to bring in our allies, he means France and Germany. That means that Kerry's assuming that the reason France and Germany aren't involved in the first place is because of the current President, George W. Bush. Fair enough, but that means...
1) Bush was terrible at selling the war in Iraq. I find that hard to believe, since many other countries have supported us, the majority of Americans supported it, and the vast majority of the House and the Senate (including Kerry) supported it. That would not have been the case without the President's and his cabinet's selling of the war.
2) France and Germany base their views on Iraq on the personality of the US president. That's a grotesquely condescending view of the two states on Kerry's behalf. Call me cynical, but I'm lead to believe that France and Germany act on their own self-interest, not on whether the US president is a "cowboy".
3) In a Kerry presidency, France and Germany will happily come into Iraq. Again, not likely. They've already said many times that they disagree with the war.
Furthermore, why should they want to get involved with the US under a Kerry presidency? As a candidate, he has slammed every country that helps us, calling the coalition a "coalition of the coerced and the bribed." (To this day he has not specified which country/countries were coerced, nor which country/countries were bribed) Along with this, the Kerry campaign has been undermining the effort of Australia by telling them that being involved in Iraq will only bring on more terrorism.
Who's the real diplomat here? Bush, who brought together a large coalition to help in Iraq, or Kerry, who insults and undermines our allies? Apparently the American people favor Bush. The latest Gallup poll has Bush leading Kerry on diplomacy by a margin of 56%-40%.
Regarding France and Germany, the two states acted as they did because they looked at all alternatives and decided that opposing the war was the most optimal. This could be for any number of reasons. It could be that the two states were making a killing off the Hussein regime. It could be that Jacques Chirac, dubbed "Jacques Iraq" in the 1970's for his closeness to Saddam Hussein, did not want to help in the toppling of a dictator he so closely embraced mere years earlier. Or maybe they knew that, even without their help, a resolute leader like President Bush would go ahead and topple Saddam, giving them the benefit of a safer world without the loss of a single Frenchman or German.
Thus, we shouldn't be surprised that Paris and Berlin have made it clear that if Kerry is elected President, they still won't send troops to Iraq.
Now which way will Kerry flop on Iraq?
What exactly does he mean by allies? After all, we already have a larger coalition in Iraq than we ever did in Korea or we did at the end of World War II. We have the help of Britain, Japan, Australia, Korea, and on and on. Being that the only major countries to oppose us are France and Germany, we can induce that when Kerry says he wants to bring in our allies, he means France and Germany. That means that Kerry's assuming that the reason France and Germany aren't involved in the first place is because of the current President, George W. Bush. Fair enough, but that means...
1) Bush was terrible at selling the war in Iraq. I find that hard to believe, since many other countries have supported us, the majority of Americans supported it, and the vast majority of the House and the Senate (including Kerry) supported it. That would not have been the case without the President's and his cabinet's selling of the war.
2) France and Germany base their views on Iraq on the personality of the US president. That's a grotesquely condescending view of the two states on Kerry's behalf. Call me cynical, but I'm lead to believe that France and Germany act on their own self-interest, not on whether the US president is a "cowboy".
3) In a Kerry presidency, France and Germany will happily come into Iraq. Again, not likely. They've already said many times that they disagree with the war.
Furthermore, why should they want to get involved with the US under a Kerry presidency? As a candidate, he has slammed every country that helps us, calling the coalition a "coalition of the coerced and the bribed." (To this day he has not specified which country/countries were coerced, nor which country/countries were bribed) Along with this, the Kerry campaign has been undermining the effort of Australia by telling them that being involved in Iraq will only bring on more terrorism.
Who's the real diplomat here? Bush, who brought together a large coalition to help in Iraq, or Kerry, who insults and undermines our allies? Apparently the American people favor Bush. The latest Gallup poll has Bush leading Kerry on diplomacy by a margin of 56%-40%.
Regarding France and Germany, the two states acted as they did because they looked at all alternatives and decided that opposing the war was the most optimal. This could be for any number of reasons. It could be that the two states were making a killing off the Hussein regime. It could be that Jacques Chirac, dubbed "Jacques Iraq" in the 1970's for his closeness to Saddam Hussein, did not want to help in the toppling of a dictator he so closely embraced mere years earlier. Or maybe they knew that, even without their help, a resolute leader like President Bush would go ahead and topple Saddam, giving them the benefit of a safer world without the loss of a single Frenchman or German.
Thus, we shouldn't be surprised that Paris and Berlin have made it clear that if Kerry is elected President, they still won't send troops to Iraq.
Now which way will Kerry flop on Iraq?
# posted by Anonymous @ 9/28/2004 08:41:00 PM 
