Kerry's Latest Comments

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Stringer
The thread might not be but the Iraq war was supposed to be.....(I think that needs remembering...kind of like people like to bring up Clinton, whom I never did vote for)


Would have been better a dead horse then dead Americans if it comes out they did not have to go there.  (I'm for the Afghan operation 100%, btw)

You guys sure like to tell people what is acceptable to say and when, don't ya.

And no, I would not.  

I would however use my position to excercise my obligation to keep the Administration honest (just as I hope you would with any and all Administrations).

**Edit...BTW, I've got no problem with the Haliburton type stuff.....they are qualified and can do the job.  Better our corporations getting profits then others, but I sure don't want my taxes to go up due to it.

Stringer I'm not telling anyone what to say or what not to say.  I'm being critical of what they say because I think it's important and it matters to me.

Am I questioning Dean or Kerry's patriotism....no....I'm questioning their and half of the other democrats motives.  The fact that anyone doesn't want to be in a war is admirable because war is hell and people die.  The remains that we are there now.  It seems to me from what I've read that real measurable progress is being made and the Iraqis want their freedom as much as any oppressed people.  Even if the invasion was the ultimate mistake leaving Iraq unfinished when it is in fact winnable would be an even bigger mistake.  

It seems to me that some prominent democrats are pushing the Idea that we've allready lost or cannot win.  The fight is done bring them home and we'll see what happens.  All for political gain completly ignoring the progress and success we've had.  The world will experience grave consequences if this happens.

[midnight Target]

You question the dems motives for criticizing the president, I question the president's motives for this stupid war... samo-samo. Neither question is unpatriotic, in fact they both uphold the very reason we have a military... to protect the rights of the American people to voice their opinions.. freely and openly.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by midnight Target
You question the dems motives for criticizing the president, I question the president's motives for this stupid war... samo-samo. Neither question is unpatriotic, in fact they both uphold the very reason we have a military... to protect the rights of the American people to voice their opinions.. freely and openly.

Your not reading correcty and making an assumption.  I never baught into that criticise a war time president argument that the republicans made.  It was a stupid defense.

Go back and re-read Dean's comments and the questions I asked.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
Go back and re-read Dean's comments and the questions I asked.

I haven't heard Dean's comments except secondhand.  Is it true he said, "We can't win -- Vote Democrat?"

[Seagoon]

Originally posted by midnight Target
Communist countries in Southeast Asia

1. Viet Nam
2. Laos

Took a while for both dominos to fall huh?

lol

Hi MT,

Cambodia fell to the Communist Khmer Rouge in 1975, the same year that South Vietnam fell to the North Vietnamese. Hanoi had been supporting Pol Pot, while the US had supported the Cambodian government's attempts to erradicate the Khmer Rouge. Predictably the US News Media and American anti-war movement sided with Pol Pot in the conflict. Oh, that is until he took power and killed well over 2 million Cambodians. The media "about face" is actually documented in the 1984 movie "The Killing Fields." But then again, being in the media means never having to say you're sorry, or wrong for that matter.

In the Jihadis, we have the most obviously evil opponents since the end of the Second World War. Men who have no problem purposely killing schoolchildren en masse and who will do literally anything to achieve a worldwide Islamic caliphate. And yet, the Western media and left wing is falling all over itself to make the only country in the world which really stands in their way into the villains in this particular conflict.

Ah well, let us assume they succeed, and the US withdraws from Iraq and Afghanistan and overwhelmingly elects the "end the war on terror" party. What do you think will happen next? Do you expect the Jihadis will say, "Ah, the infidels have been defeated, now we will leave them alone because the right-wing infidels who must be subjugated or destroyed are out of power, and the left-wing infidels who must be subjugated or destroyed are in!"

The Muslim Brotherhood and its worldwide network of affiliated organizations could care less what your politics are, the only factor they are concerned about is your religion. If you aren't a Sunni Muslim, you are simply an obstacle to be overcome on the road to victory and once the only people who really stand between them and you are taken out of the way...

But surely you're being naive and reactionary Seagoon. Why if we weren't in Iraq, they wouldn't be attacking us! In fact it is only because they knew in advance, via crystal ball, that we would invade Iraq in 2003 that they hijacked attacked the Achille Lauro in 1986, bombed the WTC in 1993, bombed the Khobar towers in 1996, bombed US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, Bombed the US Cole 2000, attacked Washington D.C. and NYC in 2001, and bombed the US embassy in Karachi in 2002, bombed Nightclubs in Bali in 2002, etc. etc. etc.

In fact, if only we hadn't attacked Iraq, they never would have started the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1930s. Who knows, if it wasn't for his being so angry about Bush and Gitmo, Muhammad might never have started this whole Islamic Jihad business in the first place.

- SEAGOON

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Dago
So did John Kerry.  He doesnt care about our troops though, he is happy to bad mouth them and embarrass them in front of the world for his intended political gain.  He would hang them out to dry or let them be slaughtered if he thought it would win him an election.

So, while I respect your service, sadly it doesnt buy you the consideration it should any longer due to traitors like Kerry.

dago

He also fought to get them benefits and health care when no one gave a damn about them

[Yeager]

When Bush said Mission Accomplished he was referring to the war against the IRAQI MILITARY.  and that mission WAS ACCOMPLISHED.  Thanks....

The insurgency started a few days later and was a new mission....one the democratic morons in congress and beyond, want to surrender to.

Screw Dem, I say.....

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I haven't heard Dean's comments except secondhand.  Is it true he said, "We can't win -- Vote Democrat?"

His exact words
"idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong."

I don't really know how you can take out of context.  I really hope libs like MT look at that and cringe and say "what was he thinking"  It may be free speech but it is the wrong thing to say.

[Momus--]

Seagoon, top marks for self righteous pontification, but that's about it.

In the Jihadis, we have the most obviously evil opponents since the end of the Second World War. Men who have no problem purposely killing schoolchildren en masse and who will do literally anything to achieve a worldwide Islamic caliphate. And yet, the Western media and left wing is falling all over itself to make the only country in the world which really stands in their way into the villains in this particular conflict.

Two points here.

1. Radical Islam as a political philosophy was on its last legs in it's own hinterland until your administration decided to invade Iraq. The Islamists failed to spark their revolution in Algeria and tore themselves apart in the process. Much the same occured in Egypt. as elsewhere in the muslim world.  But by invading Iraq and by his idiotic axis of evil pronouncements and talk of crusades, your CIC has managed to actually reinforce and reinvigorate the message that the Islamists have been making all along; namely that the lands of Islam are under occupation and that the Islamic peoples are under attack, and consequently the support of generations of previously moderate Arabs has shifted away from moderation towards extremism.

2. To portray the USA as the only country standing between these particular bogeymen and the rest of the world is patent nonsense. The fact is that the USA is with Saudi Arabia allied with the only country in the world that incorporates radical Sunni Islam into its governing establishment, the same country that has made the export of radical islam second only in importance to it's oil exports. The fact is that you and your bumbling CIC and your ongoing relationship with the country once described as the "kernel of evil" in the middle-east are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

..let us assume they succeed, and the US withdraws from Iraq and Afghanistan and overwhelmingly elects the "end the war on terror" party. What do you think will happen next? Do you expect the Jihadis will say, "Ah, the infidels have been defeated, now we will leave them alone because the right-wing infidels who must be subjugated or destroyed are out of power, and the left-wing infidels who must be subjugated or destroyed are in!

The connection between invading Iraq and fighting Islamic terrorism exists only in your head. Invading Iraq makes no sense in the context of combating religious extremism, in fact if anything it has been counterproductive. No-one is seriously arguing that we cease to work against the Bin Ladens and Al Zawahiris; suggesting that that is the case is a straw man of your own construction.

The Muslim Brotherhood and its worldwide network of affiliated organizations could care less what your politics are, the only factor they are concerned about is your religion. If you aren't a Sunni Muslim, you are simply an obstacle to be overcome on the road to victory and once the only people who really stand between them and you are taken out of the way...

Mustafa Mashhur, General Guide, Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President, Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS - Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and politicians:
“The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States which resulted in massive killing, destruction and attack on innocent lives. We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents. God Almighty says in the Holy Qur'an: 'No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another' (Surah al-Isra 17:15).”

I guess you missed this statement back in 2001? It takes an idiot of the stature of your current leader to squander this amount of goodwill from your ostensible ideological enemies.

But surely you're being naive and reactionary Seagoon. Why if we weren't in Iraq, they wouldn't be attacking us! In fact it is only because they knew in advance, via crystal ball, that we would invade Iraq in 2003 that they hijacked attacked the Achille Lauro in 1986, bombed the WTC in 1993, bombed the Khobar towers in 1996, bombed US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, Bombed the US Cole 2000, attacked Washington D.C. and NYC in 2001, and bombed the US embassy in Karachi in 2002, bombed Nightclubs in Bali in 2002, etc. etc. etc.

In fact, if only we hadn't attacked Iraq, they never would have started the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1930s. Who knows, if it wasn't for his being so angry about Bush and Gitmo, Muhammad might never have started this whole Islamic Jihad business in the first place.

I think you're losing it bud. No-one is questioning the occurance any of those incidents that you list, but only one of them has even the most tenous connection with Iraq and certainly not enough to justify the actions of the last three years.

[lazs2]

David Horowitz is a good example of what happens to a lefty when he wakes up and jumps ship...  He is despised by left...  Have you ever read his book "Radical Son"?

Seems he is in a unique position to judge lefties yet... you call him an ultra right wing attack dog or whatever..  He watched the movement from the inside as it grew..  What has he ever said that was not true?

Ann Coulter is villified because she points out that all of the lefties being tagged as lefties by Mccarthy wer indeed.... lefties.

Bush never said that "mission accomplished" about Iraq...

What else have you guys got?

I believe that most of the troops that are in Iraq want to be there.   I believe that anyone saying that they support the troops but give strength and hope to the enemy is lieing or naive.

lazs

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Momus--
Seagoon, top marks for self righteous pontification, but that's about it.



Two points here.

1. Radical Islam as a political philosophy was on its last legs in it's own hinterland until your administration decided to invade Iraq. The Islamists failed to spark their revolution in Algeria and tore themselves apart in the process. Much the same occured in Egypt. as elsewhere in the muslim world.  But by invading Iraq and by his idiotic axis of evil pronouncements and talk of crusades, your CIC has managed to actually reinforce and reinvigorate the message that the Islamists have been making all along; namely that the lands of Islam are under occupation and that the Islamic peoples are under attack, and consequently the support of generations of previously moderate Arabs has shifted away from moderation towards extremism.

2. To portray the USA as the only country standing between these particular bogeymen and the rest of the world is patent nonsense. The fact is that the USA is with Saudi Arabia allied with the only country in the world that incorporates radical Sunni Islam into its governing establishment, the same country that has made the export of radical islam second only in importance to it's oil exports. The fact is that you and your bumbling CIC and your ongoing relationship with the country once described as the "kernel of evil" in the middle-east are part of the problem, not part of the solution.



The connection between invading Iraq and fighting Islamic terrorism exists only in your head. Invading Iraq makes no sense in the context of combating religious extremism, in fact if anything it has been counterproductive. No-one is seriously arguing that we cease to work against the Bin Ladens and Al Zawahiris; suggesting that that is the case is a straw man of your own construction.



Mustafa Mashhur, General Guide, Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President, Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS - Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and politicians:
“The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States which resulted in massive killing, destruction and attack on innocent lives. We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents. God Almighty says in the Holy Qur'an: 'No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another' (Surah al-Isra 17:15).”

I guess you missed this statement back in 2001? It takes an idiot of the stature of your current leader to squander this amount of goodwill from your ostensible ideological enemies.



I think you're losing it bud. No-one is questioning the occurance any of those incidents that you list, but only one of them has even the most tenous connection with Iraq and certainly not enough to justify the actions of the last three years.

You assume way too much.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Seagoon
Hi MT,

Cambodia fell to the Communist Khmer Rouge in 1975, the same year that South Vietnam fell to the North Vietnamese. Hanoi had been supporting Pol Pot, while the US had supported the Cambodian government's attempts to erradicate the Khmer Rouge. Predictably the US News Media and American anti-war movement sided with Pol Pot in the conflict. Oh, that is until he took power and killed well over 2 million Cambodians. The media "about face" is actually documented in the 1984 movie "The Killing Fields." But then again, being in the media means never having to say you're sorry, or wrong for that matter.

Without Lon Nol and the CIA nothing would had been possible...

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by lazs2

Ann Coulter is villified because she points out that all of the lefties being tagged as lefties by Mccarthy wer indeed.... lefties.

lazs

No argument there. They were members of the communist party, or former members. Dangerous people like Lucy!

The problem with McCarthy and Coulter and the rest of the Ilk you like to quote is that they demonized an activity that was LEGAL. You or I or any other American has every right to join the communist party. None of us should have to pay for that decision with lost careers or blacklists or jail. Study what McCarthy and his attack dog Cohen did to people. Then you will realize the half truths and outright lies Coulter is foisting on the public that is lapped up by the neocons.. sickening.

These people are in power now, yet the power is based on the lie that they are still fighting those dreaded LIBERALS! If only the Libs could be defeated!!! Liberal is now as dirty a moniker as McCarthy created with the word Communist. Why? Because the neocon movement needs an enemy or it will surely fail.

[lazs2]

MT... I am not following.. If it is legal to be a member of the communist party then what was the problem?  Who blacklisted them?  Mccarthy?  How could he blacklist people from hollywierd jobs?

I am not too familiar with ann coulter but pretty familiar with David Horowitz works... I don't find anything about what he says to be wrong or missrepresented... He has written several good books including "Radical Son" that pretty much jibes with the little I seen of the left in the bay area during that time.

I think David Horowitz is a pretty courageous guy..  He has been abandoned and villified by all the lefties that he grew up with and was once a part of.  I can't find anything about him that seems dishonest...

lazs

[john9001]

every time a "american" tells the media that the war is wrong, we can't win, bring the troops home, it encourages the enemy to keep on fighting. by protesting the war you only make it last longer and more troops are killed.

it's a fact....learn it.