Today, Senator Kerry thinks it's good time to excoriate the president in an NPR interview while soldiers and Marines are dying. At this very moment, there are men fighting to capture or kill the enemies of the United States and the Iraqi people. Doesn't he grasp that? Can't he come out of his fog of preening self-absorption and think, "Maybe there is a better time to offer my criticisms"?
I have no problem with criticizing Bush administration policy per se. But there's are proper times to do it, and there are better and worse ways to phrase it. You should not do it in a way that helps murderous, anti-American thugs. When Kerry recommends handing Iraq over to the U.N., or criticizing the arrest of someone openly fomenting rebellion against the Coalition, it can't do anything but gladden the hearts of the insurgents and their Islamist cheerleaders around the world.
When it comes to destroying armed, lawless militias, is the U.N. going to do a better job than the U.S. Marines? Let me put that another way: if you had to live in a war zone, would you feel safer being with a battalion of Marines, or with a battalion of blue-helmeted soldiers under U.N. command?
I listened to the interview as NPR broadcast it, and I've read several articles about the interview, and I don't think Kerry bothered to make a perfunctory statement such as, "Whatever my differences with the president, I want our troops to emerge victorious, and may God protect them and comfort their families." With all that money, he can't even buy himself an ounce of class.
Later today, Kerry is speaking at Georgetown University, which isn't that far away from my office. I want to go and ask, "Do you think encouraging the enemy is a good idea during wartime?" Of course, he did the same thing during the Vietnam War, so the answer is "no not really."
UPDATE: Kerry said in his Georgetown speech that the Iraq War was "one of the greatest failures of diplomacy and failures of judgment that I have seen in all the time that I've been in public life." He said "we're all united as a nation in supporting our troops" but said nothing about the troops winning.
He repeated his charge that the handover was predicated on the timing of the presidential election. He's wrong. The administration's original timetable called for the handover in 2005, but Ayatollah Sistani demanded an earlier date and so we compromised. It had nothing to do with the election, which one would think journalists might remember (it was in all the papers last November), but there are so few real journalists these days.
UPDATE #2: We're also "mak[ing] war against the Iraqi people" and the Hezbollah-backed Muqtada al-Sadr is a "legitimate voice." Is it fair to say he's making excuses for the enemy?
It is so sad that this person is even taken seriously as a candidate for President.
The primary's over, so why is he wading further into Deanie Baby land that he was during the primary? Answer: Because he's more of a Deanie Baby at heart than Dean is; he's just so duplicitous that he's been moderately successful at hiding it. Until now.
I don't know about that, Coward. Kerry doesn't appear to have any detectable principles, other than "John Kerry is a great guy" and "John Kerry should be more important than he is." If you look at his comments on just about anything, he's for whatever Bush is against, and against whatever Bush favors. The subtext -- and often the text itself -- of practically every statement is "Bush is stupid and evil and I'm a better, smarter person; did I mention I was in Vietnam for about 17 weeks?"
Umm, folks, I hate to remind you that St. George is the reason our troops are being murdered in large numbers every day in Iraq. He could bring them home, but won't.
About the only thing I'll give to President Clinton is that when the Somalians started murdering their liberators left and right, he brought them home and said: "Fine, if you want to be oppressed, be oppressed." It's time for Bush to do the same. The Iraqis obviously don't want us, so let them have the alternative.
Nathan,
And leave Iraq worse, perhaps much worse, than when we went in? Yeah, that's a great idea.
The mess in Iraq right now is our mess. Whether or not invading Iraq was the right thing to do, we have an obligation to clean it up. No one else is going to be able to do it, certainly not the U.N. which flees at the first sign of danger.
Nathan, first of all, the Iraqis want us to stay until they have a stable government. That's reflected in several polls of Iraqis conducted in the last year. You're wrong on that point, unless you think that mobs and militias are ideal focus groups.
The Somalia pullout emboldened al Qaeda to go on to bigger atrocities (Khobar Towers bombing, African embassy bombings, almost sinking the U.S.S. Cole.) That's why soldiers and Marines are dying -- because Bill Clinton didn't have the guts to find our enemies and kill or frighten them into submission.
So what you're really saying is that the U.S. should leave Iraq, which would almost certainly result in a civil war that would turn into a regional conflict (Turkey would get drawn in because of the Kurds, Iran would field a proxy Shiite army, and Syria would get involved because they have nothing better to do.) Tens of thousands of innocent people would die, the economies of the Middle East would be devastated, oil shortages could well throw the rest of the world into depression....
For the U.S., the immediate consequence
would be a devastating loss of prestige, and that would invite further attacks on military and civilian targets. After all, America would be on the run, so it would be an ideal time to strike. Great idea! While we're at it, why don't we waive all visa requirements for our friends the Saudi Arabians, and those pesky bag searches at airports, too?
and Syria would get involved because they have nothing better to do
Somewhere in Syria:
"Hey, Aziru, what are you doing today?"
"Well, Bashar, I really don't have anything to do, so I thought I'd drive into Iraq and try to help take over the country. You know, shoot some people and maybe even find an infidel or two.
"Sounds like fun. Wait a minute and I'll call up Nikmaddu and Reshop. They'll bring the AK's and we'll use my car."
The Syrian government doesn't do much besides threaten its neighbors, so no, it doesn't have anything better to do. They certainly don't care about anything so lowly as economic development or human rights.
Eric, I don't consider this our mess by any means, but Bush's mess and Congress's mess. Let them figure out how to clean it up, but not at the expense of American lives. I have opposed this war since before it even looked like a legitimate concern, so I do not in any way consider this to be my mess. I will not, in any way, participate in cleaning up the mess Bush has made, or support those who do. I think he should be impeached for his horrible decisions, which have been happening from start to finish of his presidency (which is, thankfully, very much finished).
As for the devastating loss of our prestige, maybe we deserve it for letting our leaders go around killing masses of people -- both born and unborn.
I think he should be impeached for his horrible decisions, which have been happening from start to finish of his presidency (which is, thankfully, very much finished).
Why not have him executed while we're at it?
Nathan, I'll leave aside the "born" people for a moment, but when did "our leaders" "go around killing" unborn people?
Are you sure you want to post comments like that on the open Internet?
Eric, I was referring to abortion. In that sense, our leaders (or at least some of them, though not Bush) kill unborn people every day.
Mogadishu was a disaster not entirely of Clinton's making. Clinton's National Security wanted a massive attack with commandos at night - and they warned, no helicopters. What does Pentagon give Clinton? a few gunships, no commandos. They fired a little bit, which made Aideed - who used to go riding in the streets firing his rifle in the air - into hiding. And THEN they sent in the commandos - in bright daylight - by helicopters clacking in. Great.
Republican Congress started rattling for the troops to get out. Clinton dug in. More tanks, aircraft, snipers who took out anyone carrying a gun. 6 months later, Somalia was handed over to the UN as planned with no interruption in food and aid delivery.
Eric, be careful what you post. You appear to know a lot of urban legends and hoaxes that have been perpetuated by rightwing radicals.
I apologize, Eric. It was not you who wrote of Clinton. I do stand by my comment though.