If Kerry gets in - what difference will it make?




 
--
 
November 1st, 2004  
Doppleganger
 
 

Topic: If Kerry gets in - what difference will it make?


Right now the US Presidential election is very close, too close to call. If John Kerry gets in what fundamental differences do you see in US foreign policy and specifically on Iraq and the war on terror in general? He's often quoted as saying that America will work with our partners 'in consultation' and not 'in isolation'. It's ironic right now that the US has never been more powerful yet it's standing in the wider world has never been worse.
November 1st, 2004  
Bratwurst
 

Topic: Re: If Kerry gets in - what difference will it make?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
Right now the US Presidential election is very close, too close to call. If John Kerry gets in what fundamental differences do you see in US foreign policy and specifically on Iraq and the war on terror in general? He's often quoted as saying that America will work with our partners 'in consultation' and not 'in isolation'. It's ironic right now that the US has never been more powerful yet it's standing in the wider world has never been worse.
This weekend I was at a party and I chatted with some people. The topic hit the war in Iraq, terrorism and global threats. The discussion boiled down to the question, which country was considered the most dangerous to the world right now. I was expecting North Korea or Iran, but they all agreed on one nation: The USA.

This is pretty much what has become of our good name.

Could John Kerry change that?

For one thing, most of the world would sigh in collective relief. Some mock polls ask the rest of the world who they would vote for if they had the chance (http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRE...004/mock04.php) and the results are overwhelming. Here in Germany over 90% of the people would favour a President John Kerry.

I would call that a new basis of being 'in consultation' about the current pressing issues in global politics, mainly of course the war in Iraq and the "war" against terror.

What would that mean?

At least Kerry could begin reestablishing the dialogue with countries that are important allies and are increasingly being alienated. He could get financial aid, maybe even military aid, to carry the burden of the mess that has been made in Iraq. Those who believe we donít need it should research the degree of over-extension we have reached in the current situation.

Regain credibility. George Bushís behavior on the international platform is catastrophic. If necessary I will dig up some old material on his appearances at the beginning of the Iraqi crisis, but I believe it should be present in most memories. He is unable to work together with leaders of nations with different opinions or own opinions at all.

Regain respect. It is a fact: Most of the world stands in awe how a civilized country such as America, which has so many merits to show for, can have such an obvious moron as president and actually reelect him.

Sorry for being so honest, but it baffles me on a daily basis.

I have more to say on this, but this is getting too long...
November 1st, 2004  
gladius
 
The world has gone soft, Europe especially. I don't think people realize we are in a battle for Western Civilization itself.

If people don't like America because it steps on a few toes so what.

Better to step on a few toes now than to be destroyed later down the road.

If Kerry gets elected, I think he will care more for not hurting anyones feelings, than the best interest of the USA. Which we will eventually have to pay for down the road.
--
November 1st, 2004  
Bratwurst
 
We are battling for Western civilization? Did I miss something or are you still fearing the coming of the Mahdi?

And don't mistake soft for considering military actions as the last resort.
November 1st, 2004  
Doppleganger
 
 
Whatever you think of Bush, the war in Iraq has not gone to plan. Also, Bush and Tony Blair have been economical with the truth and some people would accuse them of outright lying (over Saddam's ability to launch WMD in 45 mins for example). IMO Bush sees the world too much as black and white, them and us. He can't appreciate that there is a world majority of opinion that falls within a view that you can only punish specific acts and not the potential of them happening. There is no use in trying to combat terrorism on a military level when the underlying causes are not tackled in the first place.

Bush has made too many gaffes and I for one have lost a lot of credibility in him. Whilst Kerry has not exactly sold himself to me I do think that he could mend some fences and restore US credibility in some parts of the world.
November 1st, 2004  
gladius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bratwurst
We are battling for Western civilization? Did I miss something or are you still fearing the coming of the Mahdi?
What, you still don't know this by now? That we really are in a battle for Western Civilization itself. I'm sure the terrorist know this.

Did you really think we could actually be friends and sit down with people who crash airplanes into civilian buildings, and or murder hundreds of school children, and still keep our way of life and beliefs?

The coming of the Mahdi will merely be the culmination of all this. The more we fight it now the less effective it will be in the future.

Quote:
And don't mistake soft for considering military actions as the last resort.
If you wait too long, there will be hell to pay.
November 1st, 2004  
Chocobo_Blitzer
 
John Kerry will rush along the Iraq war a bit, I doubt he'll leave it a mess, but not as clean as need be. He thought it was a complete mistake, he cares little for "Democracy in the broader middle-east" His heart is not in it.

Terrorism, well he will probably mimic Bush. But I believe he'll be even less aggressive towards nations like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc.... those that indirectly support terrorist orgs and have had little repercussions.

Overall, I think Kerry will be very catious about putting boots on the ground, unless a state or a faction declares war. He will sqeeze diplomacy until all juice is gone, and then he will sqeeze some more. Perhaps this is good to some people, but not me. If he appeases the pacifist too much, he could very well miss our chance of prevention.

Will he help our image in the world? Probably. But I don't care. Maybe I should, but I don't. Whenever I hear someone say the US is the worst country in the world, I simply grin. Perhaps if Bush was more tender with other nations (or kiss ass) maybe we would have more allies.

But honestly, if an "ally" could so easily turn so bitter and hateful, i'd rather not have them at all.

John Kerry has shown me no strength, no real plan. And while Bush is far from my perfect pick, he at least has shown me commitment. Some would say he's ignorant to his mistakes, I say he knows them well, and i'm willing to put my faith in his ability to better.

When it comes to the Iraq war, Winston Churchill sums it up best:

Quote:
Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events
November 1st, 2004  
ravensword227
 
I donít know where Kerry really wants to take this country because he has supported all views during his campaign. If anything, his propensity to defend North Vietnamese communists says volumes about his character. Donít take my word for it; just listen to what highly-decorated Vietnam vets have to say about John F. Kerry in the Stolen Honor documentary. Kerry is also for that New World Order garbage, and I donít think that will get very far in America without much deception. He basically is a communist.

So I would say that, if Kerry wins the election, itís I good thing that he will be held in check by the Supreme Court and Republican majority in congress. In other words, there will be gridlock and he won't be able to do jack.
November 1st, 2004  
Bratwurst
 
Quote:
What, you still don't know this by now? That we really are in a battle for Western Civilization itself. I'm sure the terrorist know this.
Although this is off topic, I may close the gap. This may be a idealization, because I have to keep on hoping that this current craze will come to an end and the people to their senses. Nonetheless I can see a division in the approach on dealing with the issue of global islamist terror by Kerry and Bush, even if it may not be as clear as I draw it.

Quote:
Did you really think we could actually be friends and sit down with people who crash airplanes into civilian buildings, and or murder hundreds of school children, and still keep our way of life and beliefs?
Actually I did sit down with a Muslim student, a supporter of islamist terror and had long and heated discussions with him. Yes, you can sit down and talk with them. It doesn't lead to anything productive though (other than to know what you're up against). We agree on that.

We probably also agree that those terrorists that represent the likes of Al Qaida should be hunted down without mercy. They deserve nothing less. And we need to stick together on this. It must be a broad international effort. International laws as they exist may need to be bend on occasion. It will get bloody. They should have no safe haven.

Although we must do all that, we should never forget what makes us different from them. Belief in human rights, the promise of peace, freedom through justice - just to name a few of those things that make our Western civilization worth defending.

I'm not drifting off...

We are not witness to a grand clash of civilizations. This is no Hollywood spectacle. Islamist terror is a phenomenon we have to deal with carefully and thoroughly.

How we approach this problem is essential. Regardless of the motivations of the current commander in chief and his staff, the actions taken so far have made matters worse in many ways.

Not only have they divided the Western world, they have destabilized an entire region that had become dangerously fragile through an ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, economic inequities and religious as well as cultural friction. Yes I am writing about the war in Iraq here.

John Kerry said it is the wrong war at the wrong time and he is absolutely right. Why is that? Apart from the obvious, that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein have about as much connection as Kermit the Frog and Mahathma Ghandi, the biggest disaster is that Iraq has virtually turned into a recruitment center for islamist hatred, may the recruits be called murderers, insurgents or terrorists. They are fuelled by the same poison.

Terrorist leaders have no greater ally than Bush. He supplies them with something much more necessary for their idealism than weapons. Reason.
There is nothing so fruitful for their propaganda than an Iraq in disarray, destroyed infrastructure, killed civilians. If the situation continues (and bloody hell it will), they will probably have more success recruiting than the US army at home.

Apart from the massive loss of life (http://www.iraqbodycount.net) the results of the current Presidentís efforts have cut an existing psychological wound ever so much deeper. This shock will send ripples throughout the consciousness of the entire region for a long time to come. Cause and effect. It is a simple and fundamental principle.

Fighting against a terror cell cannot be done by armies. They thrive on the chaos that armies leave behind. By what I have heard John Kerry say, he understands this (at least better). It is my hope.
November 1st, 2004  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bratwurst
We are not witness to a grand clash of civilizations. This is no Hollywood spectacle. Islamist terror is a phenomenon we have to deal with carefully and thoroughly.

How we approach this problem is essential. Regardless of the motivations of the current commander in chief and his staff, the actions taken so far have made matters worse in many ways.

Not only have they divided the Western world, they have destabilized an entire region that had become dangerously fragile through an ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, economic inequities and religious as well as cultural friction. Yes I am writing about the war in Iraq here.

John Kerry said it is the wrong war at the wrong time and he is absolutely right. Why is that? Apart from the obvious, that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein have about as much connection as Kermit the Frog and Mahathma Ghandi, the biggest disaster is that Iraq has virtually turned into a recruitment center for islamist hatred, may the recruits be called murderers, insurgents or terrorists. They are fuelled by the same poison.

Terrorist leaders have no greater ally than Bush. He supplies them with something much more necessary for their idealism than weapons. Reason.
There is nothing so fruitful for their propaganda than an Iraq in disarray, destroyed infrastructure, killed civilians. If the situation continues (and bloody h**l it will), they will probably have more success recruiting than the US army at home.

Apart from the massive loss of life (http://www.iraqbodycount.net) the results of the current Presidentís efforts have cut an existing psychological wound ever so much deeper. This shock will send ripples throughout the consciousness of the entire region for a long time to come. Cause and effect. It is a simple and fundamental principle.

Fighting against a terror cell cannot be done by armies. They thrive on the chaos that armies leave behind. By what I have heard John Kerry say, he understands this (at least better). It is my hope.
John Kerry is right when he hammers Bush on Iraq, but I'm not sure if Kerry is doing it because he understands why or he's doing it because he knows the Democrats like it and it makes good TV.

What is true that things are not any better than before. and the Middle East is a whole breeding ground for terrorism. It's a very have and have-not society. The rich are still rich and the poor are getting poorer. People there are getting more and more desperate and desperate people are more likely to become the terrorists of tomorrow. Bush or Kerry and their successors will have this to deal seeing as the US will always have to support Israel and with Israel being the one big sticking point for most Arabs. TBH I have no real conviction that either of them really know how to solve the problem.