Is Kerry Really More Open than Bush to Alternative Foreign Policy

[Larkspur]

Perspectives?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0915-13.htm

<SNIP>
Unfortunately, while a President Kerry would almost certainly be less ideological and impulsive than President George W. Bush in formulating his foreign policy, there are a number of areas in which the Massachusetts senator appears to be just as unwilling to listen to alternative viewpoints regarding foreign affairs as the incumbent president.

Take Senator Kerry's position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, for example:

Kerry shares the Bush administration's support for the policies of the rightist Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon. He has defended the Israeli re-occupation of much of the West Bank; Israel's ongoing violation of a series of UN Security Council resolutions; Sharon's refusal to even negotiate for a permanent peace agreement with the Palestinian leadership; Israel's policy of assassinating suspected terrorists and other Palestinian leaders; Sharon's proposed annexation of vast stretches of occupied Palestinian territory in order to incorporate illegal Jewish settlements into Israel; and, the Israeli government’s construction of an illegal separation wall deep inside occupied territory (in defiance of a recent near-unanimous ruling by the International Court of Justice, which led Kerry to strongly criticize the UN’s judicial body.)

As a result, the Kerry campaign has opened its door wide to right-wing Zionist groups that share his and Bush's support for the illegal and repressive occupation policies of the current rightist Israeli government, with Kerry and his top foreign policy advisors meeting regularly with their representatives. By contrast, despite numerous efforts by moderate and liberal pro-Israel groups such as the Tikkun Community, Churches for Middle East Peace, Jewish Voice for Peace, and others to meet with the candidate or his leading staffers, the Kerry campaign has completely shut them out.

The sad reality appears to be that Kerry is not interested in even hearing the perspectives of the large and growing numbers of Israel's American supporters - both Jewish and non-Jewish - who recognize that not only are Sharon's policies toward the Palestinians illegal and immoral, they threaten Israel's long-term security interests as well.

Even leading progressive Zionists like Rabbi Michael Lerner - one of America's foremost intellectuals - have been systematically denied any access to Kerry or the leadership of the campaign.
<SNIP>

[Goldmund]

1. Uh-oh, you're going to be called a "freeper"

by the DU's witch-hunting contingent.

[Larkspur]

4. This author presents a legit question and argument

Personally, I don't like Kerry's foreign policy positions on I/P and Venezuela, and his Iraq position sounds nice on paper, but I don't see him getting the help from Europe that he is promising.

[Goldmund]

5. I totally agree with you.

I'm just sick of "let's out all of the freepers" kinds of threads around here, and all of the accusations of "freepery" as soon as the smallest objection to Kerry and his campaign is brought up.

[amjsjc]

7. Yep

It's a pity that some Democrats expect us to march in perfect ideological lockstep, to the point where we can't even admit that things are going badly for our campaign, or well for W's (Oh the flames I got after I had the temerity to suggest that Bush's acceptance speech was well written, well delivered and might win over some swing voters...)

If we're going to win this thing we'll need to be honest with ourselves, and this includes admiting when Kerry screws up and W's campaign does something smart.

[phantom power]

2. consider it this way

we know, from four years of direct experience, that Bush will never, ever solve our energy or environmental problems. In fact, so far all of his policies have had the effect of making things worse, not better.

Kerry may or may not be the dream envirnomental candidate, but his Congressional voting record on the environment is about as good as any out there, and it's obvious that he believes there is such a thing as environmental problems and energy problems.

We can debate about exactly how much Kerry will accomplish, but he's likely to accomplish *something*. Conversely, Bush is *guaranteed* to either accomplish nothing, or continue to make things worse.

[2Design]

3. Kerry likes people and believes in discourse - Bush hates people

and is afraid of them and only believes in scripted "conversation" - he talks and no one else is allowed to talk

[knowbody0]

6. kerry and foriegn relations

to win this war on "terrorism" it is essential to understand the seed of the conflict which truly began with israel/palestine so long ago, trumped by the desecration of muslem holy places by american soldiers and especially the women. it is a cultural assault. i believe that kerry's wisdom of the world is profound and his "sensitivities" will prevail. the iraqi people are anxious to speek with him. have faith

[hansolsen]

8. Kerry's position on I/P conflict compromises his position on war in Iraq.

Kerry is constrained in opposing the war in Iraq because that is considered job one by AIPAC and the Likud lobby. They view the war in Iraq as the war to make the middle east safe for Zionist expansion into the "Holy Lands" in the West Bank. The Settlers are going to get a million Americans killed, and Kerry is rolling out a red carpet for them to trot down. It is disgusting.

I would never vote for Kerry because of this, except for the fact Shrub is a monster from Hell, and his policies are a national disgrace and a national disaster. Kerry will get my vote, but the next thing he will get from me is a strong letter deploring his I/P position.

Meanwhile the I/P issue makes it very difficult for Kerry to put forward a rational policy to end the war in Iraq and mend the open wounds in the middle east. I believe it will cost him the presidency unless he finds the courage to tell Ariel Sharon to go to Hell before the election. The best place to do that would be in the first ten minutes of the first debate.