Is kerry lbj jr or just caught bushitus

[TimMooring]

The preposterous message from the Kerry campaign seems to be:

This is bushes Vietnam

But we just have to persevere.

This reminds me of the number of times that I've been burning mad with congressional dems and the DNC/DLC.


i downloaded my Nader materials and will support him right up to the ballot box where whatever my vote, on a computer or otherwise, is bound to leave a hanging chad.

I'd prefer to see Kerry follow Walter Cronkite's advice, failing that he's going to lose anyway. Is it that the paints too fresh at that new HQ building? Open the windows.

[Lindacooks]

1. What else can we do?

American invaded Iraq. We have to fix it.

I agree that chimpy's way, with force upon force upon force, isn't cutting it. But we can't just abandon the country after we've ruined it.

What would you suggest?

[Minstrel Boy]

2. Yup. Just keep on invading it until you get it right.

Myself, I suggest a radical course: Get the hell out, let them govern themselves, and leave the oil where you found it.

[slksln]

26. right, but

that's what we did the last time we were in Iraq. One of the (rather good) reasons they had for not being fond of the U.S.

[FlashHarry]

45. If we leave now, Iraq is fucked.

We broke it; we bought it. If we leave now, the political and social vacuum our exit will leave will surely invite a hard-line strongman that will make Hussein seem like Mahatma Gandhi. How does the Islamic Republic of Iraq sound to you?

[TimMooring]

54. I don't believe a word of it (nt)

[TimMooring]

4. Campaign better.

He needs to emphasize a rapid withdrawal from Iraq. If its Vietnam our choices are cut and run now or a less dignified withdrawal later. He could suggest that the currect June target for "political" handover - whatever that is - to a year-end target for complete removal of U.S forces. In the interim the U.N. would setup a political entity to hand-off to and NATO forces would offer post occupation security.

If he doesn't differentiate himself from cheneybushes open-ended (negroponte ran) military occupation then he gives up his chance to win

[Caution]

3. so what you are saying is that the "right" thing to do

is to simply abandon Iraq to chaos and civil war, with the probable rise of a taliban/iran-like fundamentalist government taking power?

I don't like it any more than you do, but for better or worse, as americans we FAILED to stop Bush from invading Iraq, and in the process of that invasion he destroyed the country and it's infrastructure, and has now failed to put into place a functional government that can run this country.

"Let the UN sort it out" is not an acceptable answer, certainly the UN should take charge of the operation because we dont have the credibility to run it anymore but as a country we now have a primary responsibility to fix the problem that we created.

Unilateral withdrawal is not an answer either, unless you want to be responsible for both what occurred before the invasion and after a unilateral withdrawal. Personally, I have a conscience and mine says that any country's citizens that can justify this type of action (Invasion of a foreign country, destruction of the government and civilial infrastructure of that country and then the simple abandonment of 20+ million people is not something I can personally justify).

People ask why Bush wont take any personal responsibility for the events of 9/11, well I ask why we as dissenters won't take any personal responsibility for our failure to prevent the catastrophe of the Iraqi invasion and occupation. We should have and could have done more. Or are the mitigating factors enough that you can wash your hands of the Iraqis. "Well it was all PNAC's fault. The actions of my country are not my responsibility. They broke it, now you fix it."

Or do you honestly believe that if only us Americans would get the hell out that all of a sudden the Iraqis would put in an enlightened democratic government and start handing out candy to all the children in the streets?

[Minstrel Boy]

5. If Americans "would get the hell out" then

Iraqis would be free of Americans. This, it seems to me, is the cause for nearly all of Iraqis' current misery.

Pay restitution for the damage, but leave.

"do you honestly believe that...all of a sudden the Iraqis would put in an enlightened democratic government and start handing out candy to all the children in the streets?"

Well, if that's what you're keeping the troops in Iraq to see, then sign on to the PNAC statement of principles. And there are lots of other countries awaiting America's gift of "enlightened democratic government."

[Caution]

7. I don't advocate anything in terms of Iraq

policy other than cleaning up the huge freaking mess we made.

I guess you would be happy if I came over to your place, burned it to the ground, killed your family, destroyed every possession you had and then paid you a few bucks in restitution.

We have a responsibility to these people to make it right. I don't know the answer to it, but it certainly isnt to just hand them a big check and say "gee sorry."

I'm not expecting open arms and I don't justify the invasion, i think the whole thing was wrong, but I don't think abandoning our mistake is right and that's what you are suggesting.

[Minstrel Boy]

10. no, if you did this:

"I guess you would be happy if I came over to your place, burned it to the ground, killed your family, destroyed every possession you had and then paid you a few bucks in restitution."

I would want you dead. Which is exactly how a great many Iraqis feel towards your soldiers and "contractors" right about now. Perpetuating the occupation until they get over it is not a rational option.

And listen to what you're saying: "abandoning our mistake" is precisely what you need to do.

[Caution]

14. first off

don't call them "my" soldiers and "contractors", because, if as I suspect, you are an American citizen, YOU bear just as much responsibility as I do. A better word would be "our." I opposed the war and worked actively against it. I failed.

secondly, I don't blame them for wanting Americans dead (which be honest is NOT the way all Iraqis feel, if they did the situation would be a HELL of a lot worse, which isn't to say that it won't get worse).

Why won't you look at the situation honestly? This black and white view of things is exactly what we accuse Bush and his criminal gang of doing, yet here you are doing the same thing. There are two objectives here. Help the Iraqis and help the Americans. Would leaving Iraq immediately accomplish this? It might help the American soldiers on the ground in Iraq and their families but that would be the end of it. Overall this whole incident would damage American credibility around the globe even further than it has already been damaged. The Iraqi people would be left in a destroyed country without a functioning government, where the rule of law would fall into the hands of whomever was willing to kill anyone in his/her way.

I don't like this any more than you do (and probably a whole lot less, since I have very serious reasons to hate the current administration which are up close and personal), but I do not see how simply abandoning what is now our responsibility would be beneficial to either Americans or Iraqis in the short, mid or long term.

[Minstrel Boy]

33. I chose my words carefully. I'm Canadian, so

they're not "my" soldiers.

And I don't believe I'm looking at this situation over-simplistically. The problem in Iraq is the presence of American troops. The problem will not be corrected by sustaining the occupation.

The US has signalled over and over again it has no intention of leaving, even after "sovereignty" is handed off. Such an arrogant imperial force cannot nation build.

[slksln]

30. if we leave now

the people who want to see us dead will come to power.

And they will see Americans dead. I don't like the idea any more than you do, but unless we want our country to fall that much more rapidly because of this particular war, we had better stay and help rebuild.

I hesitate to mention this, but remaining and helping to fix what we destroyed is part of why we have such good relations with Japan now. Until I was injured, I was a cadet at a military academy, and it was an everyday sight to see Japanese tourists so excited to meet Americans that they would nearly make me late for class. I am not saying that this is how the Iraqis will be if we stay and help them rebuild, but I do think that it will make us look like less of assholes than we do now. Live with them, learn their language, share your food with them, work with them to rebuild homes and everything. This is what we tried to do in Vietnam, but that wasn't as successful as it should have been since the boys were brought home when they were. My dad was one who did both a combat tour in Vietnam as well as a restoration tour, he was upset when they brought him home after the second one, because he says he felt like he was helping to make up for the lives he felt responsible for from his first tour.

I'll end this here. I'm beginning to ramble.

[TimMooring]

6. Iraq and Afghanistan are not really comparable

The assumption of chaos if we withdraw is actually the mirror image of what happens if we stay. That's the essential lesson of Vietnam. This is no a populist uprising which makes our situation untenable at this point. The U.S. is the focal point. Replace them with a smaller number mostly in the kurdish north and with the largest possible arab contingent to back the Iraqi security force.. that we'd have until the end of the year to equip and train.

[sandnsea]

8. Seriously, are you paying attention?

This is EXACTLY what he wants to do. Turn over the governance and reconstruction to a UN authority so that Arab and other countries would have a stake in the say in the outcome. Under those conditions, they'd be more likely to send in those troops. That would change it from an American occupation to a UN occupation which would remove that "focal point" and allow us to start bringing our troops home.

[TimMooring]

11. If that's what he wants to do why not come out and say it?

I've not heard anything from him but an extended american presence - same as bush. I haven't heard anything from him about a withdrawal of American forces on a schedule or otherwise. Just asking for more "partners". If you have then i have indeed missed something.

[sadiesworld]

12. Perhaps you hear what you want to hear.

[Caution]

15. You want an exact time table?

You do realize that this is something that is totally impossible to do right? This is akin to Bush saying, "well we would have stopped 9/11 if only the hijackers had given us the date and time of the attack"

There is no way for Kerry or anyone else to provide a timetable without access to the same data about the situation that the administration currently controls. If Kerry gives a timetable as an election promise that he cannot possibly meet that simply undermines anything and everything he might attempt to accomplish here and abroad over the course of his entire administration.

[TimMooring]

17. BS (nt)

[Caution]

18. wow what a thought provoking response

thanks for really going all out to show me the error of my logic and judgement. In other words: "I can't think of anything to refute that argument. Troops out now. screw Iraq"

seriously, why even bother asking a question if you are just going to respond in that fashion when someone attempts to answer you?

[TimMooring]

20. Its the transparent argument of bush adapted by Kerry

Nothing could be worse. It's not that complex a problem. American occupation - not acceptable to Iraqis. Solution - get out. It really is that simple. Assuming that your plan is not an elaborate cover operation - LIKE THE BUSH PLAN. By leaving a lot of our hummers and tracked vehicles for use by Iraqi security forces (that we vet and train). Our troops could hand off their flack gear off to Iraqis as they come out of training and get on the first Air America flight home.

We owe the Iraqis and can repay that debt best from within our own shores, not handing it out with a military gauntlet.

[Caution]

22. I'm honestly mystified by this response

First off, stop freaking placing this plan in my hands, you seem to wish to believe that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow a shill for Bush. Well knock it off. I'm trying to be a realist here rather than look at the issue in stark black and white. You may not like it but that is no reason to accuse me of being a Bush shill.

You advocate leaving a bunch of weapons and equipment behind? So basically anyone who feels like taking over just needs to seize as much of the equipment as possible and then do so? And then that person will be left with an army equipped with top of the line US military equipment? Good plan. Oh wait, you said we are going to train and vet the Iraqis. Hmm that will be easy huh? How long do you suppose that might take? A year? Two? five? Training is easy. Vetting is not. What records were destroyed? What still exist? What raving lunatic might we put in command of a US military equipped army?

Look, nowhere does Kerry or Bush advocate the annexation of Iraq, both advocate turning it over to Iraqis. Bush however wants to do it entirely on PNAC terms. Kerry is advocating putting the UN in charge of the transition to ensure that the Iraqi people are given the best opportunity to choose for themselves instead of having Chalabi shoved down their throats.

Additionally, you seem to be laboring under the delusion that there are 135,000 troops engaged in daily combat with Iraqi civilians. If this were the case those 135,000 would have been slaughtered long ago. The Iraqi resistance is currently quite small, otherwise 135,000 troops spread over a country the size of California would have already been totally overrun. That resistance is growing. The best we can hope for is that Bush won't go completely insane and order the carpet-bombing of civilian population centers until january when Kerry takes office and begins to implement his plan which hopefully will be met positively by the Iraqi people.

Do I guarantee this will work? Nope. But do you honestly believe that your so-called plan (train and vet iraqis, leave them weapons, get the hell out) will work better?

I understand an innate distrust of the motivation of politicians, but what choice do we have? Right now it appears to be Bush, Kerry or Nader. Nader polled 3% last time. Why so low? Because the vast majority of Americans think he isn't a good leader. Simple as that. Hasn't changed. He will not ever be President. So we are left with two choices, Kerry or Bush. Who do you distrust less? Who would be more likely to make better choices?

[TimMooring]

24. bushes plan is Exxon/halliburton's plan; Kerry seems to adopting it:

I said "it" the plan not you. I made no personal reference. And yes i do absolutely believe a U.S. withdrawal by year end is an entirely workable plan. Leaving equipment is also a fairly common strategy - not top of the line - as you suggest - But Bradlies and humvee's with sensitive gear removed. So far the CPA's idea of training Iraqi police and army has been to teach them how to gesture menacingly with an AK-47. The bad news is that lost of ordinary Iraqis already know how to do this.

This baby doesn't need or want to be loved by its mother. It needs to stand up and walk quickly.

The are and have been all along capable of establishing a government to their liking. They just haven't been able to get from underneath our thumb, first Saddam then Bremer.

[Caution]

29. And on what basis

Do you think your plan is workable? Give me somethign credible that shows that your idea will actually work other than "because I said so" or "It's common sense." I'd also like to have a single piece of evidence that suggests that Kerry is in the pocket of Oil Co's and that somehow his plan is related in any way to Bush's plan. The fact that he hasnt given a drop dead out-date is not evidence anywhere other than tinhat-land.

I didn't say the Iraqis were incapable. Stop making straw man arguments. I said that given the current situation as reported that IMO simply leaving the Iraqis to it would create the perfect environment for a dictatorial person or group to seize power, particularly with weapons and materials left available to them.

Apparently you have access to the CPA training regimen that I don't because I would naturally assume that they use standard training techniques for police and military, but I guess that maybe they do just hand these people an AK-47 and tell them to gesture menacingly with it.

Either way, that is Bush's regime, not Kerry's. What indication do you have that Kerry will keep the same policies in place? Give me something here?

You sound like Ralph Nader. "Kerry is Bush-lite." Anyone can say that, but most people like a little thing called evidence and I'm still looking for some of that. Kerry has provided a plan. No it isn't exactly what you are looking for, but there is no indication anywhere that he is planning on doing just what Bush is doing either, to the contrary, Kerry wishes to place the entire thing into the hands of international oversight.

Your plan boils down to:
1.) US out by Dec 31st
2.) Train Iraqis better
3.) Leave them some non-sensitive equipment to help provide for security
4.) Pay them some restitution

While Kerry wishes to
1.) Internationalize a peace-keeping force
2.) Have the UN assist in ensuring non corrupt elections
3.) the phasing out of a US force in favor or a NATO force for the short term
4.) Continued rescontruction of all the shit we blew up in the first place

and somehow this translates to you into Kerry=Bush. Please just give me one piece, one shred that Kerry=Bush.

p.s. you did appear to me to make a personal reference:
<quote> Assuming that your plan is not an elaborate cover operation - LIKE THE BUSH PLAN.</quote>

I'm guessing you meant Kerry here rather than attempting to equate ME somehow with Bush.

[TimMooring]

34. You layout my suggestion very well ...

It and is my point that announcing a fixed schedule for ending U.S. military presence is in fact the best course of action. Whatever military gear we leave them - even if it includes main battle tanks - would be operating under the wings of a far superior NATO force. I'm suggesting that we can't leave them facing off with AK-47's and IED's. They're just tracked vehicles and necessary maintenance and ammo would require friends in the right places - like NATO. Kerry's plan from the *Iraqi* POV and the POV of a very large part of the electorate are indistinquishable. That is a *real* problem with the Kerry plan.

BTW: I intended "your" as an impersonal pronoun.

[sandnsea]

25. Give me the quote

Tell me where he said he wanted an extended American presence. Past the point of stability in Iraq. Give me the quote.

[TimMooring]

27. But I agree that you correctly state his position (nt)

It's bushes position as well. it's like stirring a pot until the contents are stable.

[sandnsea]

40. It is NOT Bush's position

Bush has absolutely no desire to truly bring the UN to the table in Iraq so that the UN countries have a real say in the governance and reconstruction. He has absolutely no plan whatsoever to put the security under a NATO umbrella. He insists a full democracy be created, or that our military stay until this pipe dream is completed (or the pipelines are created). Bush will NEVER leave Iraq, Kerry WILL. And the only reason you don't see the difference in those positions is because it supports your preconceived notions that Democrats and Republicans are all the same so you can stay on your anti-Washington rant and vote for Nader or whatever the hell your political agenda is.

[TimMooring]

42. My political agenda is:

Bring the troops home by Dec.
Address corporate/government corruption as a top priority.
Where's Kerry? Playing inbed with bush.

[sandnsea]

43. And your plan to get there?

Got one? Help Bush get 4 more years? That's going to help? Your plan is suicide. Unfortunately you're forcing the rest of us to commit suicide with you and that's just not moral or ethical.

[TimMooring]

44. Not at all

My plan is to help Nader build his base until Kerry faces the choice of losing the election or addressing the issues that I'm concerned about. His choice. Right now he's just stumbling about. It's pathetic.. and he will be repsonsible for his fate.

[sandnsea]

56. You're kidding yourself

Your plan helps Bush stay in office. It gets hundreds of soldiers killed and thousands of people in who knows how many other countries killed. That's your plan. Accept it. Own it. The blood is now on YOUR hands.

[Caution]

13. And what in Kerry's plan for the basic transition precludes this?

Have you read it?

Bullet points:

1.) Level with the American People. (Iraq situation=bad)
2.) Supply Our Military Commanders with the Additional Troops Requested. (Give them the people they need to simply protect themselves)
3.) Launch a Diplomatic Strategy that will Work. (Put the UN in charge of the US forces)
4.) Establish An International Mission to Ensure Stability and Set up Elections. - (Take the governmental power out of American hands)
5.) Transform U.S. Force into a NATO Security Force Commanded by an American, and Bring in Other Countries. - (ensure security over the short term but using forces other than straigh US forces in order to show the Iraqis it isnt about the US occupying their country)

Is the plan perfect? well no it isnt, but frankly anything we might propose wouldnt be either, simply due to us having NO CLUE about the TRUE situation on the ground in Iraq from either a military, civilian infrastructure or humanitarian stand point.

There must be an exit strategy and it must be something relatively quick, however, to deny that we as Americans bear no responsibility for repairing the damage is unethical to say the least.

Somehow, I'd be willing to bet that John Kerry, with 20 years in the Senate is more cognizant of the actual situation in Iraq than any of us here at DU are. Maybe you don't like the solution, but I base my assessment on Kerry's record in the Senate and on about 90% of the things Kerry does I would agree. This is a pretty amazing track record for any elected representative.

[TimMooring]

16. Nothing precludes?

having a plan that does not preclude is not the same as having or enunciating a good plan. The DNC has had its up its ass for nearly 3 years now. We need a clear exit strategy for U.S. withdrawal on a schedule. Notice how the Sadr asked his militia not to fire at Spanish forces after they announced a scheduled withdrawal?

[Caution]

19. And saying "this isn't a good plan"

Doesn't make you right. What do you know of Iraqi demands? Is Sadr all of a sudden the voice of Iraq? I want withdrawal as much as you but how do you expect anyone to come up with a timetable without the resources to do so? Just magically pluck a date out of the air and promise to stick to it? Fer crissakes, I'm having a hard enough time picking a date for my wedding and putting together the timetable for that, never mind a plan to create a functional government, create a working Iraqi national defense force, internal security force, internation aid infrastructure, food, water, fuel, and waste systems for 22 million people, all while attempting to come up with domestic policy for the US, run a campaign, defend oneself against shameless smear tactics and deal with a fractious constituency who are demanding answers over questions they themselves don't even understand. And on top of this you want him to do it when all of the relevant data that would be required to put this into action is in the control of his opponent in said election?

Would you like him to turn some water into wine for you while he is at it?

He gave a series of actionable items (otherwise known as a plan) that will lead to what you are asking for when it is possible to do so, what more do you want?

[TimMooring]

21. you're failing to address the central issue

bushes plan is a cover for extended occupation and concurrent withdrawal of mineral resources.

If Kerry can't find a simpler more effective plan - given that the massive cover story is no longer needed - then he needs to go talk to Wes Clark.

[Caution]

23. It is you who are failing to recognize

the plan that Kerry has already given as being just what you are asking for. What proof do you have to offer me that Kerry's plan is just a cover? His voting record doesn't give me that impression. HIs public statements certainly don't. He is adamant about restoring Iraqi sovereignty and doing it through an internation body (the UN).

What do you actually want from Kerry? A 200 page document detailling everything? How do you propose that he create this document?

[TimMooring]

28. Kerry doesn't need to convince me ...

He needs to convince everyone from cheneybush to the electorate to the Iraqi people that his plan is different. What's wrong with announcing a fixed date for an end of the military occupation? Have you let yourself become convinced of this "chaotic aftermath argument"?

[Caution]

31. Please see post #19

Providing a fixed date is something that he simply can't do at this point. Not realistically, and to provide a date and fail to meet it would be a major disaster for Kerry and his agenda moving forward as President. Why do you think Bush is so adamant about June 30th? If he misses that date things become very bad indeed for Bush and his cronies so he's going to stick to it no matter what. We'll see what happens when he does and Chalabi takes power. That's going to work really well.

Until Kerry has all of the data and facts at his disposal, to name an arbitrary date would be not only stupid, it would also be dangerous.

[TimMooring]

35. See response #17 (nt)

[TimMooring]

9. just an additional thought ...

We should leave a fair amount of our military gear in place for use by iraqi and NATO forces. Save the taxpayer a nickel for a change. A good part of it is well on its way to being junk anyway. We need to leave a powerful force of sometype in place - why not iraqi? Stability is the issue here.

don't you wonder what's wrong with Kerry? I'm feeling more apprehensive with every passing day.

[Redleg]

32. What was that stream of consciousness post all about?

What does it mean?

[TimMooring]

36. E. E. Cummin's fan are we?

:-)

[TimMooring]

37. I don't understand why ...

People are so resistant to the suggestion that a fixed date for U.S military withdrawal would be popular with both Iraqis and Americans.

Explain Please

[Snellius]

38. Recent polls have Nader doing BETTER than he did in 2000

And Nader doesn't even have the Green Party to back him up. Even knowing that without Nader, Bush would not be president today. And yet, why is it, that Bush is able to hold onto the more radical conservative elements of his party without losing his centrist appeal, while Kerry seems to be rapidly losing the support of Naderites and Deaniacs in a vain attempt to prove he's not a Kennedy liberal. The lesson of recent polls is not how well Bush is doing but how much Kerry is doing wrong.

[TimMooring]

39. More and more I feel I've found my niche on the left

As a Nader supporter. Everyone else including Kerry are to my right.
I know what liberal-progressive means to me.

[David Dunham]

52. Nader will not be on most states ballots.

[TimMooring]

55. I know how to spell his name (nt)

[bigtree]

41. Where the hell do you claim Kerry said this

You have no credibility replacing Kerry's words with your own cynical view.

[TimMooring]

46. Did I get something wrong?

He blames the current situation on bush (correctly)
Senator Kennedy has called it bushes Vietnam (correctly)

Kerry says we must stir the pot with our presence until the Iraqis calm down.
Just like bush. Germany and France are going to support the current
occupation just because Kerry gets elected? I don't think so.

This is a really dumb plan when you stop to consider that most of the American
electorate, certainly military families and the Iraqis themselves would love
to hear that we a fixed date for U.S force withdrawal. We should have to bid
for where our embassy stands in Baghdad just like every other nation. Not
fighting a popular insurgency until stability is achieved.

Brilliant !!!

[bigtree]

47. No quotes, no links

Just your biased blather.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

48. Yes, you did. How about a link?

[TimMooring]

49. You're saying that I've got it wrong ...

What exactly did I get wrong? I can't link to your thought process.

[TimMooring]

50. What America owes to the Iraqi People ...

Is the same thing the Israelis owe the Palestinians: Get off their land.

[Snellius]

51. Kerry's new ads were written by Bob Shrum

Heard on Hardball

[TimMooring]

53. Iraq is not the only issue Kerry is failing to take a position ...

his stance on corporate corruption hegemony within the government is also the same as bushes. To wit: Don't worry its all fixed now. We caught Martha.