[Rhodes22-list] Politics: Misleading

Tue Sep 21 07:35:55 EDT 2004

Wally,

I’m responding to your post out of convenience and not
necessairly rebutting your points.  First, here’s some
quotes from John Kerry.

“Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has
made it clear that he has the intent to continue to
try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to
continue to do so.  That is a threat to the stability
of the Middle East.  It is a threat with respect to
the potential of terrorist activities on a global
basis.  It is a threat even to regions near but not
exactly in the Middle East.” -  1998 Kerry press
conference

“I believe that everybody who has been involved with
the issue of Iraq understands a day of reckoning has
been a long time coming for Saddam Hussein…”  1998
-Kerry commenting on Clintons four-day bombing against
Saddam Hussein

“The President did not withdraw the UNSCOM inspectors.
 And the President did not, obviously, cut a deal with
Saddam Hussein to do this at this moment.  Saddam
Hussein has not complied.  Saddam Hussein is pursuing
a program to build weapons of mass destruction"  -
1998 Kerry press conference defending Clinton

Regardless of what you believe about John Kerry voting
for the war before he voted against it, he is clearly
on record supporting the ouster of Saddam Hussein
while his party held the White House.  For him to
critisize it now is a bit disengenious at the least.

For an excellent background on Afghanistan, read 
“Charlie Wilson’s War” by George Crile.  The Soviets
spent ten years there with a massive force and
couldn’t prevail.  We went in after 9/11 with a light
and redily adaptable force, using local tribes to
eliminate Al Quida training bases and remove the
Taliban from power.  Given the terrain and difficulty
of the Afghan/Pakistan border, it is not suprising
that Bin Laden escaped.  It is unfortunate.  More
troops might have prevented it but probably not. 
We’ll get him eventually.

Despite what all the talking head Generals say during
their “armchair quarterbacking” on TV, a larger force
in Iraq would not have made the task any easier. 
General Franks specifically delayed the arrival of the
4th ID because the docks at Kuwaitt were already
backed up and the logistical supply line was stretched
thin.  His plan to topple Saddam was in hindsight,
brilliant! Read “American Soldier” by Tommy Franks.

What was not so brilliant was the establishment of
security after the Saddam government fell.  For a
critical assessment of the current situation, read
“What Went Wrong in Iraq” by Larry Diamond in the
September/October 2004 Foreign Affairs magazine.  Part
of our problem is that we have been hypersensitive to
religious figures and shrines.  When the Iraqi’s get
their forces up to speed, that may change.  The place
is a mess but not hopeless.

I find it curious that so many who oppose the war in
Iraq had very little to say about Clinton’s record
number of deployments while he was in office.  I AM a
partisan, that is obvious, but that doesn’t mean I
un-conditionally support everything President Bush
does.  However, regarding the war in Iraq, I have to
agree with what the Democrats were saying in 1998. 
Saddam needed to go.

Brad Haslett
“CoraShen”

--- Wally Buck <tnrhodey at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Rik,
> 
> You make some god points. I can't stand Bush but I
> have a hard time getting 
> behind Kerry. Bush has a doulbe digit lead in TN.  I
> have voted third party 
> many times in the past and will likely do so this
> year
> 
> Regarding your comment about Bush having the support
> of Congress and the 
> people before attacking Iraq. All memebers of
> Congress do not have access to 
> the same security infomration as the president. 
> This is a good thing, most 
> of these elected clowns couldn't be trusted with a
> real secret. I think it 
> is fairly obvious that the President was provided a
> bunch of infomration 
> that really wasn't true. They pitched their case to
> Congress as well as the 
> UN.
> 
> Remember the nifty PowerPoint showing exact
> locations of terror training 
> camps. bomb plants and so on. We supposedly have
> inside knowledge of what is 
> going on over there yet the inspectors can't find a
> thing. I for one was 
> against attacking when we did even if Iraq did have
> WMD. We could have 
> easily waited a little longer and seen how things
> played out. We rushed into 
> this thing because of 911. In my minds our leaders
> took advantage of the 
> mood of the country. I don't think we would have
> attacked iraq when we did 
> without 911. When one studies the facts available
> there is no link to Iraq 
> and 911.
> 
> We played our hand too early, now we are stuck with
> it. Now we are pleading 
> for UN support. It looks like everyone agrees that
> we should send more 
> troops to help free Iraq. Bin Laden is still loose
> and we are wasting 
> billions in Iraq.
> 
> Wally
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Rik Sandberg <sanderico at earthlink.net>
> >Reply-To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> >To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Politics: Misleading
> >Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:35:28 -0500
> >
> >As long as we're on the subject of mis-leading, I
> just gotta ask:
> >
> >How is it that someone can collect three Purple
> Hearts in a forty day stint 
> >in Vietnam and spend no time in a hospital. I'll
> bet his manicurist was 
> >really pissed.
> >
> >Myself, I'd be ashamed to accept a Purple Heart for
> the "owies" Mr. Kerry 
> >must have incurred, considering the injuries of
> some of the people over 
> >there that really deserved the medal. But then
> again I wouldn't be caught 
> >dead hanging around with Hanoi Jane either. Just
> for that fact alone, I 
> >wouldn't vote for John Kerry if his opposition was
> Pat Paulson
> >
> >And wasn't Senator Kerry one of the vast majority
> of the legislature that 
> >voted to go  to Iraq?? Seems to me, the President
> had the backing of the 
> >majority of the American Public AND the blessing of
> the legislature to 
> >boot, going into this thing. Is someone going to
> try to tell me that 
> >Senators and Representatives are not privy to the
> same intelligence 
> >information that the President is? .... Yeah right.
> >
> >I'd sure like to see the name of ONE politician
> that hasn't done something 
> >that could be considered mis-leading. Mr Kerry,
> IMHO is pretty close to the 
> >top of the list in this area.
> >
> >So Brad and Steve.....I'm with you :-)
> >
> >Rik
> >
> >
> >At 01:33 PM 9/20/2004, you wrote:
> >>Steve,
> >>
> >>I know it will amaze you to learn that just
> because you say "End of story" 
> >>that doesn't make it the end of the story.
> >>
> >>On July 13, 2003 Secretary of Defense Donald
> Rumsfeld, when asked whether 
> >>George W. Bush had misled the nation with regard
> to the threat of Weapons 
> >>of Mass Destruction said "End of story."  But it
> really wasn't, was it?
> >>
> >>Every weapons inspector who has tried to find the
> weapons W. warned of in 
> >>his State of the Union Speech, and that Secretary
> of State Colin Powell 
> >>warned of in his United Nations speech, has
> reported back that there were 
> >>no Weapons of Mass Destruction.
> >>
> >>I call that misleading, and I believe that's what
> this election is about.
> >>
> >>Even if he wins, I don't think that will be the
> end of this story.
> >>
> >>Bill
> >>
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: Steve
> >>To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> >>Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 1:07 PM
> >>Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Politics: Misleading
> >>
> >>
> >>Bill
> >>Bush received a Honorable Discharge.  End of
> story.
> >>Last poll I heard was that only 1 in 5 even care
> about
> >>his guard service and then even its not an issue
> for
> >>voting on for President.
> >>
> >>As for a Kerry goes, we can debate Bush all day
> long,
> >>but there is nothing to debate about Kerry; he has
> no
> >>stance on anything.  His voting record clearing
> shows
> >>that he cannot be trusted to protect this country.
> >>Again, End of Story.
> >>Steve
> >>
> >>PS - Good attachment Brad.
> >>
> >>
> >>--- brad haslett <flybrad at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Bill,
> >> >
> >> > I respectfully disagree with most if not all of
> your
> >> > assessments, however, time does not permit me
> to
> >> > formulate a reasoned response this morning.  I
> do
> >> > have
> >> > one, trust me.
> >> >
> >> > In the meantime, enjoy the attachment.
> >> >
> >> > Brad Haslett
> >> > "CoraShen"
> >> >
> >> > --- Bill Effros <bill at effros.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Brad,
> >> > >
> >> > > The point of the National Guard issue is not
> >> > > Vietnam, any more than the Clinton
> Impeachment was
> >> > > about sex.  Both hinge on the question of
> >> > > Presidential misleading.  George W. Bush ran
> for
> >> > > President on this issue, saying repeatedly
> that he
> >> > > would not mislead the American people.  The
> extent
> >> > > to which he has misled the American people
> about
> >> > his
> >> > > National Guard record is emblematic of the
> way 
=== message truncated ===

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com