Breaking Political Stories and Commentary. "We're at the height of the Roman Empire for the Republican Party, but the tide slowly but surely goes out." --Republican US Senator Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
From Yahoo News:
NEW YORK - Staking out new ground on Iraq, Sen. John Kerry suggested Monday that he would not have overthrown Saddam Hussein had he known what he knows now, and accused President Bush of "stubborn incompetence," dishonesty and colossal failures of judgment. Bush said Kerry was flip-flopping.
Daring or disastrous? I have no idea.

What do you think, JoeUsers?

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Sep 20, 2004
Flip flopping.. yes. Honest answer this time... yes. Right answer... yes. Daring... yes because by stating his true belief he leaves himself open for attack for making a false stamente before.
on Sep 20, 2004
Saddam was such a kind and loving dictator who was a MAN of the people, who lived no better than his citizens. Saddam should when the Nobel Peace Prize for all the Humanitarian action he has taken in Iraq. (End Sarcasm)
on Sep 20, 2004
Bush has several stock answers. "9/11" "I'm a compassionate conservative" and "flip flop" are the top three.

No Saddam wasn't good. But neither is King Fahd or Kim Jong IL. Don't give me that crap. Hell, if taking out evil dictators was such a big deal for Bush, he should have just invaded Cuba. It's a lot closer.
on Sep 20, 2004
I think that when the Bush camp calls Kerry a "flip-flopper," they are truly calling him "one who is not afraid to admit he is wrong." So what if Kerry changed his mind about Iraq. I prefer a leader that does not invade a country simply because he doesn't want to change his mind. It is infinately better to have a leader who admits when he is wrong and works to rights things, especially if national security is at stake.
on Sep 20, 2004
he should have just invaded Cuba. It's a lot closer.


Come on that is not even a fair fight, not to mention since when does anybody fear the Cuban Military invading or attacking the US or supporting people who attack the US. Fidel is not a idiot, he has not supported jack since Russia left Cuba.

on Sep 20, 2004
It is infinately better to have a leader who admits when he is wrong and works to rights things, especially if national security is at stake.


US / Mexico Border.
on Sep 20, 2004
US / Mexico Border.


Agred, ShoZan, I think this is a red-hot issue that neither candidate wants to touch. The Canadian border as well, but the US/Mexico border is the biggest weakness we have. I'm not anti-immigration, but I work for a school in an area of Arkansas that has a lot of poultry processing in the area -- and it's really tough to get these poor kids figured out sometimes -- they don't have any sort of documentation at all. Generally, these are hard-working kids, and I love having them as a part of my school -- but a border this porous could let anyone in, and not just to make a few Tyson chicken products. I'm not anti-immigration at all, but I do worry that our border with Mexico could be a future gateway to terrorists. It's got to be something we address, the status quo isn't going to hold here.
on Sep 20, 2004
Hey I don't care about South Americans or Mexicans coming across, probably because I am Hispanic (P.R.). What I do have a problem with is that terrorists could come across that border and nobody is really checking for them.
on Sep 20, 2004
George Bush's Stock answers include And Iraqi war is just that, a war with Iraq. It means that we are at war with Iraq, to create war with Iraq for the purpose of creating war with iraq. 9/11. September 11th. Kerry. Flipflop. Osama bin husien. I mean saddam bin laden. I mean Osama bin laden.
on Sep 20, 2004
I would like to hear an Iraqi citizen's opinion on this.
on Sep 20, 2004
It is very sad when more Iraqi justified this war than American. What the hell is wrong with the left? The left keep on talking about humanitrate issue. Damn it. The previous oil sanction killed 5000 Iraqi children under 5 every MONTH, according to UN its own source. This does not even include what Saddam did.
The worse estimate I read on Iraqi civilian causlties in this war is a total of 8000. If you do the math, by going to war, if only we end the oil sanction earlier for two months. It is worthy from a humanitarian point of view. Go look at the death rate in Iraq has been dropping
Link
Instead of asking why I support the war to kill Iraqi, why don't you tell me why you are for an oil sanction which kill more Iraqi? Why do you want to starve Iraqi to death? Why? If you are a true liberal, you should be glad for the invasion.

In term of Iraqi opinion... more Iraqi justified this war than not. "More Iraqis (49%) still believe that the coalition invasion was right compared to those (39%) who thought it was wrong."
Link
Iraqi was living in hellhole before the war. Why else any Iraqi will justified a war on their own country. You can't even find that in Nazi German and Imperial Japan. Those citizens love their government. The choice to wage war on Saddam was never between an invarsion and some happy/nice alternative. It was between a war and a oil sanction which is far worse. It was between invasion and letting Saddam kills his own people.
on Sep 21, 2004
Senate Hearings on C-Span Predicted this
I know that it is no secret that invading Iraq without massive international support and a plan to stabalize it afterwards would be doomed to fail. I saw Senate hearings aired on C-Span long before Bush plunged us into this mess in which experts on middle-east affairs predicted that without the above mentioned, along with a ready trained police force and at least one Trillion dollars in ready cash for re-construction, that any invasion would leave a huge power vacum in Iraq, which would lead to a civil war between the differing factions of Iraq and surrounding Arab countries with more than a passing interest in who controls the place after Sadam.

Of course, far be it for me to expect my President to follow Senate hearings any more than I would expect him to read his own PDB, or for that matter, listen to the outgoing administrations dire warnings. Odd how the Bush administration is critical of John Kerry "flip-flopping" on Iraq, when he did what they asked in the first place and backed Bush. Which is worse: changing your mind about supporting the President when you learn that he lied to you and the rest of the American people about WMDs, or using the most powerful office in the world to settle a grudge against your dad and make your oil buddies filthty rich in the process?

There is an excellent book called "Had Enough?" by James Carville (who came up with "it's the economy stupid" which takes a serious (and sometimes humurous) look at what a true "flip-flopper" Bush is, but more importantly, Carville offers some really dynamic and realistic ideas on how to fix the mess that Bush has gotten us into, not just Iraq, but the economy, health care, education, and a few other issues as well. It is written so that anyone with a third grade education can understand it.....so we need not worry about anyone in the Bush white house actually reading it and stealing any of the great ideas he puts forth.

on Sep 21, 2004
OOPS..sorry about the font folks
on Sep 21, 2004
why don't you tell me why you are for an oil sanction which kill more Iraqi?


Who exactly is it that supported the sanctions? Most people who protested the war protested the sanctions. Did we have to go to war to stop the sanctions? Wasn't it possible to fix the sanctions so half a million children did not die.

Do you support the bombs that were used to kill innocent people? There are many Iraqis that despise the United States who had nothing to do with terrorism and who will always hate the United States. Do they support the war? I also thought the reason the USA went to war was because Saddam was a threat, not to nation build.
on Sep 21, 2004
They went in too early. Saddam is not immortal, he would have died sooner or later. WIth his death, infighting would have begun and that would've been a good time to invade, especially seeing that no WMDs were found nor a connection between Saddam and international terrorist groups (not a surprise there, Saddam was hardly interested in their endavours and vice-versa, just look at his past history for Christ's sake). Whatever the reasons for invading Iraq really were, the bottom line, in my opinion is that it happened way too early and on the backbone of terrorism phobia.
2 Pages1 2