« Kerry's Great Coalition | Main | Where is the GOP as a Party? »
September 24, 2004
Kerry's Undercut
John Kerry has apparently decided that all is such gloom and doom in Iraq that we are already defeated. His remarks yesterday during the visit by Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi went way beyond what is acceptable during even the most heated of political campaigns.
Allawi, of course, has been in the United States to discuss the situation in his country with the president and other officials. Yesterday he gave a speech to a joint session of Congress in which he thanked our country for saving Iraq from more years of Saddam's tyrannical rule.
How did John Kerry repay Allawi?
"The prime minister and [Mr. Bush] are here obviously to put their best face on the policy, but the fact is that the CIA estimates, the reporting, the ground operations and the troops all tell a different story," Mr. Kerry said.It's hard to think of a better way to undercut the new government of Iraq than by making statements such as these."The United States and the Iraqis have retreated from whole areas of Iraq. There are no-go zones in Iraq today. You can't hold an election in a no-go zone."
If John Kerry or anyone else want to criticize our methods in Iraq, then fine, do so. If you want to say that we're losing, fine. If you even want to say that we should not have invaded in the first place that's fine too. All of these are within the boundaries of political discourse. But it is reprehensible to say them at the very moment that Allawi is in the United States to thank us for freeing his country.
The implications of Kerry's fixation on Vietnam are becoming more apparent by the day. At least when Nixon withdrew our troops he did so under the guise of "Peace with Honor." He declared victory and pulled out the troops. Nixon then relied on congress to support South Vietnam through arms shipments (that the congress did not do this is another matter).
Kerry, however, would apparently withdraw our troops regardless of the consequences for Iraq. He would leave Allawi and other faithful and good Iraqis to the wolves.
In Kerry's World, everything always goes back to Vietnam. Like so many others with Vietnamitis, all American wars are replays of Vietnam.
Why would he do such a thing? One reason is apparently because we need to save Medicare here at home:
"$200 billion for Iraq, but they tell us we can't afford health care for our veterans...We're spending $200 billion in Iraq while the costs of health care have gone through the roof and we're told we don't have the resources to make health care affordable and available for all Americans. They're charging 17 percent more for Medicare while making America pay $200 billion for a go-it-alone policy in Iraq. That's the wrong choice; that's the wrong direction; and that's the wrong leadership for America."
That's right, folks; domestic spending uber alles.
No I'm not saying that we shouldn't make Medicare spending part of our political discussions. But to reduce great questions of foreign policy, of war and peace, of the future of the Middle East and whether millions will live under liberty or tyranny, to make all of these decisions on the basis of a few domestic spending bills, is at best extremely shallow, at worst simply greedy.
I've written about this more on my other blog here. The point is, are we going to elect someone president who makes foreign policy decisions on the basis of domestic spending priorities? Who undercuts the leaders of countries that we liberated (watch out, Mr. Karzai, You could be next)? Not if this blogger has anything to do with it.
Update
Kerry advisor calls the Iraqi PM a "puppet":
Senior Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart suggested Mr. Allawi was merely reciting talking points supplied by the president.Does Kerry realize that if he wins he will need to work with Allawi? Or does he just intend to declare defeat and pull our troops out, leaving the Iraqi's who trusted us to the wolves?"The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips," he said after the Allawi-Bush press conference.
For that matter, he's going to have to work with all of the countries that have troops in Iraq, countries such as the UK, Australia, Poland, Japan, and South Korea. You know, the ones he called part of a "fraudulent coalition"?
Bush calls Kerry to the mat
"This brave man came to our country to talk about how he's risking his life for a free Iraq, which helps America, and Senator Kerry held a press conference to question Prime Minister Allawi's credibility," Mr. Bush told an audience in Janesville, Wis.Words well spoken."You can't lead this country if your ally in Iraq feels like you question his credibility," he added. "The message ought to be to the Iraqi people: We support you."
Update II
Roger Simon compares Allawi and Kerry
Kerry would thus do well to consider exactly who it is that he criticizes. Allawi is a true Iraqi patriot, but some people are going to start to question if John Kerry is an American patriot.1. Awad Allawi - a man who was once left for dead (1978) in his Surrey home after having been bludgeoned with an ax by one of Saddam's henchman who thought he had killed him. Allawi then spent a year in a hospital. He is still said to walk with a limp and is now the object of, one would imagine, daily assassination attempts.
2. John Kerry - a man who left the Vietnam War after 4 1/2 months after having been "seriously wounded" - a description that now even his biographer finds dubious.
 |
 |
Update III
Well, John, do you or do you not think that the war in Iraq is illegal?
When asked, Kerry did as he always does; he waffled. Bill Kristol, writing in the Weekly Standard, reports thus
Kerry was asked about Kofi Annan's description of the war in Iraq as an "illegal" invasion. Kerry answered: "I don't know what the law, the legalities are that he's referring to. I don't know." So the U.S. government is accused of breaking international law, and Kerry chooses not to defend his country against the charge, or to label it ridiculous or offensive. He is agnostic.Actually, "waffle" is probably not the best term to use. "Unintelligible" describes it much better.Then Kerry continued: "Well, let me say this to all of you: That underscores what I am saying. If the leader of the United Nations is at odds with the legality, and we're not working at getting over that hurdle and bringing people to the table, as I said in my speech yesterday, it's imperative to be able to build international cooperation." It's our fault that the U.N. is doing almost nothing to help in Iraq. After all, according to Kerry, "Kofi Annan offered the help of the United Nations months ago. This president chose to go the other way."
Oh I know, the liberal sophisticates will sneer that Kerry is "nuanced" and that the issue is so "complicated", and that the issue is just so "simplistic"...blah blah blah.
The issue may be complicated but the answers are quite simple. They are hard answers, but simple ones. And the answer is that yes, the war was legal, yes, what we are doing is right, and no, it is simply not acceptable to behave as Kerry and Lockhart have been behaving these past few days. And if they keep it up, they are going to be severely punished in the polls this November.
Posted by Tom at September 24, 2004 9:45 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theredhunter.com/mt/refer.cgi/138
