September 1, 2004
THE CONDITIONAL COMMANDER:
Kerry Challenges Bush on Terror Policies (NEDRA PICKLER, 9/01/04, AP)
As a Massachusetts senator, Kerry voted in 2002 to give Bush the authority to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, and said recently that he would still do so in hindsight, even knowing that no weapons of mass destruction have been found.But Kerry said, "I would never have diverted resources so quickly from Afghanistan," where the Taliban has been forced from power but Osama bin Laden and other members of al-Qaida remain free.
"I wouldn't have ignored my senior military advisers. I would have made sure that every soldier put in harm's way had the equipment and body armor they needed. I would have built a strong, broad coalition of our allies around the world.
"And if there's one thing I learned from my service, I would never have gone to war without a plan to win the peace," he said.
So:
* He'd have frozen in place until we recovered the corpse of Osama from some rubble-sealed cave in Tora Bora or wherever?
* He'd have let the military bureaucrats have their 300,000 men in Iraq? Essentially forfeiting the role of commander-in-chief and the concept of civilian control?
* He'd have given France, Ruissia, China, etc., vetoes over American security policy?
* And he'd have insisted on something we've never had in any war we've ever fought?
If he's a pacifist why not just say so instead of enumerating so many absurd conditions as to make war impossible?
MORE:
Does explain this though, U.S. warrrior wins respect: Communists back former soldier Kerry in his bid for U.S. presidency, saying he's more realistic about war (MARINA JIMENEZ, June 22, 2004, Globe and Mail)
In the spartan banquet room of the Coolong Hotel, the Communist Party apparatchiks all agree on one thing: Democratic Senator John Kerry is the best candidate for U.S. president.Posted by Orrin Judd at September 1, 2004 3:29 PMMr. Kerry, who served in Vietnam but later became an opponent of the war, is seen in the rural Mekong Delta province of Tra Vinh as a brave warrior, a man to be respected "soldier to soldier."
"That George Bush is so arrogant. Mr. Kerry is better for Vietnam," says Tran Hoan Kim, the Communist Party's provincial chairman and a former Viet Cong guerrilla fighter during what was known here as the "American" war.
"And if there's one thing I learned from my service, I would never have gone to war without a plan to win the peace..."
Help me out as I am not an historian. In the history of the entire world has anyone ever waited to go to war WITH a plan to win the peace?
Posted by: Rick T. at September 1, 2004 3:46 PMRick T:
The Treaty of Paris ending our Revolutionary War was signed in 1783. The Constitution was adopted in 1787. Thus the founding of this country was done without a 'plan for the peace.' Unless, of course, you want to point to the Articles of Confederation, which turned out to be entirely unsatisfactory and unworkable. So we fought a seven year war for independence either without a plan for the peace, or with a fundamentally flawed plan.
Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at September 1, 2004 3:58 PMIf after 12/7/1941, we had waited until our Congress-critters came up with a 'plan for peace', until our McClellan-inspired military establishment had what it considered sufficient soldiers and equipment and until we had the approval of various and sundry nations that weren't attacked but were trading with those who attacked us, Marshall Tojo and Hitler would be in the White House before we decided on a response.
Posted by: Bart at September 1, 2004 4:06 PMIf you include John Edwards' remarks this week that Kerry would support the delivery of nuclear fuel to Iran, you might get an idea of how the senator would end up lowering the number of U.S. combat troops in Iraq if he were to win the presidency (and there's no point in even getting into Edwards' other remark that a Kerry Administration would give Guantanamo POWs full legal access to the military tribunal system, except to say that once a trial laywer, always a trial laywer).
The whole Guantanamo thing has struck me as stupid.
Why not let the Uzbek tribesmen hold these imported gangsters in custody and let them deal with as they wish? Afghanistan doesn't have an 8th Amendment, punishment is often cruel and can be unusual.
Posted by: Bart at September 1, 2004 4:08 PMif GWB ignored Tommy Franks , why is Franks endorsing him?
Jon--
Exactly. Franks is going to innoculate Bush on a lot of these charges very nicely.
Heh. Here's a thought. How could Kerry have a plan to win the peace, when he obviously doesn't even have a plan to win the election?
Posted by: Timothy at September 1, 2004 4:50 PMThere goes Orange County.
Posted by: Melissa at September 1, 2004 6:10 PMNow, now. Kerry would have aggressively fought the war, just as soon as everything was perfect. Any day now. Just as soon as we get the stun setting on the phaser out of beta.
Posted by: David Cohen at September 1, 2004 6:19 PMWhat did Patton say?
Better an adequate plan in time, than a perfect one too late.
Or something like that.
Posted by: Jeff Guinn at September 1, 2004 9:52 PMThe quote is according to TCPN:
"A good plan taday is better than a perfect plan tomorrow."
General George S Patton
Posted by: Jeff at September 1, 2004 10:50 PMKerry gets the Vietnamese endorsement - now there's an ad. And they're not even a 527.
Posted by: ratbert at September 1, 2004 11:55 PM"In the history of the entire world has anyone ever waited to go to war WITH a plan to win the peace?"
In the history of the entire world, has any country ever chosen to invade another with the intent to transform it and thus the region around it?
If that is the intent, and the invasion of the country and deposition of its leader is anticipated to not take very long, then there had dang well better be a plan to "win the peace" in place, even if it does need to be changed as facts on the ground emerge.
The Bush administration bungled that aspect of the Iraq adventure badly.
Posted by: at September 2, 2004 1:39 AMAnonymous:
The Civil War, the Mexican, the Spanish-American, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam come to mind.
Posted by: oj at September 2, 2004 1:44 AM