Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk
Reload this Page >

Thanks, But No Thanks, Mr. Kerry

Other Talk "Otterville" plus Religion/Politics

Thanks, But No Thanks, Mr. Kerry

Old 08-10-04, 09:22 AM
  #1  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks, But No Thanks, Mr. Kerry

Fox News:
By John Gibson

It's time for me to say, I knew this was going to happen.

On Monday the Los Angeles Times no right wing rag reported that despite what candidate Kerry is saying about his planned efforts to internationalize the Iraq occupation, or stabilization force: None of our so-called friends are going to be sending troops to take the place of American troops.

The French love John Kerry. But no, thanks, they won't be sending troops.

The Germans love Kerry. But no, thanks, they won't be sending troops.

The Japanese have 551 troops in Iraq. But they probably won't be sending more.

The Brits have a bunch in Iraq and they don't think it will be possible to send more.

Now remember, John Kerry has been saying he would internationalize the job in Iraq so that American troops could go home.

Kerry's implied that he would be able to get that done, even though President Bush hasn't. He's suggested that Bush has not been able to internationalize the Iraq effort because he doesn't want to, or because other world leaders hate him so much they refuse to lift a finger to help.

Well, it turns out that they don't like Kerry all that much better than Bush not enough to help anyway.

It leads to the question: If Senator Kerry plans to do things different in Iraq, and we've just discovered that a major component of that different approach is DOA a non-starter.

So what's left? How is John Kerry going to be so much different than Bush if it turns out that being nice to the French and Germans isn't going to change things at all?

That's My Word.
_______________

I don't believe many people took Kerry's 'proposal' very seriously anyway. They recognized that it basically politics.

Add to that: Kerry just recently said: "If I had it to do all over again - I'd do it."
Old 08-10-04, 09:30 AM
  #2  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Time for a quick poll to determine what will be the next plan.
Old 08-10-04, 09:31 AM
  #3  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Chew's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: South of Titletown
Posts: 18,628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We can add the Russians to that list. I heard a quote from somebody in Putin's government saying there was no way they would send troops regardless of who's president.
Old 08-10-04, 09:49 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Peachtree City, GA 30269
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When Kerry is elected and those governments join in to help I'll refer back to this thread. World leaders want Bush out, period. Too not believe they want Bush out is to not believe that Bush polls 85 percent NEGATIVE in these countries. I have a masters in international business, and travel extensively overseas. The overseas community is very much against Bush and growing restless. Foreigners actually do like and respect America, but the face of Bush himself is now a major deterrent to foreign help. They might not immediately send troops though, if that is the ultimate question (but you can only blame that on the current president). It is amazing the the Republicans foreign policy in only 4 years becomes very negative and allows countries such as the French to influenence our elections. All of you that hate the French should realize that overseas policy and French politics (the French are playing major politics with Bush at the United Nations) may end up ushering Bush right out of office (and when they do the French will party!!). As the USA we have changed, altered, endorsed, observed and stuck our noses in free elections all over the world in the last 30 years. Turnabout is always fair play in politics.
Old 08-10-04, 09:50 AM
  #5  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't think anyone was under the impression the troops were coming home anytime soon. Bush got us into a mess, thats for sure.
Old 08-10-04, 09:53 AM
  #6  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All of you that hate the French should realize that overseas policy and French politics (the French are playing major politics with Bush at the United Nations) may end up ushering Bush right out of office (and when they do the French will party!!).
The French have had a confrontational foreign policy as far as the U. S. is concerned ever since Charles DeGaulle. It most assuredly didn't originate with the coming into office of George W. Bush.
Old 08-10-04, 09:56 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This has started off to be a bad week for Kerry.

1. The L. A. Times exposes his Iraq internalization policy to be (being generous) somewhat unrealistic.

2. Jeff Greenfield (CNN), hardly a right-winger, exposes his education, tax, health care, and energy policies as being unrealistic.

3. And of course the coming to light of his problems about where he was Christmas Eve, 1968, have come to light.

Last edited by classicman2; 08-10-04 at 09:58 AM.
Old 08-10-04, 10:03 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Peachtree City, GA 30269
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by classicman2
The French have had a confrontational foreign policy as far as the U. S. is concerned ever since Charles DeGaulle. It most assuredly didn't originate with the coming into office of George W. Bush.
You are somewhat correct. However, to think that relations with the French haven't crumbled in the last 4 years is laughable. At the moment, the party in power in France hates the Repubs here, and 90% of Repubs in the USA consider France a dirty word. You think it was the same with Clinton? The French certainly weren't hoping Dole would be elected, but they pray daily for a Kerry win.
Old 08-10-04, 10:06 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The French foreign policy is, like the U. S. foreign policy, is based on what the leadership in France believes to believes to be in the interests France. In other words, like the U. S., it's an interest driven foreign policy. Which U. S. President is popular with the French people or not popular has nothing to do with how the French government conducts its foreign policy.
Old 08-10-04, 10:09 AM
  #10  
Premium Member
 
bfrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 20,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
troops is a reach but the key of his point is to reverse the tension that Bush has created.

Anyone that thinks we will be safer without help from France Germany and Russia needs to explain to me how.

It is one of Bush's biggest problem with his "war of terror". It requires an international effort yet we have taken world support and pissed it down the drain.

Sad when many in the world think they would be better off if we had a different president.
Old 08-10-04, 10:13 AM
  #11  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Chew
We can add the Russians to that list. I heard a quote from somebody in Putin's government saying there was no way they would send troops regardless of who's president.
Those were comments made by their foreign minister, not directly from President Putin. There still exists a strong belief amongst many that Russia will indeed be the only nation to provide significant number of troops. I remain a bit sceptical, but there is a rather large carrot dangling in front of the Russians.
Old 08-10-04, 10:13 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Peachtree City, GA 30269
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by classicman2
This has started off to be a bad week for Kerry.

1. The L. A. Times exposes his Iraq internalization policy to be (being generous) somewhat unrealistic.

2. Jeff Greenfield (CNN), hardly a right-winger, exposes his education, tax, health care, and energy policies as being unrealistic.

3. And of course the coming to light of his problems about where he was Christmas Eve, 1968, have come to light.
You are not even in touch with your party. The economic number from Friday (only 32,000 jobs created in July) is the most important number released in the election thus far and trumps your 3 items above by millions and millions and millions of votes. Karl Rove has never been as worried since Friday morning. The last 7 days of news cycle has been absolute hell for the Bush campaign. Polling will show Kerry lengthening his lead over the next week due to last weeks bad economic news, bad Iraq news, largest deficit ever announced, "safer danger" terror warnings, etc. I absolutely love the fact that no Bushies will see this race coming until Fox News calls it for Kerry on Nov. 2, other than those on the inside and they are doing everything they can to keep you from knowing it (and they are pretty good at hiding stuff). The Kerry people have been salivating for the last 7-10 days. Check out the talking heads on any number of channels and look behind their faces. The Dems know this is theirs, but you obviously won't know it until Nov. 2. See you then.
Old 08-10-04, 10:14 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Chew's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: South of Titletown
Posts: 18,628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by bfrank
It is one of Bush's biggest problem with his "war of terror". It requires an international effort yet we have taken world support and pissed it down the drain.
Well, I would take issue with that portion of your statement. The US policy sees Iraq as part of the war on terror, while Europe doesn't. But, that still doesn't mean they aren't fully helping on other aspects of the WoT.
Old 08-10-04, 10:15 AM
  #14  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Chew's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: South of Titletown
Posts: 18,628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by johnglad
You are not even in touch with your party.
I know you registered a while ago, but you must be new to political discussions here.
Old 08-10-04, 10:16 AM
  #15  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Please stop this presidential popularity crap.

Newsflash: Major powers don't make foreign policy decisions on how popular or unpopular the U. S. President. They make decisions based on what the government perceives to be in the best national interest of the country.

I would imagine that most of those powers would want to combat terrorism in their own country, despite the fact Bush is President, wouldn't you?

They will be allied with the U. S. when they believe their national interest is at stake, and they won't be allied with the U. S. if they don't believe it to be so.

The end of the Cold War has made them less dependent on the U. S. They have spread their wings - so to speak. But let something happen, like the interruption of the free flow of oil from the Persian Gulf, and see how quickly they align themselves with the U. S. regardless of whoever the President is.
Old 08-10-04, 10:18 AM
  #16  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by bfrank
troops is a reach but the key of his point is to reverse the tension that Bush has created.

Anyone that thinks we will be safer without help from France Germany and Russia needs to explain to me how.

It is one of Bush's biggest problem with his "war of terror". It requires an international effort yet we have taken world support and pissed it down the drain.

Sad when many in the world think they would be better off if we had a different president.

Perhaps it would be sad, but it is also a completely erroneous and irrelevant statement, it is not reality.

We have an international effort in the War on Terrorism, more cooperation and support than the world has experienced since World War II. The German-US initiative is the example the World uses for anti-terror cooperation. The amount of intel sharing and assistance in regards to financial tracking of terrorist funds is truly astounding, something all Americans should be proud of. This level of cooperation exists not only amongst our European allies, but throughout the globe. Have you checked the efforts in ASEAN, for example?

Aside from the fight against terrorism, we never ever had any true real "support." We lost nothing! Simpy saying so doesn't make it true.

Last edited by Pharoh; 08-10-04 at 10:25 AM.
Old 08-10-04, 10:19 AM
  #17  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: is everything
Posts: 17,990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Chew
Well, I would take issue with that portion of your statement. The US policy sees Iraq as part of the war on terror, while Europe doesn't. But, that still doesn't mean they aren't fully helping on other aspects of the WoT.
Exactly. Fighting terrorism and militant Islam is both in the best interest of the US and the rest of the world, lest we let them win and be plunged into a new Dark Age.

The war in Iraq is almost strictly a US thing. Many of Our European allies, Germany, France, and Russia in particluar, had very vested financial interests in the former Hussein administration and opposed the US lead war in Iraq based primarily on those interests.

In short our biggest European allies are pissed at us because we meddled in their interests in Iraq and shattered them.

Edit because I can't spell.
Old 08-10-04, 10:19 AM
  #18  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by johnglad
You are not even in touch with your party. The economic number from Friday (only 32,000 jobs created in July) is the most important number released in the election thus far and trumps your 3 items above by millions and millions and millions of votes. Karl Rove has never been as worried since Friday morning. The last 7 days of news cycle has been absolute hell for the Bush campaign. Polling will show Kerry lengthening his lead over the next week due to last weeks bad economic news, bad Iraq news, largest deficit ever announced, "safer danger" terror warnings, etc. I absolutely love the fact that no Bushies will see this race coming until Fox News calls it for Kerry on Nov. 2, other than those on the inside and they are doing everything they can to keep you from knowing it (and they are pretty good at hiding stuff). The Kerry people have been salivating for the last 7-10 days. Check out the talking heads on any number of channels and look behind their faces. The Dems know this is theirs, but you obviously won't know it until Nov. 2. See you then.

Please stop the silly condescending bullcrap. Thanks.
Old 08-10-04, 10:22 AM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Peachtree City, GA 30269
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Bullcrap ends on November 2nd.
Old 08-10-04, 10:23 AM
  #20  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: is everything
Posts: 17,990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by johnglad
The Bullcrap ends on November 2nd.
No, on Nov 2nd the current bullshit will be replaced by different bullshit.
Old 08-10-04, 10:23 AM
  #21  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Shoveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA, USA
Posts: 4,723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by johnglad
Polling will show Kerry lengthening his lead over the next week due to last weeks bad economic news, bad Iraq news, largest deficit ever announced, "safer danger" terror warnings, etc.
I don't suppose you'd care to tell us exactly which polls you can foresee, so that we can keep watch on them? I'd hate to be watching polls that show Bush gains, only to find out next week that you don't consider them credible.
Old 08-10-04, 10:23 AM
  #22  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East County
Posts: 33,359
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
1, 2, 3, 4 - I declare a Thumb War!!!



None of this bullcrap will end until there is a third party in the Oval Office or a decent-sized third party contingent in Congress.
Old 08-10-04, 10:24 AM
  #23  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by johnglad
You are somewhat correct. However, to think that relations with the French haven't crumbled in the last 4 years is laughable. At the moment, the party in power in France hates the Repubs here, and 90% of Repubs in the USA consider France a dirty word. You think it was the same with Clinton? The French certainly weren't hoping Dole would be elected, but they pray daily for a Kerry win.

Not quite as laughable as the beleif that relations between our two nations will magically and inexplicably reverse themselves. Things are the way they are for much deeper rooted and older reasons than who is the President.
Old 08-10-04, 10:31 AM
  #24  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe the inference was made that I'm a Republican.

For the 100th time - I've voted for a Republican one time in my voting life (that's been 44 years), and that was for a Governor of Texas.

I voted for every Democratic candidate for the Presidence from 1960 thru 1996. I didn't vote for Gore in 2000. I didn't vote for Bush either.

I'll match my 'Democratic Party' credentials with anyone on this forum. I just don't happen to be a blind partisan. I used to be one, but I age changes a lot of things.

I just don't happen to share some of the members' naiveness when it concerns geo-politics.
Old 08-10-04, 10:31 AM
  #25  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by CRM114
I don't think anyone was under the impression the troops were coming home anytime soon. Bush got us into a mess, thats for sure.

Senator Kerry has made statements regarding a two year timeframe for US troops to leave Iraq. He acknowledges that these troops will have to be replaced, but he never mentions by whom. Of all the silly proposals made by the good Senator, I think this might be the silliest, and that is saying something.

He claims the troops will be replaced, that he will attain more international cooperation in Iraq. How and by whom? Since it is obvious now that few in the world, including those in his own party, (Senator Biden for one), take these statements seriously, isn't it time for him to offer concrete specifics? How and by whom? Specifics.

Could there be a reason why he, and his supporters, are unable to do this?

BTW, I do know what his likely plan is, or at least what he told members of his own party he will do to accomplish his goals in order to keep them from coming out against him before the election. And you think the French don't like us now?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.