John Kerry's Iraq speech: Your reaction

Azadre

One more turn...
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
3,224
John Kerry has made an outspoken attack on President Bush over the conflict in Iraq.

In a speech at New York University, the US Democrat presidential candidate accused Mr Bush of "colossal failures of judgement".

He said that the president's decision to go to war against Iraq had distracted from a greater threat to the US - more terrorist attacks - and created a crisis which could lead to an unending war.

The Bush campaign has accused Mr Kerry of inconsistency on Iraq and said a change in the middle of the war was not what the nation needed.

What do you think of John Kerry's speech? Was it the right thing to do or an act of desperation?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I applaud Kerry's efforts, hopefully this will help him.
 
I don't think Clinton, or JFK, would have invaded Iraq. Aren't they both universally considered superior Presidents to Bush Jr?

If so, it seems Kerry is in good company.
 
I am glad to see Kerry make more of a stand against Bush's policy towards Iraq. I am somewhat skeptical though considering Kerry approved of the war in the beginning. But perhaps if Kerry continues down this path of making a stand and showing he has a spine. I might vote for him instead of Nader.
 
His approval of the war in the beginning, like the greater percentage of Americans (some 65% plus originally felt it was a good idea to invade Iraq - check poll %'s) was based on not only faulty information, but the knee jerk, "Look! There's a bad guy who hates America" reaction that rode everyone's mind during the hey day after 9-11 and the subsequent "win" against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

We went there to free Iraq from the cruel regine of a dictator who was harboring WMDs. Supposedly. Maybe for oil. The problem is that the waters are very muddy now and with all the new information and misinformation that has been brought to light, anyone NOT in the president's shoes OR part of his immediate staff is allowed to back pedal and say, "Whoa! We didn't know all the facts. Misled! Misled! If we'd have known then what YOU knew, we'd have had different feelings about invading Iraq!"

Good for Kerry for being open but as usual, the Bush campaign will drop a few waffle ads and comments and that'll be the end of it. I am looking forward to the debates, that and the chance to see Bush had to fence words with someone else without the aid of a teleprompter, written speech, or Cheney's hand up his back.

My 2 cents.
 
Vanadorn said:
His approval of the war in the beginning, like the greater percentage of Americans (some 65% plus originally felt it was a good idea to invade Iraq - check Gallup poll %'s) was based on not only faulty information, but the knee jerk, "Look! There's a bad guy who hates America" reaction that rode everyone's mind during the hey day after 9-11 and the subsequent "win" against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Erm, he has said that even with what he knew now he would still have voted for the war in Iraq.
 
andrewgprv said:
I am glad to see Kerry make more of a stand against Bush's policy towards Iraq. I am somewhat skeptical though considering Kerry approved of the war in the beginning. But perhaps if Kerry continues down this path of making a stand and showing he has a spine. I might vote for him instead of Nader.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. Perhaps he can actually show us that he has some redeeming qualities beyond that he is not Bush.
 
Maybe the statements are being taken out of context? :confused:
 
My first reaction "Why hasn't anyone assinated this guy yet?"

My Second reaction "He's defiantly getting better at speaking"

My Third Reaction "Well, why the heck did you support it to begin with?"

My final reaction "That was a waste of time."
 
FINALLY!!!!He goes on the attack for once, he should have pounded home the fact that W's decision was flawed from day 1. Let's review a couple of statements
1: Iraq has WMD, that was crap and everyone knew it.
2. Iraq was connected to Osama bin Laden. Umm....no, Sadam feared the Taliban and disliked their radical Islamic government because they disliked his Socialist dictatorship.
3. The American people are just plain stupid, how could you elect a guy who ran our budget into the ground, is sending our boys to die in a pointless piece of sand, and is controlled by his party? Simple answer is he kicks butt and asks questions later, like the typical American citizen wanted after 9/11. It's time to stop this Right wing nutjob nonsense and get our good favor back with other nations.
 
zeon252 said:
FINALLY!!!!He goes on the attack for once, he should have pounded home the fact that W's decision was flawed from day 1. Let's review a couple of statements
1: Iraq has WMD, that was crap and everyone knew it.
2. Iraq was connected to Osama bin Laden. Umm....no, Sadam feared the Taliban and disliked their radical Islamic government because they disliked his Socialist dictatorship.
3. The American people are just plain stupid, how could you elect a guy who ran our budget into the ground, is sending our boys to die in a pointless piece of sand, and is controlled by his party? Simple answer is he kicks butt and asks questions later, like the typical American citizen wanted after 9/11. It's time to stop this Right wing nutjob nonsense and get our good favor back with other nations.

1) If everyone knew it, then why did everyone still agree?

2) Sadam feared the TALIBAN. You said it yourself. No Al-quedi in there.

3) How could you elect a guy who said a month ago he would support the Iraq war, even if he knew what he does now, and now is completely against it? Hell, he has most poistions than Paris Hilton!

Kerry really needs to get over the "Well, I would've done this." It's done and over with, you can't do jack about it. Shut up about what you would've done and tell us what the heck you will do.
 
Okay enough of this flip flopper crap, face it Bush lied to us about going into Iraq. If he had said right out he wanted to go into Iraq to kick the guy who tried to kill his father's behind, then fine. I would have still disagreed with him but at least he didn't lie to my face. Oh and a question for you strider, what makes Bush so great?
 
zeon252 said:
Okay enough of this flip flopper crap, face it Bush lied to us about going into Iraq. If he had said right out he wanted to go into Iraq to kick the guy who tried to kill his father's behind, then fine. I would have still disagreed with him but at least he didn't lie to my face. Oh and a question for you strider, what makes Bush so great?

Of course Bush lied, I never said he didn't. He did exactly what he had to do, same thing with Nixon/Johnson with the Vietnam war. They lied, because they had to.

What makes Bush so great? He sticks up for American interests, he's iron-willed, and he's willing to fight terrorism no matter the cost.

Much better than Kerry, the only thing Kerry has going for him is that he's not bush. :rolleyes:
 
Strider said:
]
What makes Bush so great? He sticks up for American interests, he's iron-willed, and he's willing to fight terrorism no matter the cost.
What American interests? Seriously, Bush is not working in American interests. The founding fathers would not have supported Bush.
 
What made Stalin so great? He sticks up for Russian interests, he's iron-willed, and he's willing to fight terrorism no matter the cost.
 
Strider said:
the only thing Kerry has going for him is that he's not bush. :rolleyes:
Because they had to? Nobody lies because they have to, they lie because they're corrupt and don't want their grip on the short hairs of power to slip. As for giving all to fight the war on terrorism, have you ever read the book 1984? It gives a perfect account of what the government can do to a populace that is told it is at war possibly forever. I'm not going to give up my rights or my money to fight some anti-muslim crusade the right seems to want to go on. We cannot allow big government to tell us we are supposed to give up our rights to fight the unamed enemy. Obviously you love Bush because he's a man of action, and I agree with you it felt great to pound bombs into Afghanistan and take out the damn Taliban, but we have to stop and take a look around at the world and try to mend some fences.
 
Azadre said:
What American interests? Seriously, Bush is not working in American interests. The founding fathers would not have supported Bush.

The founding fathers also lived 200 years ago. Back before there was cars, computers, airplanes, two world wars, and the list goes on. :rolleyes:
 
stormbind said:
What made Stalin so great? He sticks up for Russian interests, he's iron-willed, and he's willing to fight terrorism no matter the cost.

Stalin? Well, other than being on the complete opposite of the political spectrum than Bush (Kerry is closer to Stalin), he was pretty good.
 
zeon252 said:
Because they had to? Nobody lies because they have to, they lie because they're corrupt and don't want their grip on the short hairs of power to slip. As for giving all to fight the war on terrorism, have you ever read the book 1984? It gives a perfect account of what the government can do to a populace that is told it is at war possibly forever. I'm not going to give up my rights or my money to fight some anti-muslim crusade the right seems to want to go on. We cannot allow big government to tell us we are supposed to give up our rights to fight the unamed enemy. Obviously you love Bush because he's a man of action, and I agree with you it felt great to pound bombs into Afghanistan and take out the damn Taliban, but we have to stop and take a look around at the world and try to mend some fences.

It is much better to know there were not any WMD's, than to find out after Isreal had been nuked.

The government can only do what the populace lets them do. You can listen to them or die for what you believe in. Pick one. Do you really expect them just to hand you your rights on a silver platter? You want your rights for the same reason they want to take them away. Power.
 
Back
Top Bottom