John Forbes Kerry Makes No Time for Terror Briefing

Bush cannot be Tigger!
Cuz Tigger's are wunderful things!

 

always preferred the dirt band's version to the kenny loggins original. ..uncle charlie, what an album!

 

That's probably where they'll bury John Edwards

 

There it is again... You'd think it was posted from Iraq! But no, it is more likely posted using a swanky new bluetooth-enhanced PDA from a luxury SUV... it's like a drunken house guest that will never leave the party. At this point, that rhetoric has crashed on the couch, thrown up and soiled itself. It's time to throw it in the street and start the clean up. Let's commence.

Criticism of the administration's "strategeries" (that's what was in my post if you'd read it) means I belittle the "troops?" Uh huh. What do I know about troops, anyway? My father served in the Korean War; two uncles saw combat in WWII, one experienced injuries and jumped from a flaming aircraft carrier in the Pacific, _Jorge. All of them were dirt poor kids like the kids in the military today. My father, in his retirement, now volunteers to drive veterans to their nearest veterans hospital for treatment, (and he's watched their medical coverage dwindle over the last two years). I have a deep respect for the troops, past and present. I applaud the troops for their efforts, their sacrifices. I mourn their losses and the deep impact on their families.

Once and for all:
THE TROOPS DO NOT EQUAL THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.
THESE ARE SEPARATE ENTITIES.
I put it in all caps so you might read it. Now please follow the lower cap portion that follows.

A *sincere* love of the men and women in the military could lead one in many, many cases (dare I say most?) to oppose the Bush Administration. For instance, if you love the troops you might favor: not cutting their pay, not cutting their medical benefits, letting them rotate to come home to see their families, and for the sake of all that is holy not putting them in harm's way unless we absolutely positively must do so. So you support the troops, but you clearly support cutting their pay, cutting their benefits, overworking them, and putting them in harm's way for a risky, speculative venture in bringing freedom to the Middle East by attacking the nation that had the fewest terrorists in it. I have nothing further to add to the whole "troops" topic.

By the way, for rational participants in the thread... I'm still curious. Is there precedent for challengers meeting with the officials of the sitting administration for information briefings? I still find it an odd idea.

 

Amazing post B-Bob.

 

Not sure I'm rational, but I'll give it a try...

There is a precedent for challengers getting individual briefings, but for some reason, I think it is after the official nomination (or maybe I am confusing SS protection). At any rate (and I could be wrong on this), I think the briefing he is talking about is the one given to Senators in general.

 

A great post B-Bob. You make very valid points. Sadly I don't doubt that many people understand those points but still use the rhetoric anyway.

 

Okay, thanks rimrocker. I had thought it was just the Senate briefing,* but some posts in this thread made it sound like a one-on-one special thing for Kerry since he's running for pres.

* I say "just" in that, for better or worse, our elected officials miss tons of meetings and have proxies, et cetera ad nauseum.

RM95, fb, thanks. Kind of melodramatic, but hopefully my last post ever on how I feel about troops.

 

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
What has our military done? WHAT HAVE THEY DONE?!?! Are you even remotely serious? Please tell me you are not. If you are, then I fear that your brain has been completed infested by liberal propaganda. Here's what our courageous troops have done:

1) Routed the Taliban and removed them from power.
In all areas of Afganistan that reside inside Kabul, of course

2) Removed terror camps from Afghanistan and put al Queda on the run
The camps are still there and al-Queda is still as dangerous as before. Look at the bombing in Spain for evidence.

3) Toppled arguably the most dangerous dictator in the Middle East, a man responsible for the deaths of thousands and instability in the region
Responsible for the deaths of thousands and instability in the region... think hard about this one... which nation has been the cause of most conflicts in the middle east and is responsible for millions of refugees...

4) Put the framwork in place for a free, democratic Iraq
Last I saw, most Iraqis aren't recognizing the government as being legitimate and it wasn't elected by the Iraqi people. See Rising Insurgency

5) Suffered *very* few deaths for a campaign of this size. If you liberals think that 1,000 deaths is a lot, then you just don't have a good knowledge of military history. I grieve for each soldier lost, but I am also capable of recognizing that this is a very low number of deaths for such a long campaign in such hostile territory.
One of the greatest things in Modern War is the worst thing also. We have the best doctors in the world. However, some of the injured in Iraq are in such bad shape they would be better off dead. Look at the injured in Iraq for a more accurate description. Unlike previous wars, these types of injuries no longer result in death, but painful, horrible lives.


6) Greatly increased America's capacity to defend against terror, and has prevented any al Queda terror attack from happening on American soil since 9-11.
TJ, it's been 2 and a half years since 9-11. A little soon to say we've prevented anything that catastrophic from occuring again.


BTW, Why do Conservatives want our soldiers to die without justification?

 

excellent post. and as many points as you scored, i think however that TJ does have a point, although perhaps it shouldn't be directed at you (btw, why doesn't the treo have bluetooth!?!).

re the briefing. i'm not sure whether it was just a senate briefing or not, but from kerry's comments i took it to mean it was specifically for him "they've offered to brief me, but i haven't had the time." in either case, kerry should find the time, if he wants to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate, or indeed a senator. unless, that is, he's got all the time in the world.

 

basso, this is the sort of spin-free analytical questioning we all need.

I followed and enjoyed your song link, by the way. Will be in my head while I attend a long boring conference banquet tonight. I can taste the bland chicken puck with mystery sauce even now, especially with the soundtrack you've provided.

 

Waste of time, I'm afraid. I posted a study which showed that AQ's recruitment had seriously increased since the invasion. It also stated that, of the original 20, 000 trained pre-invasion, they'd lost 2,000 since the war began. A kindergarten student could have understood the distinction. Take a look at T_J's sig. He either can't or won't get it, depending on what you think of his ability to grasp simple reasoning. Or maybe, like those he parrots, he prefers to misinform than to admit error.

 

well, i didn't get it either, despite your best efforts to explain it. in fact, i still don't, so TJ's sig looks pretty accurate to me.

 

A) Prior to war, there were a group of 20, 000 already trained AQ members.

B) Since the war, 2,000 of that group have been eliminated.

C) Also since the war, AQ recruitment has exploded, these people (presumably) currently being trained.


What's difficult to grasp about this??!!?

 

Do you have a credible link that states a realistic estimate of just how many new recruits have "signed up" since the Iraq war?

More importantly, even if you do, who is to say that these people wouldn't have joined up anyway? Did they do exit interviews with these guys as they were leaving the recruiting cave?

 

Here's what the article was saying.

There were 20,000. 2,000 died. But way more than 2,000 new recruits have joined up. Thus while 2,000 died the numbers still increased overall.

 

It's the fuzzy math that got them.

 

Hmm, the idea of net gain is above most of our heads.

 

not since we got T-Mac...

 

the ersatz populism of John Courgar Mellencamp Kerry seems particulary apt for the JohnJohn campaign, although I think perhaps they should've chosen 'Little Pink Houses'

"Well they told me
when I was younger
"Boy, you gone be president"
But just like evrything else
those old crazy dreams
just kinda came and went!"