NYT Highlights consistancy of Kerry's position on Iraq

[DJcairo]

Though his emphasis has shifted, Mr. Kerry's writings, statements and speeches from before the vote on using force through now do show consistent underpinnings. He argued for using the threat of force to support the weapons-inspection program, but only using force when all other options were exhausted. And he often warned that the greatest challenge would be in stabilizing postwar Iraq.

In the interview, Mr. Kerry said that he was frustrated at the way the debate about Iraq was playing out and that he believed that Dr. Dean had escaped scrutiny. He said Dr. Dean had criticized him and others who accepted the administration's assertions that Iraq had unconventional weapons, although Dr. Dean himself had previously said he believed Iraq had such weapons.

And he said Dr. Dean had expressed support for the same alternate Iraq resolution that Mr. Kerry and many other Democrats had preferred. It would have allowed Mr. Bush to go to war without further United Nations or Congressional approval, though it would have given him somewhat less latitude. That proposal never came up for a vote.

"Nobody has paid attention to his duplicity," Mr. Kerry said of Dr. Dean. "We're going to have to point it out more, but he was allowed a complete free ride."

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

http://nytimes.com/2003/10/24/politics/campaigns/24KERR.html?pagewanted=2

[Pez]

1. fact is...

...if kerry were president we wouldn't have this problem. i'm not so sure iraq would even be on the radar-- the most he would have done would be persuing UN approval for weapons inspections. to criticize kerry for BUSH INC.'s contracts for cheney is ridiculous. kerry was one of the key leaders in shaping this proposal to thwart shrub from bringing us to war with the entire ME... but details are boring heh?

[La_Serpiente]

2. This was what I was talking about earlier

If Kerry says this more or says it on TV or whatever, he could really help himself. My advice: GET HIM ON TV!!!!

[wtmusic]

3. Huh?

Mr. Kerry said the difference between his votes on the two matters was the administration's record.

"They're not promising some course, they're on the course," he said. "What they've done is visibly mistaken. What they're doing is visibly wrong."

Translation?

[sandnsea]

4. They're on a course that's wrong

geesh.

[ModerateMiddle]

5. That prior to the vote, prior to the actual war

Bush was still saying "War is the last resort. We will build the coalition. We will get the support of the UN."

Since that time, all of those words have proven empty.

[wtmusic]

6. And unfortunately Mr. Kerry

gave him the blank check to do it.

Kerry should just stop trying to explain his war vote. There is no explanation. It descends into gobbledy-gook.

[blm]

8. only if you don't WANT to comprehend it.

MWO was pretty scathing about those pretending they don't understand it for to political gain. They pointed to Republicans AND Democrats.

[blm]

7. They were handed the tools needed to do the job right and they failed

to use them competently. Visibly so.

[killbotfactory]

9. Did Kerry believe all the options were exhausted?

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
Senator Kerry, the first question goes to you. On March 19th, President Bush ordered General Tommy Franks to execute the invasion of Iraq. Was that the right decision at the right time?

SENATOR JOHN KERRY
George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.

May 4th, 2004

That said, Saddam Hussein is a tyrant, truly the personification of evil. He has launched two wars of aggression against his neighbors, perpetrated environmental disaster, purposefully destabilized an entire region of the world, murdered tens of thousands of his own citizens, flouted the will of the United Nations and the world in acquiring weapons of mass destruction, conspired to assassinate the former President of the United States, and provided harbor and support to terrorists bent on destroying us and our friends.

From that perspective, regardless of the Administration's mishandling of so much of this situation, no President can defer the national security decisions of this country to the United Nations or any other multilateral institution or individual country.

Even having botched the diplomacy, it is the duty of any President, in the final analysis, to defend this nation and dispel the security threats - threats both immediate and longer term - against it.

Saddam Hussein has brought military action upon himself by refusing for twelve years to comply with the mandates of the United Nations. The brave and capable men and women of our armed forces and those who are with us will quickly , I know, remove him once and for all as a threat to his neighbors, to the world, and to his own people, and I support their doing so.

March 17th, 2003

Saddam Hussein made a grave error when he chose to make war with the ultimate
weapons-inspections enforcement mechanism

April 11th, 2003

[Feanorcurufinwe]

10. The essential difference between Kerry and Dean's positions

is that Kerry had to vote on the resolution, Dean didn't.

Dean:Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/02/20/dean/index2.html

Kerry: "If we go it alone without reason, we risk inflaming an entire region and breeding a new generation of terrorists, a new cadre of anti-American zealots - and we will be less secure, not more secure, at the end of the day, even with Saddam Hussein disarmed. Let there be no doubt or confusion as to where I stand: I will support a multilateral effort to disarm Iraq by force, if we have exhausted all other options. But I cannot - and will not - support a unilateral, US war against Iraq unless the threat is imminent and no multilateral effort is possible." http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2002_1009.html


Dean:"In Iraq, I would be prepared to go ahead without further Security Council backing if it were clear the threat posed to us by Saddam Hussein was imminent, and could neither be contained nor deterred."
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/dean/dean021703sp.html

Kerry:"we should be particularly concerned that we do not go alone or essentially alone if we can avoid it, because the complications and costs of post-war Iraq would be far better managed and shared with United Nation's participation. And, while American security must never be ceded to any institution or to another institution's decision, I say to the President, show respect for the process of international diplomacy because it is not only right, it can make America stronger - and show the world some appropriate patience in building a genuine coalition. Mr. President, do not rush to war."
http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

Dean:"never been in doubt about the evil of Saddam Hussein or the necessity of removing his weapons of mass destruction."
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000395.html

Here is Kerry's speech once Bush announced the invasion:
www.vote-smart.org/speech_detail.php?speech_id=M000003667
I won't cherry pick quotes out of it -- it is impossible for anyone to give it an honest reading and characterize it as a statement that indicates Kerry believed all the options were exhausted.

MATTHEWS: Were we right to go to Iraq?
KERRY: Not the way the president did it. Clearly, no, because he didn’t plan for how to win the peace. He didn’t build the kind of coalition he said he would. He didn’t keep his promises to the American people.
He promised he would respect the U.N. He promised he would, in fact, build an international coalition and he promised he would go to war as a last resort. And, Chris, one of the great lessons I learned in Vietnam is the meaning of the words “last resort.”
I think the test for a president as to whether or not you send young men or women anywhere to fight is whether you can look in the eyes of parents-if you lose one of them-and say to those parents, I tried to do everything in my power to avoid this happening to your child. But we had no choice for the security of our country. I believe the president of the United States fails that test in Iraq.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/983074.asp

[killbotfactory]

11. If Kerry didn't believe all options were exhausted, why did he support

Bush's decision to invade? Why did he say Saddam brought action upon himself?

And why did Kerry vote the way he did? Sometimes he says it was to get Bush to go to the UN, because he could invade anyway. Other times he says it was to give Bush the threat to make Saddam comply with inspections. Those positions are contradictory.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

18. If Dean didn't believe all options were exhausted, why did he support

Bush's decision to invade? Why did he say it was necessary to remove his weapons of mass destruction?

Any why did Dean spin the way he did? Sometimes it was a 60 day deadline, sometimes it was the U.N. needs to send in troops, sometimes it was we can act unilaterally. Those positions are contradictory.

[killbotfactory]

24. Saying it was neccessary to remove WMD

Is not the same as supporting the invasion. The UN was in agreement, they didn't support the invasion.

Saying you supported Bush's decision to "disarm" saddam military means you supported Bush's invasion.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

42. 'disarm' means something different from 'removing weapons'?

:eyes:

[killbotfactory]

43. No.

It just doesn't mean you supported bush's decision to "disarm" Iraq through military action.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

44. Beware of precession

[killbotfactory]

45. Again, Saying you supported Bush's decision to "disarm" Iraq

A month or two after the invasion, and in response to a question where you are asked about whether it was the right decision to invade, and not saying the invasion was wrong, would be tacit approval of the invasion in my book.

[sandnsea]

12. Consistent, consistent, consistent

He approves of the goal, disarming Saddam, but not the way Bush went about it. He approves of that goal because he is serious about WMD proliferation. He is serious about rogue leaders not being allowed to play games with the UN inspections process. He thinks if Bush had done this in a different way, we would have been much further ahead in that regard. But the goal of disarming Saddam is still something he supported. And you can say what you want about there being no WMD, the fact is, nobody really KNEW that at the time.

[killbotfactory]

13. Saying you support the military disarmament of a country

when it was not a last resort, after saying it must be a last resort, is not consistancy.

[sandnsea]

14. That's not all he said

You don't understand because you don't want to understand. A 5 year old could understand this. He supports the goal, not the process. It's not that damn complicated, quit pretending it is.

[killbotfactory]

16. This is the entire response to the question asked of him in the SC debate.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
Senator Kerry, the first question goes to you. On March 19th, President Bush ordered General Tommy Franks to execute the invasion of Iraq. Was that the right decision at the right time?

SENATOR JOHN KERRY
George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.

May 4th, 2004

That's it. There's nothing else to add context to what he said. Not once does he say the invasion was wrong.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

21. Why did Dean say he supported Bush

because of the necessity of removing Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? Why did he say he hoped the invasion was a success? Is that the same as saying it is wrong?

[killbotfactory]

25. Dean never said he supported Bush's disarmament of Saddam.

He wanted the invasion to be a success, because the cost of failure would be worse, and there was nothing he could do turn back time and stop the invasion.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

27. Read the quotes I've provided. Denying reality won't make it go away.

[killbotfactory]

29. I did. They don't back you up.

Frankly I don't understand the need to defend Kerry by bringing up irrellevent Dean quotes, but knock yourself out.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

31. You call Dean's statements on unilaterally invading Iraq irrelevent?

Dean's statement on Saddam's WMD's - irrelevant? Dean's statement that he hoped the invasion would succeed - irrelevant? Dean's statement that he would invade without the U.N. - irrelevant? Dean's statement that he wouldn't invade without the U.N. - irrelevant?

OK.

[killbotfactory]

33. As to whether or not Kerry supported Bush's war?

Yes.

Dean would unilaterally invade under certain circumstances. None of which ever came about. Since Dean is not claiming to be Ghandi, I don't see the point of Kerry supporters constantly bringing up this common sense and uncontroversial position. The only thing it tells me is that you have a problem with context and basic forms of the english language.

It does not, however, get me one step closer to understanding why Kerry said what he did, when he did.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

35. No matter how many times you spin Dean's position

you'll never be able to keep up with the number of times Dean has spun it.

[killbotfactory]

39. Nothing to spin here, sorry.

[sandnsea]

36. Support the goal, not the process

It's so simple. And most Americans expect a Sentor to be supportive of a President during a time of war. That's just the way it is, like it or not.

[killbotfactory]

38. "Did Bush make the right decision?" It's very simple.

Kerry responds by saying he'd prefer more diplomacy, but, yes he supported Bush when he made the decision and the fact that we disarmed Saddam. This was a month or two after Bush invaded.

He did not say the invasion was wrong or it was the wrong decision.

It's seems pretty simple to me he supported the process depsite some reservations about how it was done.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

15. Dean said he

had "never been in doubt about the evil of Saddam Hussein or the necessity of removing his weapons of mass destruction". In the same statement where he said he supported the success of the invasion.

Dean:Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/02/20/dean/index2.html

Spin it however you want, Dean also supported Biden-Lugar, he has said repeatedly that he supports the principle of preemptive, unilateral war under the right circumstances. Both he and Kerry have said that Bush's decision to invade was wrong. No matter how many times you try to deny it.

MATTHEWS: Were we right to go to Iraq?
KERRY: Not the way the president did it. Clearly, no, because he didn’t plan for how to win the peace. He didn’t build the kind of coalition he said he would. He didn’t keep his promises to the American people.
He promised he would respect the U.N. He promised he would, in fact, build an international coalition and he promised he would go to war as a last resort. And, Chris, one of the great lessons I learned in Vietnam is the meaning of the words “last resort.”
I think the test for a president as to whether or not you send young men or women anywhere to fight is whether you can look in the eyes of parents-if you lose one of them-and say to those parents, I tried to do everything in my power to avoid this happening to your child. But we had no choice for the security of our country. I believe the president of the United States fails that test in Iraq.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/983074.asp

[killbotfactory]

17. Kerry never said Bush's invasion was wrong.

Please, find me one quote, JUST ONE, where Kerry says clearly and without qualifiers that "This invasion was wrong". Please. Just one.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

20. Look above.

if you need things said a certain way in order for you to understand them, I can't help you.
But I've already shown where Kerry said that, in the post you responded to - if you are willing to look.

I'm not going to try to convince you that:

MATTHEWS: Were we right to go to Iraq?
KERRY: Not the way the president did it. Clearly, no

means the same thing as 'the invasion was wrong', anymore than I would try to convince you that 2 + 2 = 4 if you were denying it.

[killbotfactory]

23. Great, there's one.

Now what was keeping him from saying that for the past 8-months?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

26. What was keeping Dean from speaking out against Bush? Courage?

Dean: "It's hard to criticize the president when you've got troops in the field" Dean to ease up on Bush

Kerry: ""This is a democracy, we could be at war a year from now. Would we put the election on hold?" Kerry Stands By Bush Criticism

So much for Dean's political courage. Of course he doesn't have the advantage of experience that Kerry does --
Kerry was learning about speaking out during wartime while Dean was learning about skiing bumps.

[killbotfactory]

30. Huh?

Kerry and Dean both decided to tone down the rhetoric for a while in respect for the troops. What does that have to do with anything?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

32. Regime change in America? "Kerry Stands By Bush Criticism" - toning down?

Dean: "It's hard to criticize the president when you've got troops in the field" Dean to ease up on Bush

Kerry: ""This is a democracy, we could be at war a year from now. Would we put the election on hold?" Kerry Stands By Bush Criticism

if you can't see the difference, there is no hope for reasonable discourse.

[killbotfactory]

34. Did you read the article?

"Republicans countered that Kerry himself, last month, said he would not criticize Bush while troops were in action, citing his own experience in the Vietnam War where news of war protests disheartened troops."

There are many other articles as well saying that Kerry pledged to lighten his criticism of Bush while troops were in danger.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

37. Weak. Let's look and see who is showing courage:

Democratic presidential hopeful Howard Dean, whose candidacy has attracted a lot of attention because of his staunch anti-war position, said Wednesday he will tone down his criticism of President Bush in the weeks ahead.

"It's hard to criticize the president when you've got troops in the field," the former Vermont governor said during a two-day campaign swing through South Carolina to raise money and meet with potential supporters and party activists.

"We all have got to support the troops. They didn't send themselves over there, and they're doing their jobs for the country."

But in an interview with The State newspaper, Dean stressed he's not changing his position on the Iraqi war, which he still thinks will get the United States into serious trouble.

<snip>

The 54-year-old physician has criticized his rivals for the nomination, saying everyone is afraid of taking Democratic positions.

"A timid messenger is a losing messenger," he said.
Dean to ease up on Bush



Presidential candidate John Kerry said Monday that democracy affords rival Democrats the right to criticize President Bush even with the nation at war.

The Massachusetts senator has come under a withering attack from Republicans for suggesting that the United States, like Iraq, needs a regime change. Traveling through Iowa, Kerry rejected what he called "phony arguments" from the GOP that political candidates should mute their criticism of the commander in chief.

"This is a democracy," Kerry said. "We could be at war a year from now. Would we put the election on hold?"

Kerry voted last fall for a congressional resolution granting Bush the authority to use military force to oust Saddam Hussein and disarm Iraq, but he has been sharply critical of the Bush administration's diplomatic efforts to assemble a coalition of allies. Last week, Kerry's regime change comment drew fire from top congressional Republicans who said the remarks were highly inappropriate with U.S. troops fighting overseas.

Since then, Kerry, a decorated Vietnam War veteran, has defended himself, arguing that unlike his Republican critics, he fought for his right to speak freely. At an elementary school in Iowa, he reminded his listeners of that past conflict and the political dynamic.

"We had an election in the middle of the Vietnam War," Kerry said. "It was the center of that election."

The lawmaker argued that the disparate views of Democrats should be central to the 2004 election, including where the candidates' stand on how the war is being conducted.

"Let's not have a lot of phony arguments here about what we can and can't talk about," Kerry said. "We need to talk in America about the things that make us strong as a country."
Kerry Stands By Bush Criticism

[killbotfactory]

40. Again, what does this have to do with Kerry's war position?

Dean, said he'd tone it down, the troops didn't send themselves there so we have to support them, and then says he still disagrees with Bush's policies and is against the war.

What a bombshell!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

41. How about

unless you have a new angle for us to talk about?

[unfrigginreal]

19. They've got a point, Kerry is consistently wishy-washy n/t

[Feanorcurufinwe]

22. Dean is consistently duplicitous, disingenuous, and deceptive.

Is trading insults really the best we can do?