John Kerry is a man of great courage and integrity.

[pnwmom]

I trust that he's telling the truth, and that he's in a position to judge the truth of what he's learned.

I am still hoping there is some way this can be negotiated without our having to make an attack. But I'm glad he's the one in this position now.

John Kerry: "We know there is no ultimate military solution."

John Kerry is no Colin Powell.

[leftstreet]

1. It takes a lot of guts to lie to the American people

Hopefully Kerry doesn't have that kind of fortitude, and has more integrity than Colin Powell

[Phlem]

155. Aw c'mon now, everything's just fine.

-p

[MNBrewer]

2. I don't trust him

When it comes to war, I don't trust ANYONE in the administration. ANY administration.

[Inuca]

4. In other words

you do not trust ANYONE period. Because those high in the administration are the only ones to have all the information.

[MNBrewer]

5. ever heard the phrase "slam dunk"?

[dkf]

11. I hear the evidence isn't even a "slam dunk".

[MNBrewer]

14. But they have "all the evidence"....

for some reason, their supporters say that the President has "all" the evidence....

ALL... LOL!

I guess all they need to spin us into a bombing run in order to protect the President's "red line" diplomacy.

[blm]

18. Ever heard that Kerry's the one who worked for 8yrs to PREVENT Syria war

and knows Assad better than anyone else in the country, and would not assess what's going on there to benefit anyone BUT the Syrian people and US security interests.

Assad has been steadily losing his grip mentally since Arab Spring - Kerry was fighting the last 2 years to KEEP Assad from completely cracking up. That's no longer possible, and it's pretty clear that these stepped up chemical attacks on his own people are indicative of his mental state.

[MNBrewer]

20. What difference does that make in the slightest?

What difference does it make that it's "his own people"? When did he give a shit about his own people before now?
This is a PRETEXT, not a provocation.

[blm]

22. Baloney - the point is that Kerry wouldn't be lured into use of force in Syria

based on bogus intel.

He put himself on the line for Syria and Assad for 8 years.

Were YOU the one taking all the hits from the neocons and war hawks the last 8 years? He would only take this position KNOWING that Assad is miscalculating...... badly....and when he's so far gone, he becomes even more suicidal with his country, then what?

[MNBrewer]

23. Taking hits....poor little Secretary Kerry...

Assad is a bad man. And yet Kerry is merely human, just like his boss.

[blm]

217. Point being that YOU and many Dems, and many on the left weren't

lifting a finger to defend him or give him backup against the hawks and neocons. Many of you weren't even aware of what has been going on and now all of a sudden you know more about Syria and Assad than Kerry does.

Kerry wouldn't be siding against Assad now unless it was an incredibly serious situation, and very likely because Assad's gone off the deep end.

[mylye2222]

237. I follow you,

by adding that JK is on of the MOST human and kind guys in American politics.

[Dr Fate]

70. It's not like Kerry was ever lured into voting for a war based on bogus intel.

If he had- then that would be different. He didnt.

So it stands to reason that he would not support a war based on false intel this time either.

The far left is so off on this.

[LearningCurve]

175. Oh that was delicious

You are becoming one of my favorite posters, and I was predisposed to like you from your screen name.

[blm]

216. Haha, Doc. But, get real about Kerry's efforts the last 8 yrs

he's worked to prevent war in Syria.

Taking shots JUST BECAUSE they're easy, the audience is easy, and easy to entertain is BS.

I understand it...but, it's still BS.

[Dr Fate]

229. And he is still working to prevent "war" in Syria!

Afterall, this is not a "war."

GOTCHA!!!!

[blm]

230. Hey - Putin is already backpedaling.

Looks to me like there may be some alternative solutions back on the burner, consisting of Putin urging Assad to step aside. It's called leverage, Doc. It might work, it might not, and they may have to strike the targets they have in their sights, but, it's not coming from shills for MIC or NWO.

They didn't manufacture the intel. They didn't plant evidence or intel in other countries. This is last resort time, and you'd be more cognizant of that if you paid more attention to my Syria posts since 2005. Sorry - I guess they WERE a bit boring, but, at least I paid attention. ; )

[Dr Fate]

232. They didn't manufacture the intel, but we sure as hell are going to manufacture some bombs!!!

Kerry knows fake intel when he sees it if anyone does- so I also trust him this time.

Besides, maybe we really wont do it. I'm cool either way. Back burner and all of that. I'm sure we wont really bomb them- I mean this is all just a trick to gain leverage. (LOL! How did I do?)


All at deminimus costs, of course- so no need to raise Kerry's taxes to pay for it- he needs that money to create jobs. I've got this one.

Who needs all these schools, "Detroit" and all that liberal garabage anyway? I'm willing to throw a few deminimus pennies at some bombs- we CAN TOO afford it!!!

[DJ13]

6. Like Chenney and Powell, right?

[avaistheone1]

15. We don't know that, do we?

Isn't the point to get all the facts first before attacking a country like those two murderous bozos?

[ancianita]

65. Hagel said they'll wait until "facts develop." Does that sound trustworthy to you?

[Marr]

206. That is *exactly* what the Bushbots used to say about Bush's argument for invading Iraq.

Doesn't that bother you, even a little?

[avaistheone1]

9. Me either.

They are politicians first and foremost. They do things in their own interests, and for their moneyed special interests.

[YvonneCa]

31. Any administration? So you really have no trust in our elected...

...government at all? No matter who the American people elect? That is pathetically sad.

[MNBrewer]

40. It's largely the unelected ones that cause the most trouble

but administrations are what they are... and yes, it's sad, isn't it.

[YvonneCa]

44. You seem to generalize...

...a lot.

[MNBrewer]

45. There has been one trustworthy administration in my lifetime

and this ain't it.

[YvonneCa]

51. We disagree. But I'm curious..

...which one?

[MNBrewer]

54. At the risk of sounding like a Democrat

Carter

[YvonneCa]

58. I like President Carter...

...too. Did you read his book a few years ago on religious fundamentalism? Can't remember the title...

Edited to add title..."Our Endangered Values", 2005. GREAT book.

[FiveGoodMen]

127. Agreed!

[go west young man]

135. Agreed here too.

[Maedhros]

61. TRUST IS EARNED. [n/t]

[wisteria]

137. So are you saying you do not trust this administration to do what is right?

Did you vote for President Obama? And, if you did and you didn't trust him, I have to ask why you voted as you did.

[Maedhros]

158. I voted for Obama in 2008, and cheered in the street when he won.

I did not vote for him in 2012 because I disagreed with the policies he adopted in contrast to his campaign promises.

[YvonneCa]

194. May I ask which policies...

...you were disappointed with? Foreign, domestic...?

[Maedhros]

199. Mostly these:

Claiming the authority to execute U.S. citizens without due process.

Criminalizing of adversarial journalism.

Pretty much everything about his drone campaigns: signature strikes, double-taps, targeting weddings/funerals, classifying all military-aged males as "militants"

Military intervention in Libya in defiance of Congress.

Indefinite detention and keeping Gitmo prisoners locked up even though they were cleared of wrongdoing.

Continuation of Bush policies RE: GWOT.

[YvonneCa]

203. Mostly civil liberties and...

...due process. I take issue with some of those,too. Changing these policies is taking too long.

[treestar]

80. +1

And not persuasive.

[treestar]

74. What a broad brush

That's just as silly as believing everything the government says.

Twisted even, since we do have free speech and the power to influence our elected officials.

[Peregrine Took]

117. Couldn't agree with you more! n/t

[cynatnite]

3. I second that. n/t

[dkf]

7. Funny I was going to say "just like Colin Powell".

But you knew that would be the comparison when you wrote the title.

[pnwmom]

12. Someone else already wrote that OP. nt

[cali]

8. too bad his judgment doesn't match his courage and integrity

he voted for the atrocious IWR which as Senator Leahy said was nothing but a fucking blank check.

[pnwmom]

13. It wasn't a blank check. It was a check that was fraudulently deposited.

But if the Congress in that October hadn't passed the IWR, which was written to require Bush to get proof of WMD before taking military action, then the incoming Congress in January would have given him a blank check without any conditions at all.

[MNBrewer]

16. It's a check that the Obama administration continues to fraudulently withdraw funds from, then

IWR is used as a fig leaf to cover a multitude of sins by the Obama Administration, even here on DU.

[cali]

17. it damn well was a blank check and somehow I'll take Leahy's informed opinion of

yours. It was horrible and many many reps and Senators knew it.

This resolution, like others before it, does not declare anything. It tells the President "you decide." This resolution, when you get through the pages of whereas clauses, is nothing more than a blank check. The President can decide when to use military force, how to use it, and for how long

[HardTimes99]

210. Oh, how soon we forget. The lure of 'post hoc, ergo propter hoc' is overwhelming. Did

you forget the Rose Garden concordat between Bush, Gebhardt and Daschle where it was agreed that Iraq would be "off the table" for the 2002 mid-terms? If the Dems had functioned as a true opposition party in the 2002 mid-terms (instead of a bunch of triangulating wusses), we might have had a Congress come January 2003 that would have refused to fund Operation Shocking and Awful.

The Democratic Party leadership failed the people of this country and the world miserably. Kerry and Hillary share a major portion of the blame for that on-going war crime and crime against humanity.

[Martin Eden]

24. That's why I couldn't vote for Kerry in the 2004 Primary

I voted and campaigned for him in the general election, but any Democrat who voted for for the IWR in October 2002 is not someone I want in a leadership role in the Democratic Party. That includes Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

Abysmal judgment or willful complicity, take your pick.

Anyone who didn't know GW Bush would take that authorization and invade Iraq no matter what the UN inspectors found or didn't find, was clueless.

[cali]

26. me too. Same with Clinton and Biden. Won't do it in the primaries.

I prefer to attribute it to abysmal judgment but who really knows?

[HardTimes99]

211. Not me. All 3 of them were trying to groom their national security

creds for a run in 2004 or 08. At the same time, Obama was speaking out against the war (at a time when it was extremely politically risky to do so). I have always had a spot of admiration for Obama for either his good jugment there, his courage or both, even though I have come to disagree with him massively about his political tactics, strategies and policies.

[Puzzledtraveller]

28. ^^this^^ Cali

[treestar]

93. It seems you will throw someone under the bus for one disagreement with you

Thus, no one else can represent you in Congress. Start running.

[cali]

120. you are soo wrong, tree. I am represented by Leahy, Sanders and Welch

I think they're all flat fucking wrong on the F-35s in Burlington, Vermont. I still support all three. I've disagreed with decisions or votes or comments of all three at various times. Love being repped by all three.

I've never been a big admirer of JK's.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Well, he follows orders adeptly.

[zeemike]

130. Well he is a Skull and Bones man

Like Bush...and so he must follow orders.

[1-Old-Man]

19. Yep, him and Colin Powell.

[Cha]

84. That's lazy thinking that leads to ignorance. nm

[pa28]

154. Unquestioning trust in politicians is lazy and leads to ignorance.

Public figures should expect rigorous scrutiny and indeed should welcome it if they expect to restore trust in our institutions.

[Cha]

157. Yeah, it does.. and calling John Kerry the same as Colin Powell is lazy and Ignorant.

[Phlem]

186. Bullshit.

Blind faith is nothing but lazy thinking.

-p

[blm]

231. Who said it's blind? Were YOU working to stop war in Syria in 2005?

For EIGHT YEARS Kerry has been working to do exactly that - to stop use of military force in Syria, and he put his neck on the line many times and took all the shots from the neocons and hawks and their RW media machine. Where were you?

YOU weren't there backing up his efforts for 8 years - guess what - Assad's losing his mental grip - Kerry knows it and he's doing what he has to do now because it truly is a last resort.

All you know-nothings who are now jumping on the issue of Syria sure were missing the last 8 years weren't you? You are targeting for lies and smears the ONE MAN who did the MOST to prevent Assad from heading in this direction.

[Phlem]

235. riiiiiiiiiiiiiight....

OK then.

I'll just believe you since your using all those facts. I'm sure your were sitting right next to him talking foreign policy in 2005.

A call to war on a country not directly attacking us is bullshit plane and simple, that's based on recent history, and look at where we're at as a country because of it. Nervous and afraid.

PS. and if Assad were truly that dangerous, where's the UN, where are our allies cause all I hear are crickets.

[MNBrewer]

21. I guess the word has gone out to spread the lie that Kerry has been working for 8 years

to prevent this war that started 2 years ago... inspired by the Arab Spring... which was completely unpredicted.

[YvonneCa]

41. From 2005...

...Kerry at Georgetown on ME Foreign Policy (to help you start your research). That would be 7+ years ago, and he continued this effort as chair of SFRC after Biden left to become VP.

As I recall, he also began a run for President in 2004 (or before) in large part because our foreign policy under GWB was going totally in the wrong direction.

That makes more than 8 years, by my count. I hope you watch the speech...but also the questions at the end about all the problems we currently face...including Syria.


Enjoy!

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/USForeignPolicy112

Edited to add...To think this is a two year situation in Syria that started with the Arab Spring is naive at best. Civil war has been prevalent in the region for a very long time.

[MNBrewer]

49. "Civil war has been prevalent in the region for a very long time"

Oh, my sides!!

[KittyWampus]

47. For someone so cynical you really are uninformed.

[wisteria]

168. Bravo!

[Hekate]

25. The poisonous distrust of government that infests this place is one of the legacies of Bush/Cheney

The British Parliament's shout-down of Cameron is one of those legacies. They don't trust Uncle Sam after Bush/Cheney.

Here in the US and definitely at DU too many people seem unable to differentiate -- well, much of anything.

The situation is terrible and the decisions are likewise, but Obama is not Bush, Kerry is not Powell or Rice, and Syria is not Iraq.

There are many of us in the US who voted for Obama based on his character and not on (take your pick) his being the lesser of two evils, or a complete fantasy of Utopia. I would still vote for him today based on his character, which is thoughtful and intelligent.

The current situation sucks like a wet-dry vac in a septic tank. I'm glad I am not the president. But you know, I voted for him based on his character, and I expect that after reading everything and listening to everyone, he will do his job.

I don't expect this post to change the mind of even one DUer. The poison was running deep even before Syria gassed its own people.

[dennis4868]

35. Best words ever stated at DU

"The poisonous distrust of government that infests this place is one of the legacies of Bush/Cheney."

I had a bad feeling this was going to happen. What Bush has done is create haters of government, a government that can never be trusted again no matter who is president.

[SunSeeker]

48. Yup, the one actual "Mission Accomplished" for Bush. nt

[HardTimes99]

212. It's actually a legacy of Vietnam. Bush and Cheney merely added a couple exclamation

points to it. Something about killing 2-3 million southeast Asians for a set of lies will create distrust not easily regained.

[Hekate]

223. They didn't "merely" do anything. They damn near destroyed us from within.

Barack Obama is a chance to start to work our way back -- he's not the be-all and end-all and he's not the Second Coming. He's a chance to start.

I lived through the Vietnam War era, and Nixon. I thought it was not possible to hate anyone as much as I hated Nixon, but I was not afraid of him.

I hated Bush/Cheney more than Nixon -- and I feared them, too.

False equivalencies do not sit well with me.

[HardTimes99]

224. I was a little boy during Vietnam and Nixon's first term but, even so, I think I understand

your distinction between the Nixon and Bush\Cheney regimes.

I wished "merely" to suggest that the legacy of distrust in government began during Vietnam and that Bush and Cheney compounded the problem. I may have worded my post a bit clumsily, for which I sincerely apologize.

As for Bush and Cheney nearly destroying us from within, I agree with you 100%, so much so that I devoted myself pretty much non-stop from Nov 2001-Nov 2008 to protesting against them. I didn't have the chance to protest during the Nixon presidency. One of my deepest disappointments has been not seeing anyone from the Bush Junta prosecuted for their many crimes against the people.

[Hekate]

225. Thank you. Perhaps we saw each other among the hundreds of thousands in Washington DC!

[YvonneCa]

46. Thank you for this, Hekate. You may not change...

...many minds, but...I have to tell you...your post is heartening to those of us who agree with you. Bush/Cheney hurt this country in ways many do not grasp. I am glad to know I am not alone in seeing that President Obama and Secretary Kerry are NOTHING like the GWB group.

AND...this was hilarious:

The current situation sucks like a wet-dry vac in a septic tank. I'm glad I am not the president. But you know, I voted for him based on his character, and I expect that after reading everything and listening to everyone, he will do his job.

[Dr Fate]

59. Kerry was NOTHING like Bush and Cheney. Just look at the issue of entering Iraq, for instance.

He was not fooled into supporting their wars.

No- he in nothing like them at all.

And even if Bush and Cheney agree with him on this war-well, this war is different in any event.

The main thing is that Obama WILL do his job one way or the other. For that, we can all be thankful.

[Brewinblue]

145. Sarcasm,

but it can be tough telling the difference here, especially for a newbie. And, welcome aboard the DU Love Boat!

[Dr Fate]

57. Kerry was smart to trust Bush and Cheney though. Thank God he he voted "yes" on Iraq.

And he is smart to agree with Bush and Cheney on this too.

I'm with you-It's only DUers and far-left malcontents who have a problem with not trusting politicians and corporate media when they clearly should.

[woo me with science]

62. We have been lied to repeatedly.

"Trust" may not be your best argument at this point.

[treestar]

86. good post Hekate

I wondered why the UK is OK with the Syrians using these weapons.

[Hekate]

115. One Parliamentarian flat out said that Bush had lied the UK into Iraq...

... so why should they go along with the US government now? The rest of the crowd erupted in "Heah, heah!" and pounded their feet on the floor. That was a soundbite, but an indicative one.

I doubt they are okay at all with what Assad is doing, but frankly I cannot blame them for their opinion of us.

Our current president, who is not Bush, has to deal with this crisis in the here and now. Neither Obama nor the crisis exists in a time-warp.

[h2ebits]

191. These are difficult times

I truly appreciate your posting and it certainly adds one more layer to the ongoing debate. I also agree about the poisonous distrust of government. But I also believe that the situation is terribly complex with many, many moving pieces and I WANT PEACE in my lifetime so that we can take another small step towards a civilized and caring society.

So here we sit without complete knowledge as to who actually gassed/murdered all of the people. From what I can see, every player in the region is suspect--and that includes Israel, Turkey, and Iran, not to mention Al Quaida, Hezbollah, and the other usual suspects.

President Obama is in a tough spot and should absolutely not move in the direction of a strike against Syria until the UN inspection is complete. And, then, he should not act unless he can involve other participants. The world is holding its breath waiting for whatever explosion comes. The reality is that we must consider the law of unintended consequences.

[JohnnyLib2]

192. Amen!

[LukeFL]

221. Bravo

I too feel the same way and also agree with the OP

[IL Lib]

226. +1 n/t

[MH1]

228. Well said. Thank you. nt

[GoCubsGo]

234. Well said, Hekate.

Not only have they poisoned our trust in government, they have continued to divide us all even further.

[Hekate]

236. This appears to have been a worthwhile subthread. Thanks to those who ...

... have continued to participate.

[The_Casual_Observer]

27. Same guy who was for it before he was against it and was foolish enough to spend the Month of August

prior to the election sailing on catamarans. Oh yeah, he's a great and wise man alright.
The guy is a dilettante fop, of course he's going spout shit like that , he has nothing to lose.

[bahrbearian]

30. he also had the Courage to challenge Ohio's election results.

[The_Casual_Observer]

34. There were more pressing social engagements to attend to....

[bahrbearian]

37. I'll never forget the wonderful concession speech and the Gala afterwords.

[The_Casual_Observer]

38. He and his wonderful wife (he married up as we were reminded many times) danced the night away.

[YvonneCa]

50. I think you may be lost. ;) n/t

[Cha]

95. that's rw propaganda shite.. don't really expect to see that shit on DU..

but, here it is.

[The_Casual_Observer]

122. So then tell me what really happened.

[Cha]

142. the history is chronicled for all to know but lazy rw propaganda is so easy

to push.

[bahrbearian]

207. You mean he was Yachting while the RW was swift boating him, surly he stood up to them.

[YvonneCa]

29. I agree wholeheartedly. Your post expresses...

...exactly how I feel, too. Thank you.

[daa]

32. Any asshole can hide behind a cruise and lie to us

I don't remember you saying this about Cheney

[dennis4868]

33. I agree with you...

I also trust the president. We all know how much he doesn't want to use military action but he has more of the evidence and intelligence than anyone, including the "experts" from DU.

[The_Casual_Observer]

39. If that's the case then it isn't mentioned in that half assed "report".

I think you are giving them more respect than they deserve.

[Maedhros]

64. Drone wars in too many places to count puts the lie to your assertion

that Obama doesn't want to use military action. He's been using military action non-stop since the second he took office.

[Logical]

36. I have no idea if you are being serious or sarcastic. n-t

[politicasista]

42. Kick n/t

Last edited Fri Aug 30, 2013, 06:34 PM - Edit history (2)

[woo me with science]

66. It's so MEAN!

We need to STICK UP for the Blue Team!

All they want to do is a little BOMBING! It's so MEAN and HATEFUL not to STICK UP FOR THEM!

[wisteria]

143. All they want to do is prevent Assad from using chemical weapons

on his own people and attempt to get him to negotiate. That only happens if Assad doesn't have the ability to murder his own people with weapons that have been banned since World War 1.

[woo me with science]

149. Humanitarian cruise missiles.

We learn something new from Big Brother every day.

[woo me with science]

171. Because bombing a country is the quintessential humanitarian act,

and it will certainly calm things down in that part of the world. I'm sure of it.

Just as sure as I am that that's all the MIC wants out of this.

[Dr Fate]

68. Brave Millionares who voted for two of Bush's wars need us liberals to stick up for them.

3 is the charm, after all.

[ProSense]

77. Obama didn't support the war. Is he one of the "brave millionaires" who is just like Bush?

What exactly is your point?

[Dr Fate]

94. Kerry voted for both of Bush's freedom wars. Now Kerry agrees with Obama's freedom war, thank God.

And Both wars DID TOO continue to be fought and funded under Obama.

HE IS TOO for freedom!

And he is so brave, and he is so a millionare. What's wrong with that?

My point is that he and Kerry would be very, very, very brave to agree with Bush Jr, Cheney, John McCain, the defense profiteers and the corporate media on this bombing.

We CAN SO afford it too.

[wisteria]

148. The conflict is different as is the result.

And, if you think it is just fine to sit by while a ruthless dictator wipes out all those who oppose him with illegal chemical weapons, you must be an Assad sympathizer. Are you sure you aren't Russian?

[Dr Fate]

152. I am for bombing Syria. (Even though we are not going to)

You must not be reading my posts.

I agree with you- we must bomb all the Hitlers of the world- as long as we are not going to raise taxes on the job creators in order to pay for it.

In fact, any discussion of how the poor and middle class will have to pay for a 3rd war needs to wait. Now is not the time.

Anyone who thinks we cannot afford this war is just a Russian version of HITLER as far as I can tell.

Besides, no one ever said we were going to bomb them. And even if we do, that is fine.

I have expressed nothing but full trust and support for anything Kerry says now, this time.

[bowens43]

43. I thought so to until he pulled a Powell......

[Tikki]

52. John Kerry is NO colin powell...and if you have forgotten just who and what powell is/was then..

the history revisionist have won.


Tikki

[Dr Fate]

63. It's not Like Kerry agreed with Powell and voted "yes" for Bush's invasion.

And Kerry never once cited anything Powell said in his justification for voting for Bush's war.

All that is mere far-left revisionism.

Kerry knew he was nothing like that guy, and so did we.

I too am tired of people who keep saying Kerry ever agreed with him.

[MNBrewer]

90. Please tell us "who and what powell is/was then"

vs. Kerry who/what is/was then/now

[Dr Fate]

53. His "yes" vote for Bush's actions in Iraq prove that beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Just b/c he got fooled by Bush's genius does not mean we should not trust his judgement this time.

[Arkana]

55. When I hear Kerry say it I'm more inclined to believe it.

The way most of the folks in this place talk, everyone is a lying, cheating bastard with no integrity or honor.

[Dr Fate]

60. Kerry showed much integrity and honor when he voted for Bush's war in Iraq.

I believed in his honor and integrity when he supported Bush and Cheney then, and I believe in him now too.

His ability to discern the truth about WMDs was baffling.

Besides- this one is different- even if Bush and Cheney support this war too.

[ProSense]

71. Kerry didn't support the war. In fact,

he and Ted Kennedy jointly spoke out about the invasion before Bush launched the war March 2003.

[The_Casual_Observer]

76. That's right he was against it after he was for it.

[ProSense]

78. Thanks for reminding me of the RW talking point. n/t

[Dr Fate]

81. No kidding- only right wingers and far-lefts are stupid enough to NOT want this war.

Next thing you know- the far left will be agreeing with Bush, Cheney and John McCain on bombing Syria.

[ProSense]

85. What war? Who is "stupid enough" to be advocating war?

Go a link to the announcement?

[Dr Fate]

97. Exactly- the far left will look like FOOLS when Obama never bombs Syria.

And even if he does bomb them- they will still look like fools.

[The_Casual_Observer]

82. He didn't actually say that? It was a talking point invented by somebody?

[Cha]

101. RW Bullshit Propaganda.

[Arkana]

146. Let me guess--you owned Purple Heart Bandaids too, didntcha?

[YvonneCa]

196. ...

...

[YvonneCa]

195. This again? I thought...

...this was DEMOCRATIC Underground.

[Dr Fate]

79. I'm just glad that he voted "yes" on the Iraq invasion instead of "no" on the invasion.

The fact that he voted "yes" proves that he trusted all the right voices- just like now.

[ProSense]

83. The vote wasn't for an invasion, but

no amount of facts is going to stop some from rewriting history.

[The_Casual_Observer]

88. Oh no, he wasn't snookered into voting for that trojan horse war declaration, that never happened.

He's a lot smarter than that LOL

He didn't realize what he was voting for LOL!

[ProSense]

91. Bush lied.

Bush lied after the vote. He lied in his SOTU after the vote, and lied to Congress and the American people after the vote.

[The_Casual_Observer]

96. And he couldn't separate those obvious lies at the time from the facts! Go ahead

let me help find you a bigger shovel.

[cali]

98. oh please stop with the excuses and revisionism.

[ProSense]

103. Too many facts for you? n/t

[Dr Fate]

106. The far left hates it when you prove that Kerry was smart enough to vote AGAINST Bush's war.

Keep it coming- I may need to use your arguments in another thread.

[ProSense]

108. LOL!

You keep insulting the "far left" with snark.

[Dr Fate]

113. They deserve it- they are not even smart enough to trust you or Kerry.

Both of you have been proven Right wayyyyyy too many times.

[ProSense]

118. You're way too smart to be here.

Seriously. Your brilliant snark is destined to become classics on the Internets.

"They deserve it- they are not even smart enough to trust you or Kerry."

Damn! Brilliant!

[Dr Fate]

123. I am glad to fight by your side as well as sit at your feet.

nt

[cali]

107. nope. I'm good with the facts, just calling you on your twisting them, propro.

[YvonneCa]

197. THANK YOU. n/t

[Dr Fate]

100. I'm just proud that he voted "yes" instead of "no." His was a true profile in courage.

n/t

[cali]

110. yep. it was for a blank check to go to war. so much better, pro.

rewriting history is claiming that Kerry was against the Iraq War.

[Dr Fate]

162. He thought he was voting "yes" on NOT having a war.

Why does the far left refuse to look at this fact?

[cali]

92. lol. he voted to give bushie a blank check. Guess what? Kennedy did NOT.

huge difference.

[ProSense]

99. In that case, they all voted to give Bush a "blank check" if you look at resolutions.

Like I said, Kennedy knew the deal, and he was right to call Bush out. In fact, before Bush launched the war, Republicans began attacking Kerry and Kennedy for denouncing Bush's plan to invade Iraq.

[cali]

104. oh no, calling them out. no, they did not all vote to give bushie a blank check

those who voted against it sure as shit did not, but I love your dedication to obfuscation. It's cute on you.

[The_Casual_Observer]

105. Not all of them voted for it. Kerry was a fool that did, that's a fact. Same fool

different bullshit report.

[ProSense]

151. Nope, the facts say you're wrong. n/t

[Dr Fate]

160. Exactly. The facts say that Kerry's "yes" vote was in OPPOSITION to any and all action in Iraq.

He thought he was voting "yes" on NOT supporting Bush's actions.

If he had voted "no"- then maybe the far left would have an argument- but I doubt it.

How many times do we keep having to tell you all this?

The fact that the far left keeps on distorting this FACT just proves how desperate they must be.

Just because he thought his "yes" vote meant "yes" on NOT having a war does not mean he had poor judgment. It means the opposite if anything.

He thought he was voting "yes" on NOT having a war. It's a mistake anyone could have made.

The point is that he learned his lesson.

[Cha]

89. Everyone except those lying cheaters, greenwald and snowden.

[LondonReign2]

67. You forgot to add "as long as he agrees with my President"

[Jackpine Radical]

69. Powell covered up My Lai.

Kerry exposed Iran-Contra.

Kerry is no Powell.

[Dr Fate]

75. Kerry was smart enough to trust Powell on Iraq though,

And he reaps the political benefits to this day.

Kerry is no Powell, but I'm glad he had the honor, integrity and smarts to believe every word Powell said about Iraq- and then to vote accordingly.

[treestar]

72. That is true. I listened to his 19 minute speech today.

He deserves to have his opinion seriously considered.

[Cha]

73. Of course, John Kerry, is no Colin Powell.. and

those who are saying that.. get their damn thread trashed. It's lazy and ignorant thinking to suggest it.

Mahalo for your OP, pnwmom.

[totodeinhere]

87. If he were such a man of great courage and integrity he would oppose military

action against Syria. Even if it means resigning he needs to do the right thing. Now that would be courage. But I'm not holding my breathe. I'm afraid that it's only a matter of time until bombs away and Kerry will be right there cheerleading.

[woo me with science]

102. "Even if it means resigning, he needs to do the right thing."

Thank you.

[ProSense]

109. LOL!

[woo me with science]

112. Yeah, that conscience thing...

It's hard for some.

[HardTimes99]

222. ProSense would have been laughing at Cyrus Vance (Carter's SoS) when

he actually DID resign over Carter's ill-fated desert rescue of the embassy hostages.

[ProSense]

111. Are you saying the President lacks "courage and integrity"? n/t

[Dr Fate]

114. Hogwash. His courage and integrity will be proven when he bombs Syria.

And it will also be proven if he does not.

I'm cool either way.

[ProSense]

121. Bullhockey!!!

[Dr Fate]

125. LOL! I may use that argument in another thread.

nt

[ProSense]

132. Sure.

Likely better than anything you could come up with.

[Dr Fate]

134. Cool. What was it?

??

[totodeinhere]

129. No, bombing Syria is not a brave act. But standing up to the military industrial complex

would be an act of courage. I imagine that executives at the Raytheon Company are literally salivating at the prospect of getting a big fat contract to replace the missiles that will be fired at Syria.

[totodeinhere]

119. I believe that the president is a man of integrity. But if he really wants to show

courage he needs to resist the temptation to attack Syria. He said he hasn't made a decision yet. If my worst fears are unfounded and he takes the sensible course and refrains from a military attack then I will be in the front row cheering him. But I suspect that you will be cheering him on no matter what he does.

[woo me with science]

124. "There is no spying on Americans."

Hmm.

[ProSense]

126. LOL!

Snowden still stuck in Russia?

[woo me with science]

128. Lies, lies, and more lies.

America is sick and tired of being lied to.

[ProSense]

159. Amnesty International on use of chemical weapons in Syria

Amnesty International on use of chemical weapons in Syria
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023555922

The use of chemical weapons in Syria is not a lie.

[woo me with science]

161. The lies are that the decision has not been made,

and that lobbing cruise missiles into another country is not an act of war.

[Dr Fate]

131. Can I use that argument in another thread?

I may just start cutting and pasting everything you say.

I've never seen so many slam-dunks.

[wisteria]

133. People have forgotten that the messenger is different.

This is not the Bush/Chaney Administration, and it is not about taking out the leader because he tried to assassinate former President Bush. There are a few similarities to the Iraq lead up to war, but there are a lot of dissimilarities too. I trust in this Administration to make the right choices for the right reasons. Thank you for this post.

[Dr Fate]

140. The far left keeps lying and saying that Kerry voted with the Bush/Cheney admin on Iraq.

Since this is a lie, I too feel comfortable trusting Kerry for a 3rd time on THIS war.

3 is the charm, after all.

[wisteria]

150. You need to read his comments before his vote on Iraq.

If you see everything in black and white, you miss a lot.

[Dr Fate]

167. I did. He thought he was voting "yes" on NOT having a war.

And I beleive him as much then as I do now.

Hillary also voted "yes" to not have a war.

It's not their fault that Bush the genius fooled them with his semantics tricks.

[YvonneCa]

200. ^^^^^^READ THIS^^^^^^^^^

I agree completely wisteria.

[Bluenorthwest]

136. Is he? How does that matter? He fell for the false Iraqi 'intel' voted death upon thousands and

today he admitted that was all lies but there is NO accountability for lying. No repercussions for falling for it. He bought stupid lies, he's Sec of State. The criminals, criminals walk free.
If they are wrong, people die and they just say 'whoops' then fire the footman for bringing the wrong sandwich.
If they wanted to be trusted, they needed to hold Bushco liars accountable. Any killing they do is theirs to own, Barack and John and Joe. Biden voted for Iraq as well.
I think people of integrity who voted for the Iraq war lies would have resigned.

[whatchamacallit]

138. Meh. In the end they're all just barkers for whatever circus employs them n/t

[Marr]

139. Yeah, really-- his vote against the Iraq invasion proves how good he is at standing up to

bullshit pretexts for military actions.

Oh, wait...

[Aerows]

170. It enriched members of Congress

that invested in military contractor stocks. That's really all that matters, right? I mean it's not like they have to abide by insider trading laws like the common folk. Hedge fund managers have less of a rate of pay off than members of Congress, but nobody questions why that is, because they make the laws, give out the military contracts, and SURPRISE, SURPRISE! Do fantastic on Wall Street.

[Bluenorthwest]

141. Why do you who support the war post 'rofl' emoticons in the threads about war?

Is it really amusing material to you folks?

[Dr Fate]

147. You have to ask? Just look at all of the silly accusations about Kerry and Iraq.

The far left is even trotting out the old lie that by voting "yes" twice- Kerry somehow lended his support to Bush's wars.

We know he has more honor, integrity and smarts than that. We know that Kerry got it RIGHT on Iraq, and he is getting it RIGHT on this one too.

If you wont listen to TRUE facts and look at REAL history, then yes, we will laugh at you.

[wisteria]

156. Obviousy, you haven't read the entire history on Kerry's votes.

And, obviously you don't see things other then in simple black and white. And, you also don't seem to understand that this is not Kerry making these decisions, he is only a part of the discussion.

[Dr Fate]

164. Agreed. Kerry thought he was voting "yes" on NOT having a war in Iraq.

I trusted his logic and clear-eyed judgement then, and I trust it now.

[zeemike]

153. Perhaps because they are losing the argument

And it is their custom to use ridicule when losing an argument...it is a cheep dodge and one that usually works.

And they use it in this topic because to them it is not about war, but defending the leadership of the party.

IMHO

[wisteria]

166. Public opinion is wrong on this one, they make a huge mistake

thinking this is just like Iraq, because it isn't. And, personally, I think the administration will do what it thinks is in the best interest of our country, whether people support or understand it or don't.

[cali]

172. whatever public opinion is, it's a mistake to launch missile strikes against syria

unilaterally and without the approval of congress. but that's only part of why it's wrong. The strikes planned are not designed to stop anything or oust Assad or really change the balance of power in Syria at all. It won't save lives and could cost them. It may up the ante. It may spur attacks on Israel or within Lebanon. It's likely to cause more foreign fighters to enter Syria on the side of both rebels and the regime.

That's the short version.

[Dr Fate]

178. The public is stupid for thinking we cannot afford a 3rd war. We can so afford it.

And besides, no one ever indicated that we are going to bomb them.

But if we do, that is fine too.

We CAN TOO afford it- and we can and WILL do this without putting any burdens on the Republican job creators.

The far left is being WAYYY too stingy on this. It's up to us to pay for this, guys.

The far left claims to be for freedom- yet they are not willing put their money where their mouth is and make more economic sacrifices- history will prove them to all to be selfish FOOLS.

If we need to tighten our belts even more and or borrow money from China to advance the cause of freedom again, so be it.

[zeemike]

183. Well the Bush administration did what they thought best

for our country too...but what is good for Wall Street is good for the country the way they see it from that bubble they live in.
And war destroys things and they have to be replaced and so it is a job creator too....all good for the country I guess.

[Marr]

208. +1. Spot on.

They see this, like just about everything else, as just the political fodder of the current news cycle.

[wisteria]

163. I not using them. I take any military action seriously.

But, sometimes out of necessity and because this world is a dangerous place, it becomes apparent that the only way to negotiate and to stop someone from murder, is to use force. What would you do? Have us ignore the slaughter? Do you really believe that he won't continue to use chemical weapons if he is not stopped now?

[Bluenorthwest]

174. I think an argument made in jest is not apporpriate for a decison about dropping death on

thousands of random people. I think it is out of place, disgusting and I have to wonder why no one objects to it.
I wonder why the OP does not speak against this levity in the face of horrors. I think it is shameful and repulsive.

[JI7]

181. i agree, the OP just seems to want personal amusement from it

there are serious ways of discussing this.

[Sand Wind]

144. Kick ! Nt

[Aerows]

165. "We know there is no ultimate military solution."

Translation: "We're going to fuck up things worse than they already are, but contractors will be rolling in the dough while our men and women die for their payday."

[idwiyo]

169. Voted for war in Iraq, that's sure sign of great courage and integrity. <--- sarcasm

[Dr Fate]

173. Wrong. He voted "yes" to NOT have a war. Stop looking at his actual vote and read his speeches.

His vote may have said yes, but his speeches and other votes clearly said "NO!"

Besides, when he voted "yes"- he thought it was saying "yes" to NOT having a war.

Just read the speeches if you think he was trying to have it both ways.

[Bluenorthwest]

177. Kerry's statement on why he voted Yes to authorize Bush to attack Iraq:

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

[Dr Fate]

182. I'm so sorry that the facts upset you so much. n/t

Rolly laughing guy

[Bluenorthwest]

185. Fact is Kerry voted for war in Iraq.

Plain and simple. Not sure what your spin based delusion is, or if you are playing satire games or what. Those are John Kerry's words. Deal with it.

[idwiyo]

188. I think they are channeling a Pro. Though I do agree, it's damn hard to tell this days. :)

[idwiyo]

179. ROFTLOL. But of course! Black is white and war is peace! WOO HOO!

GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK, Arizona (CNN) -- Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said Monday he would not have changed his vote to authorize the war against Iraq, but said he would have handled things "very differently" from President Bush.

Bush's campaign has challenged Kerry to give a yes-or-no answer about whether he stood by the October 2002 vote which gave Bush authority to use military force against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
...

The U.S. senator from Massachusetts said the congressional resolution gave Bush "the right authority for the president to have."
...

[woo me with science]

180. Thank you.

It's kind of like when the Obama administration invested all their legal resources and time and energy into arguing that Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and everyone should be prosecuted for war crimes, and they accidentally ended up arguing for the other side.

These things happen.

[ProSense]

189. "I agree that Saddam Hussein is exceptionally dangerous and brutal...And I support...regime change."

Feingold:

<...>

My colleagues, my focus today is on the wisdom of this specific resolution, vis-a-vis Iraq, as opposed to discussing the notion of an expanded doctrine of preemption, which the President has articulated on several occasions. However, I associate myself with the concerns eloquently raised by Senator Kennedy and Senator Byrd and others that this could well represent a disturbing change in our overall foreign and military policy. This includes grave concerns about what such a preemption-plus policy will do to our relationship with our allies, to our national security, and to the cause of world peace in so many regions of the world where such a doctrine could trigger very dangerous actions with very minimal justification.

I want to be clear about something. None of this is to say that I don't agree with the President on much of what he has said about the fight against terrorism and even what he has said about Iraq. I agree, post-9/11, we face, as the President said, a long and difficult fight against terrorism. We must be very patient and very vigilant, and we must be ready to act and make some very serious sacrifices.

With regard to Iraq, I agree, Iraq presents a genuine threat, especially in the form of weapons of mass destruction, chemical, biological, and potentially nuclear weapons. I agree that Saddam Hussein is exceptionally dangerous and brutal, if not uniquely so, as the President argues. And I support the concept of regime change. Saddam Hussein is one of several despots whom the international community should condemn and isolate with the hope of new leadership in those nations.

Yes, I agree; if we do this Iraq invasion, I hope Saddam Hussein will actually be removed from power this time. I agree, we cannot do nothing with regard to Saddam Hussein in Iraq. We must act. We must act with serious purpose and stop the weapons of mass destruction and stop Saddam Hussein. I agree, a return to the inspections regime of the past alone is not a serious, credible policy.

I also believe and agree, as important and as preferable as U.N. action and multilateral solutions to this problem are, we cannot give the United Nations the ability to veto our ability to counter this threat to our people. We retain and will always retain the right of self-defense, including self-defense against weapons of mass destruction. When such a threat requiring self-defense would present itself--and I am skeptical that is exactly what we are dealing with here--then we could, if necessary, act alone, including militarily.

These are all areas where I agree with the administration. However, I am increasingly troubled by the seemingly shifting justifications for an invasion at this time. My colleagues, I am not suggesting there has to be only one justification for such a dramatic action, but when the administration moves back and forth from one argument to another, it undercuts the credibility of the case and the belief in its urgency. I believe this practice of shifting justifications has much to do with the troubling phenomenon of many Americans questioning the administration's motives in insisting on action at this time.

- more-

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/Z?r107:S09OC2-0011:

Kerry: We Still Have a Choice on Iraq
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/06/opinion/we-still-have-a-choice-on-iraq.html

Kerry Says US Needs Its Own 'Regime Change'
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0403-08.htm

As for the IWR, Bush lied. He lied leading up to the IWR vote, and the faulty intelligence convinced a lot of Senators, who all bought into the WMD lie. Do you really think that if either the Byrd, Durbin or Levin amendments had passed the situation wouldn't have been the same?

To amend the authorization for the use of the Armed Forces to cover an imminent threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction rather than the continuing threat posed by Iraq.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00236

To provide a termination date for the authorization of the use of the Armed Forces of the United States, together with procedures for the extension of such date unless Congress disapproves the extension.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00232

Setting a date for the termination of the authorization would still have given Bush enough time to lie and launch a war. And as anyone could see, once the Iraq war was launched, none of these Senators committed to forcing a withdrawal. In 2006, Kerry-Feingold got 13 votes.

The notion that anyone got it "right" based on the IWR vote is absurd. Bush lied after the IWR and illegally invaded Iraq. That is the fact.

Bush lied
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022537683

He lied before, during and after the vote. He lied in his SOTU. He lied to the American people.

[OnyxCollie]

176. Kerry isn't President, so he doesn't have the final word.

[BlueMTexpat]

184. I concur that Kerry is telling the truth because

he probably believes the intel that he has received. I believe that Powell never did, but still presented it.

But I believe that he has received intel largely derived from sources (and culled by Bush II "analysts" still embedded in civil service in the DOS and CIA) who have been pushing for US military intervention in Syria all along. This taints that intel significantly. I do like that he is making the report available, however.

The issue is much more nuanced than most of the US population is able to understand since most Americans a) have never been to the ME or North Africa, b) are not familiar with the history of the region and the nefarious actions undertaken by or sponsored by our own nation there, c) completely misunderstand Islam, Arabs and other ME peoples (such misunderstanding is not limited to this region of the world, but it is the relevant region for the moment), d) do not speak any language other than English, limiting their access to what others are really saying - as well as to the thought processes that are innate to other languages and cultures, e) have no sense of geography (sadly, most probably still can't identify Syria on a map) or geopolitics ... etc., etc., etc. ad nauseam.

May Kerry continue to err on the side of caution in his actions, no matter what he says! We have already made too many mistakes in the region. Saber brandishing or worse simply because it is "unmanly" to do otherwise is not at all good for long term cooperation or credibility. Kerry knows that there is no ultimate military solution, so why even talk about beginning with a military action? Why?

I am very troubled - and have been for a long time - about the situation in Syria. Neither side is admirable and yes, what Assad is doing is criminally reprehensible even if it turns out that this intel is wrong about chemical weapons. But why is it that other bloodthirsty and malevolent tyrants who do as much or worse continue to get away with their actions? Could it - just possibly - have to do with the facts that there is lots of oil in the region of Syria and that Israel is right next door to Syria and has always hated the Assad regimes even more than most Syrians do? Couldn't it?

[OnyxCollie]

190. John Kerry makes a lot off of defense contracts.

US lawmakers have as much as $196 million invested in defense companies
From AP via The International Herald Tribune

WASHINGTON: Members of the U.S.Congress have as much as $196 million (€126.2 million) collectively invested in companies doing business with the Defense Department, earning millions since the start of the Iraq war, according to a new study by a nonpartisan research group.

The review of lawmakers' 2006 financial disclosure statements, by the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics, suggests that members' holdings could pose a conflict of interest as they decide the fate of Iraq war spending. Several members who earned the most from defense contractors have plum committee or leadership assignments, including Democratic Sen. John Kerry, independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman and House Republican Whip Roy Blunt.

The study found that more Republicans than Democrats hold stock in defense companies, but that the Democrats who are invested had significantly more money at stake. In 2006, for example, Democrats held at least $3.7 million (€2.3 million) in military-related investments, compared to Republican investments of $577,500 (€372,000).

Overall, 151 members hold investments worth $78.7 million (€50.6 million) to $195.5 million (€125.9 million) in companies that receive defense contracts that are worth at least $5 million (€3.2 million). These investments earned them anywhere between $15.8 million (€10.1 million) and $62 million (€39.9 million) between 2004 and 2006, the center concludes.

More Here: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/03/america/NA-GE...

[Botany]

198. 3 purple hearts, a bronze star, and a silver star

the man has earned my trust

[YvonneCa]

201. And mine. :) Not like Bush or Cheney....

...in the least.

[David__77]

209. I trust VVAW.

Kerry once upon a time supported them. Vietnam Veterans Against the War.



http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=2244

Plenty of decorated veterans have the insight to oppose launching yet another war in the Middle East. Kerry may not be one of them. And I'm especially sensitized to the Vietnam reference. My father was there for a good chunk of the years 66-72 - got the purple heart and all that bullshit for an immoral and unjust war. He was rewarded with agent orange-related dementia and PTSD and lifetime of emotional horror.

[ucrdem]

204. Rec. I'm going to take Kerry's remarks under serious consideration.

I don't believe Assad ordered or intended to launch a gas attack, but that doesn't mean one didn't happen, or that someone in his military is working as a double agent. There have been several high-level resignations already so it's possible. And I have serious doubts about several details of the attack as it's been presented, but Kerry's statement gives me pause, so I'm going to move into the "let's wait and see what happens" column before running around condemning Obama and his Cabinet.

[David__77]

205. If he took out the word "ultimate," then he'd be right.

Instead, it is double talk.

[pangaia]

213. When I heard him on my car radio

driving home from work I had to turn the radio off. Screeching, howling orgasmic fury. Who the fuck was that?

[modem77]

214. I'm probably going to catch flak for this but I was getting flashbacks from GW Bush admin.

I had to do a double take to make sure it was Kerry giving the speech and not Shrub.

[RetroLounge]

215. Wrong again

RL

[jessie04]

218. Great post

nt

[UTUSN]

219. R#41 & K n/t

[LukeFL]

220. He is

And I support his position. I think PO and him are both persons of great judgement and both are extremely analytical- I am sure they have been given this action serious thoughts and will never place this country in harms way for nothing.

President Obama has shown us these past years how he is and how much he thinks things thru- to the point if making us, his base and supporters uncomfortable and more often than not getting us upset because of it.

So, I trust him and John Kerry. They are certainly not bush and Colin Powell

[Flying Squirrel]

227. The noble Brutus hath told you that Caesar was ambitious

and Brutus is an honorable man

[Demo_Chris]

233. So are they all, all honorable men. nt