Kerry wanted Spain to keep it's troops in Iraq.

[Cascadian]

I do not know why I missed this story but if Kerry thinks he can stay the course in Iraq, he has already failed that test. Zapatero already told Kerry to back off. Refusing to change his mind about bringing his soldiers home.

Read on....


http://seattle.indymedia.org/en/2004/03/239227.shtml

This proves my point that Kerry will not be able to get the UN and NATO in to "bail us out" so to speak. He must turn 180 on his policy on Iraq.


John

[kiahzero]

1. Zapatero didn't exactly have an open mind on the matter, now did he?

Kerry also wasn't a head of state.

So, ultimately, Kerry's theory hasn't been tested.

[Cascadian]

2. At least Zapatero kept his promise.

eom


John

[kiahzero]

3. That's kind of the point

Zapatero was obliged to not keep troops in Iraq. Kerry's 'failure' to bring him around doesn't reflect on Kerry in any serious way.

[gate of the sun]

7. excuses, excuses

Kerry wasn't head of state true. Did he sound liek a statesmen in regards to Iraq...before and now?

Zapatero had an open mind.....he said F. you to the United States and their stupied war.....that's what he did.

[Classical_Liberal]

20. Zapatero said nothing of the kind. He said:

If the United Nations does not take over the situation and there is not a rethinking of this chaotic occupation we are living through, in which there are more dead in the occupation than in the war phase, the Spanish troops are going to return to Spain."

Very open minded and rational.

[Tellurian]

4. The article you site is 2 mos old..

things have changed drastically over the last several weeks..

Unfair assumption..

[Cascadian]

5. It does not change the fact that it happened.

eom


John

[Tellurian]

11. And the fact that it happened means what right now? nt

[Old and In the Way]

6. And the hits keep on coming.......

Let's wait and see what happens in 8 months, OK? I really bet that the dynamics of the Iraqi fiasco will not be held in a suspended state until Kerry is elected. Pretty hard to tell what the right thing for Kerry to do 8 months before he can do anything, don't you think?

[gate of the sun]

8. No I don't think so

Kerry should be espousing the right thing to do right now. That's what he should do......or will he sit on the fence maybe until he's sure he'll win and then denounce the war I doubt it.....and that would make him a hypocrite. I can't admire his stance. Either way he's a big fat disappointment in these regards. Don't give me any of this he's not head of state anyway. He's a candidate for President. Stand up John Kerry and just say No.He's your hope for the future. You give him too many breaks my friend.

[Old and In the Way]

9. Like Kerry knows what the State of Iraq will be in 8 months.

I'm sure he's got a crystal ball that he can refer to. Fact is, Bush created this mess and he's not consulting Kerry on his plans. Bush could pull all the troops on 6/30. Or he could turn it into a parking lot.

But you demand Kerry paint himself into a corner and limit his options before he is even elected. Perhaps you should spend equal time demanding the same accountability from Bush that you seem to expect of Kerry.

You don't give him enough breaks my friend.

[Tellurian]

12. yep, sharpshooters looking at the wrong target...

Kerry is doing just fine...leave him alone.

[FlemingsGhost]

10. John Kerry = status quo

It'll be interesting to see what the "give-Kerry-a-break-regarding- Iraq" folks say when Kerry ultimately "stays the course."

[PittPoliSci]

13. what else can we really do?

we can hardly leave iraq in such a state as it is now. and even if we do leave and let the UN come in, where are all the soldiers and peacekeepers coming from? it's a terrible situation with no easy way out, "staying the course" is probably the only realistic option.

[FDRrocks]

14. Or handing over the country

on the 30th to the ambiguous force, which Bush says is going to happen. It's not going to happen. Pulling out may not be the "moral" thing to do, but neither was going there in the first place. This could turn into another Vietnam (even worse, with enemy forces apparently flocking to Iraq) really quickly. We pulled out of Vietnam without regard to thier welfare, in fact thier infrastructure was alot worse than that of Iraqs currently.

[FlemingsGhost]

16. "How do you ask a man to be the last to die for a mistake?"

John Kerry will find that out soon enough.

The gods can be cruel sometimes...

[Cascadian]

17. Those words will come back to haunt him....

if he stays the course in Iraq.


John

[Cascadian]

15. No it isn't. It is very clear. They do not want us there.

I hate this paternalistic, we know best attitude that this country seems to have. Iraqis have been there for thousands of years and are highly educated. They were one of the cradles of civilization and they are not fighting each other. They have united in their goal of getting us to leave. This whole "we broke it we have to fix it" attitude just does not wash. We are only going to invite more death and destruction on Iraqis and Americans. Wake up!


John

[PittPoliSci]

18. Okay, let's assume this...

Let's assume that the Iraqis are all united and happy and peaceful after we leave. If that would happen, I would rejoice and thus encourage the US to go home.

The fact of the matter is, there is a Shiite majority in Iraq which would behave in a fashion similar to the Iranian government. Iraq is about 60% Shiite, 30% Sunni, and about 10% or less Kurdish. If the Shiites come into power, which they will when there is a power vaccuum, the Sunnis and the Kurds are going to have a very grim future. You may call it paternalism, but I still call it helping those who are in the minority. Perhaps you should wake up, we'd only be inviting continued violence against those not in power.

*edited for clarity*

[Classical_Liberal]

19. The EU and the UN won't help us unless we promote the Roadmap

between Israel and the Palestinians which is a perfectly reasonable demand.