Kerry: " a foreign policy that absolutely makes it unnecessary to DRAFT"

[Dems Will Win]

KERRY: "NO DRAFT"

-SNIP-

Mr. Kerry also asserted, in response to a question from a high school student about the possibility of another military draft, "If you elect me president of the United States, I will give us a foreign policy that absolutely makes it unnecessary to have a draft in this nation."

He accused the Bush administration of "running a kind of clandestine draft" that "turned the National Guard and the Reserve into almost active duty."

- SNIP -

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/politics/campaign/26kerry.html


BUSH '04 = DRAFT '05

KERRY '04 = PNAC OUT THE DOOR!

[mike_c]

1. "KERRY '04 = PNAC OUT THE DOOR!" not true...

...if Kerry continues the neo-con agenda in Iraq, e.g long term U.S. military presence, massive intel dominated embassy, etc. The only way the PNAC loses is by repudiation of their ME foreign policy objectives. Changing bosses won't help unless the boss changes direction.

This hints at that: "I will give us a foreign policy that absolutely makes it unnecessary to have a draft in this nation" but only barely. For example, replacing a substantial proportion of U.S. troops with multi-lateral forces STILL keeps the PNAC agenda intact, while lifting the need for conscription in the U.S.

[bryant69]

2. Well how much does he have to reverse it?

And also, are there elements we might want to keep? I mean I'm not sure about a long term presense with military bases and all, seems like that's a bad idea. But having better intelligence in the middle east seems like a pretty good idea. Better intelligence might have told President Bush that invading Iraq was not the best idea.

of course the intelligence he did have told him that, so maybe it wouldn't have made any difference.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Dems Will Win]

3. How in the world does turning over Iraq's OIL to the UN equal PNAC???

Don't forget it's all about OIL.

The UN will make sure Iraqis get the OIL, not Cheney and Poppy.

With Bush and PNAC, even if they leave this year, they will reinvade next year, take the OIL back, reinstate the DRAFT and take over the next six countries on the secret memo list that Clark revealed.

That's PNAC, not staying in Iraq in a multi-lateral force and letting the Iraqis have their own OIL as Kerry would do.

Please explain how not invading the next 6 countries is following the PNAC Plan.

I think you owe us all that explanation now....

[mike_c]

4. ok, I'll bite....

"Don't forget it's all about OIL."

No, it's not. Oil is only part of the equation, although it might have been the hook that really drew Cheney and shrubya in. For the PNAC, the real agenda has more to do with U.S. global hegemony and colonialism than with oil, per se. That said, it IS common knowledge that access to petroleum supplies will be essential to maintaining U.S. economic and military dominance during the next couple of decades. After that? It's going to get tough, and even the petro-heads in the administration know it.


"The UN will make sure Iraqis get the OIL, not Cheney and Poppy."

The U.S. will still be a major player no matter what, if for no other reason than market forces, unless the U.N. actually embargoes the U.S. from access to Iraqi oil. That's an interesting thought, but not very likely-- and even less enforceable. Hear that great sucking sound? That's the U.S. rate of oil consumption-- something NO oil producing state wants to ignore. Poppy and Cheney's greed serves the PNAC's purposes, and makes them willing accomplices, but personal greed is not the primary motivation behind the neo-con agenda. Power and world dominance are, but that also-- and not just incidentally-- provides a framework for lots of "opportunity rich environments..." along the road to empire.


"With Bush and PNAC, even if they leave this year, they will reinvade next year, take the OIL back, reinstate the DRAFT and take over the next six countries on the secret memo list that Clark revealed."

I certainly won't dispute ANY nefarious predictions about how badly the BFEE might screw the pooch over and over.


"That's PNAC, not staying in Iraq in a multi-lateral force and letting the Iraqis have their own OIL as Kerry would do."

Have you read Rebuilding America's Defenses? Here's a link directly from the horse's mouth if you haven't: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Granted, a multilateral force probably isn't the ultimate neo-con wet dream, but it doesn't detract too stongly from their regional objectives as long as U.S. forces are prominantly included (they will be), have a long-term force presence in Iraq, get to establish a regional mil intel hub in Baghdad, and so on-- especially if those multilateral forces remain under nominal U.S. command. All of these objectives will still be achieved unless the U.S. surrenders all of it's interests in Iraq and walks away, without reservations.


"Please explain how not invading the next 6 countries is following the PNAC Plan."

I'll repeat my question from the reply above-- have you read the "PNAC Plan?" Again, the neo-con objective is global dominance and naked colonial aggression, and while they doubtless salivate over "invading the next 6 countries", that probably isn't necessary for achieving their objectives in Iraq (unless the Arab League unites and attacks, of course). A puppet gonvernment, strong diplomatic ties (ala with Iran under Shah Pavlavi), a ME intel hub, and a staging ground for potential military sorties in the region will do nicely, I think. This is what Kerry must repudiate if the PNAC is to fail in Iraq.

[Dems Will Win]

6. It is very doubtful what you surmise about Kerry

He will not keep a large force there and certainly not the 3000 people we have in the embassy there, no doubt a lot of them CIA. He might put in more Special Ops.

But Kerry has spoken out quite clearly about the Bushies reckless foreign policy--and given his Vietnam experience he will most likely withdraw within 1 to 2 years or less, especially after the Iraqi government asks us to leave.

The PNAC Plan on their Web site is not complete really as it only calls for what you quoted and does not mention the next 6 countries, which of course was secret until Wes spilled the beans.

So if Kerry does NOT keep the Intel bases or staging bases there NOR maintain control of the OIL or NOT invade the next country, would you agree that KERRY '04 = PNAC OUT THE DOOR?

[BevHarris]

5. Okay now there's an answer I was looking for.

Thank you for posting this.