Bush-haters projects their anti-war opinions on John Kerry, forgetting that the Senator voted for the war in Iraq. Kerry even noted in early August that knowing what he knows now, he would have still voted to authorize the war.

Kerry, ever the candidate of shades of gray, notes that he would have conducted the war differently than George W. Bush. Specifically, he states he would have taken a more multilateral approach. Last week, for instance, Kerry proclaimed: "the Bush administration would have you believe that when it comes to our allies, it won't make a difference who is president. They say the Europeans won't help us, no matter what. But I have news for President Bush: just because you can't do something, doesn't mean it can't be done."

In a blow to this notion, high government officials in France and Germany told the Financial Times this week that even if Kerry wins in November, they will not send troops to Iraq. So much for multilateralism.

Unfortunately, John Q. Voter who should be aware of this kind of blustering and the alternate reality, will not know anything more than just what he hears in the soundbite.

Hopefully, John Q. will not be voting.

Kerry voted against the first Gulf War in 1991. And he has recently spoken against the draft. That makes him more anti-war than Bush.

With two younger brothers, both of draft age, I'm seriously considering voting for Kerry.

For some reason I find the notion that the draft could return under Bush completely impossible. Maybe it is wishful thinking on my part as I also seriously doubt that we will invade Iran even in a second Bush term. I know the neocons want a draft and war on Iran but there would have to be total revolt in the streets against a draft wouldn't there? And not just by student radicals.

Remember, it was Charlie Rangle (sp?) a radical way left democratic rep. from N.Y. who has been floating this idea of re-instating the draft.

Somehow, it has been mis-communicated as an idea from those bad old Republicans.

Won't happen.

Your best chance for a draft is to vote for Bush.

Neocons want a draft. They want to aggressively push America's military superiority. Yes Hussian was a bad man and we are better off without him but the current Iraq war could have been avoided. We have more important fish to fry.
The American people would never have supported a war without the false claim of WMDs.
Watch the neocons cook up another pretense for the next target. Bush = Draft

Cheesah beecha wonky Chewbacca

Cha too ma laya conky, ya neema loka nyan.

Those weren't false claims ButtMunch. Bush acted based on the best information that was available which communicated that there were WMD's and EVERYBODY in Goverment was convinced that it was true.

They believed nothing of the kind.
Bush and his top advisers ignored many of the caveats and qualifiers included in the classified report on Saddam Hussein's weapons." Specifically, the President made unequivocal statements that Iraq "has got chemical weapons" two months after the DIA concluded that there was "no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons." He said, "Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production" three months after the White House received an intelligence report that clearly indicated Department of Energy experts concluded the tubes were not intended to produce uranium enrichment centrifuges. He said, "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," three months after "the CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about" the claim. CIA officers "said President Bush ignored warnings" that his WMD case was weak. The Bush State Department's top intelligence official, "said suspicions were presented as fact, and contrary arguments ignored." "Senior diplomatic, intelligence and military officials have charged that Bush and his top aides made assertions about Iraq's banned weapons programs and alleged links to al-Qaeda that weren't supported by credible intelligence, and that they ignored intelligence that didn't support their policies."
"U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix said his teams have not uncovered any WMD."
"Senators were outraged to find that intelligence info given to them omitted the qualifications and countervailing evidence that had characterized the classified version and played up the claims that strengthened the administration's case for war."
Thanks for keeping the discussion at a high level Buttmunch

The ongoing intelligence portfolio on Iraq that was built since Clinton's days in office plus Iraq's refusal to allow weapons inspectors access convinced many people including Clinton, Kerry, Fat Ted and, more recently, Little Johnny Edwards and scores of others, that there were grounds to invade Iraq to safeguard the U.S.

This was not some "Right Wing Conspiracy" foisted by Bush and his cabinet launch a military attack for reasons of revenge, business or collusion with any other foreign government.

Great to know now what we didn't know then. Eh? Makes understanding what's happened a lot easier.

This really is a bipartisan mistake. Whatever the case, it's time to get out.

No not a bipartisan mistake - a George Bush mistake. Clinton or the Democrats didn't take us into Iraq, They didn't commit 200,000 troops to free people who hate us and are trying to kill us. Clinton didn't commit 89 billion in 2004, Funds that could be used to defend the US. This is a Bush mistake - Pure and simple.
To re elect this guy despite this among other issues will lead America to ruin.

You're right, it was a Bush mistake. But, it was a mistake by a leader who believed there was a clear and present danger to the United States.

A leader who had the sack to do what he thought was right to protect us. A reactionary move based on our loss of 3,000 U.S. citizens. Remember that?

I'm not in love with this guy, but I'd rather have someone like him in my corner than a politician like Clinton who would never put anything on the line unless the polls said to. Or this other politician Kerry who would be King and is incapable of making any decision at all.

You guys kill me. You parrot back quotes and internet info as proof that you're right without even considering the consequences and reality of what not making a decision like that might have meant.

It's all clear as crystal now and easy to sit there in your jammies and pontificate after the fact.

Sgt. Hulka: Why did you join the Army son?
The Cruiser: I thought I'd join up before I got drafted.
Sgt. Hulka: There isnt a draft anymore!
The Cruiser: There was one?

They should'a called him "The Dork!"

Why would we invade Iran? Is it because with Iraq having it's own "government" now that Halliburton needs another no-bid contract with security provided with U.S. soldiers?

No, I don't think that Bush started this war for oil. In my guts (or lack thereof) I think it was personal, due to Saddams plot to assassinate 41. He didn't make the false evidence, or ask for it. But others near him knew his heart and produced the crappy intellignece knowing that Bush was hungering to kick Saddam's rear end.

Like many, I was in favor of the ouster of Saddam, but rather through covert means. Of course, at the time I was being spoon-fed information from a man I thought I could trust-Colin Powell.

Between politicians and the media, I am running out of people to trust for information. At least with C-Span I get less filtering. Sorry, Fox News has its own spin, and spin=lies to me. There is an old saying, (paraphrased here) "Don't (urinate) down my neck and tell me it's raining."

You spin me right round baby right round....

So what that he believed he was right? Just means he was an idiot.

"It is a reasonable presumption that Mr. Kristol and certain of his colleagues would prefer to install in the White House some person who might be astutely manipulated by Neoconservative ideologues." - Russel Kirk, 1993

And there you have it.

Great quote by Kirk, too bad he is no longer with us as he would be a great critic of conservatism as it exists today.

Kerry is again demonstrating, the way he did after his service in Viet Nam, that he is a divisively dangerous individual when it comes to supporting America and her allies.

His ‘sock puppet’ comment when referring to Iraq’s Prime Minister is another example of why this guy should not be our President.

France and Germany are so jealous of our military might and position that it's laughable. They can't stand the fact that the world doesn't revolve around them anymore.

This really is a bipartisan mistake.
Posted by asdf at September 28, 2004 12:38 PM

No not a bipartisan mistake - a George Bush mistake.
Posted by Robert at September 28, 2004 12:47 PM

You're right, it was a Bush mistake.
Posted by asdf at September 28, 2004 01:16 PM

ASDF. If your anything, at least your not consistent. Is this your pen name Kerry, I mean Buttmunch?