mikegarrison

Here's part of an exchange from another forum. I wanted to repost it here because of some of the things I have read in the other threads. These are my words, except for the first paragraph:


> That is not to say that they like the democrats, but that they will take
> such an outcome as retreat by the American people, and will consequently
> be greatly encouraged to intensify their assault.

The Japanese had similar delusions in the early 1940s.

No US president would have brushed off the attacks on
9/11/01. In fact, Bush handled the original invasion of
Afghanistan about as well as could be expected. It's not
certain Gore would have done as well, but it's pretty
unlikely he would have done much better. It's also pretty
unlikely that he would have had a significantly different
response. (Consider that Clinton used cruise missles to
attack Afghanistan after the embassy bombings -- the use of
military force is always an option for any US president.
Even liberal Democrats. Like FDR, for instance.)

It is true that some societies just don't understand
democratic countries. They think that our disagreements and
dissent are weaknesses, when in fact they are the source of
our strength. But that is their error, not ours.

The election of Kerry or re-election of Bush will have no
effect on our country's resolve against terrorism or Bin
Laudin.

Where it probably will have an effect is on the outcome of
the Iraq war. I still believe this was a grave error, and
has made our country much less safe, not more safe.
Furthermore, I don't see any indication that Bush has any
plan in place to resolve the situation in Iraq, which means
that it is unlikely Kerry can do worse.

If the enemies of the US (and generally, the West) believe
that the election of Kerry is a victory for them, they will
learn otherwise.

After all, the last time something like this happened was
when Iran won a victory over the Great Satan by helping to
overthrow Jimmy Carter. You could just as easily argue that
the election of Reagan signified "a retreat by the American
people".

SilverKnight

A new poll out has 67% saying Bush will fight a stronger war then Kerry would.

ralper

The only thing that the poll proves is that Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney have succeeded in convincing the American public that they will take a stronger stand against terrorism. Other than that, it says nothing. I would expect that to be the result as the current administration has focused the public's attention on terrorism. Many, myself included, happen to think it is a diversion that has worked in favor of the current administration. By keeping terrorism in the forefront, Mr. Bush has been able to divert the public's attention from his failings in other areas.

I happen to agree with mikegarrison, it is unlikely that Mr. Kerry will do any worse than Mr. Bush. I think it is probable that he will do better.

SilverKnight

I have to disgree with Ralper and the propaganda agument People are smarter than that and can see above it.
Kerry going to be more defensive and try to do a fotress America while Bush goes out and fights the enemies.

Ask yourself this Q. Who does AL Qaueda and Osama want as Pres?? Of course John kerry. Bush as Pres is very agrresive and I like that.

Also the majority of people also thought it was unsafe to change Presidents in this time of war. Again high 60s.

anarky

I DO think that Kerry would do worse.

ralper

Fair enough, we agree to disagree. We'll find out soon enough.

SilverKnight

yes after Bush is reelected for his second term!! 4 more years!!!!

ralper

Not exactly what I had in mind. We'll see.

dean

Interesting, I haven't heard a word concerning bin Laden's or Al Qaeda's endorsement of Kerry other than from the Republican front. I have to say that I'm more than a little puzzled as to how this came to be established as a "fact" as it is presented to be.
Personally, I find the suggestion highly offensive, and I'm not even a Democrat.

Dean

SilverKnight

I never said it was them, its my opinion Easily, John Kerry is a flip flop who didn't even vote yes for the First Iraq war when we had a huge colation, UN approval, allies, an invasion of another country and he voted no!!!

Open your eyes, he speaks but does not do what he preaches.