Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Kerry Should Emphasize That We Are Fighting War On "Stateless" Terrorism

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
DrFunkenstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 12:49 PM
Original message
Kerry Should Emphasize That We Are Fighting War On "Stateless" Terrorism
When the phrase "war on terror" is used, it makes it seem like it will follow the rules of conventional warfare, kind of like the invasion of Afghanistan.

But beyond Afghanistan, there really aren't a whole lot of nations actively harboring terrorists.

Stateless terrorism is an entirely different form of "war" that relies almost entirely on international cooperation and intelligence gathering.

If the emphasis is on "war" it plays into Bush's militaristic image. But if the emphasis is on "stateless," it makes the issue seem much more complex and beyond Bush's well-documented stupidity.

It's a subtle difference in message, but I think this should be repeated ad nauseaum by the Kerry people.

We should highlight that Bush both no credibility and no clue.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
coloradodem2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. I've heard him say...
...that the war on terror is mostly intelligence gathering with a few major engagements so I can see him driving at what you are saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. Kerry can't do that. His PNAC/PPI bosses won't let him.
They need the pretext of the "war on terror" to carry out their agenda of overthrowing every government in the Middle East as a favor to Likud, and then moving on to Korea,Russia and China.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrFunkenstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Polite Pat On The Head
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. You know what you can do with the patronizing attitude.
If Kerry manages to somehow beat Junior, the imperialism will continue. They'll just alter the rhetoric slightly. Reality will be the same. All about appeasing Likud/Israel and exploiting the natural resources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. Maybe he could just call it the war on anti-American sentiment

Since nothing that Washington considers terrorism is a result of support for US policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Who's saying that?
Which candidate and/or party is saying that, and if none of them are, then who/what are you supporting and why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. It is a fact. Name me one act of terrorism that was done because the

perpetrators support US policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. So you've injected your off-topic snipes into another productive thread.
Edited on Sun Mar-07-04 01:08 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
Why? What are you trying to achieve here? Let's say we accept all of your ridiculous ideas completely -- what's next? What do you suggest should be done? If you were to apply your talents towards trying to make the world a better place, now that you have so thoroughly, exhaustively and repeatedly discovered its flaws -- what would you do?

Can you imagine a positive and good thing that could happen in the world? What? Once we have a positive goal, would can begin to imagine steps towards achieving it. So what are your goals?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. The topic of this thread is how Kerry should present the war on terror

If you want to discuss your opinions of other posters, why not start a thread for that purpose?

How do you think Kerry can most effectively present the war on terror?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I asking you how you think we should proceed
Edited on Sun Mar-07-04 02:00 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
and how we can use the political process to work towards those goals?


I have no opinion about your views on anything, because after asking hundreds of times, I haven't received a response yet. But I'll keep asking.

As far as Kerry's anti-terrorism plans, I think he is off to a good start in his approach, but for the sake of argument, I'm willing to accept your premise that Kerry is just Bush with a different face, and I'd like to know what conclusion you think that premise leads to. If your premise is correct, what should we do? Besides working to defeat Kerry?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donating Member ( posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. working to support this maybe?
maybe this should be its own thread...
Personally, I thnk Kerry will be an improvement on Bush.
Now that I've gotten that out of the way!

I think some of the problem is our fascination with single leaders.
So my idea is to get Congress to grow a spine. That's where the real action can be. If Congress had had a spine, Bush wouldn't be causing all the damage he has been.
& conversely, no matter how good Kerry is potentially, if Congress doesn't back him, it won't do much good.
 Add to my Journal Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. That's why we need to win the Senate back
politics is a tough game, you have be active on every front at all times. But the good news is that sentiment is definately swinging in the direction of the Dems. The late-night hosts are mocking Bush more often than not.

I think we have good chances, the base is so animated, and so many people who are simply anti-Bush will be joining us, if the campaigning is done right, Kerry could have real coattails.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. A few ideas
Call for US to stop providing arms to human-rights violators, to sign the anti-land mine treaty, get on board with the kyoto treaty, pay our UN dues (at least last I remember we wern't paying them, maybe we have by now), move up from the around the lowest of the industrial nations on the % of GNP providing foreign aide, lift the embargo on Cuba, stop trying to depose leaders whose economic policies we don't like...those are off the top of my head, so I present them without the exhaustive citations required here...anyone curious could perhaps just put US/International Treaties into a search engine, or CIA/ Central/South America or or or...

Kerry is not Bush, but he has given little indication thus far of intending to change the policies that make the US so loathed around the globe. Or do people here think that loathing is a new thing since the ascension of the fascists currently in power? It's not, though they have exponentially increased its' level.

Personally, I remain hopeful that Kerry's Vietnam experience will make him reluctant to fight and kill villagers around the world in pursuit of profit for US corporations. Hope springs eternal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Kerry is in favor of at least some of the specific things
Edited on Sun Mar-07-04 03:17 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
you've listed. Again off the top of my head didn't he advocate for the land mine treaty? He criticized pulling out of Kyoto and wants to renegotiate an even more global approach - including the developing world - that would also have a better chance of being ratified. Not paying UN dues? Isn't that a thing the radical right has been pushing?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Yes
Edited on Sun Mar-07-04 03:27 PM by kenzee13
he is not Bush, as I said. Nor do I realistically expect him to step too far from the Corporate line as a candidate. And I am hopefull, as I say, for a less Imperialist approach to the globe under a President Kerry. It will remain to be seen if that is a fool's hope, but since there is no hope at all from the current gangsters I support Kerry. However, Kerry's Drake speech cited in another thread certainly seems to support the validity of US "right" to invade as we please and to define "threat" in any vague terms we choose...which usually boils down to economic advantage. But, perhaps that is "campaign speak." (Being generous and hopefull again.)

As for UN, I read a while back that we hadn't paid our dues for years...I think Clinton paid some of them? But not the full owed amount? I'd have to go searching to find out, was a while ago.
(edit for typo)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Kerry's World: Father Knows Best
By the time John Kerry's father, Richard, published his only book, The Star-Spangled Mirror, in 1990, he should have been a mellow man. Nearly 30 years had passed since his retirement from the Foreign Service, where he'd filled mid-level posts in Washington, Berlin, and Oslo. His central issue, the cold war, had followed him into retirement with the crumbling of the Berlin Wall and rise of glasnost in Russia. When the 75-year-old Kerry wasn't working on his book, he could be found building model ships and sailing off Cape Cod. If he had any reasons for professional bitterness, they should have long since faded. None of these facts, however, becalmed him. His book has a young man's brash, polemical tone. The Star-Spangled Mirror is a critique of moralism in America's foreign policy -- and, more than that, it is a critique of America's national character.

"Americans," he writes, "are inclined to see the world and foreign affairs in black and white." They celebrate their own form of government and denigrate all others, making them guilty of what he calls "ethnocentric accommodation -- everyone ought to be like us." As a result, America has committed the "fatal error" of "propagating democracy" and fallen prey to "the siren's song of promoting human rights," falsely assuming that our values and institutions are a good fit in the Third World. And, just as Americans exaggerate their own goodness, they exaggerate their enemies' badness. The Soviet Union wasn't nearly as imperialistic as American politicians warned, Kerry argues. "Seeing the Soviet Union as the aggressor in every instance, and the U.S. as only reacting defensively, relieves an American observer from the need to see any parallel between our use of military power in distant parts of the world, and the Soviet use of military power outside the Soviet Union," he writes. He further claims that "Third world Marxist movements were autonomous national movements" -- outside Moscow's orbit. The book culminates in a plea for a hardheaded, realist foreign policy that removes any pretense of U.S. moral superiority.

<snip>

From the start, Richard Kerry turned his oldest son into his foreign policy protégé. As Newsweek's Evan Thomas has written, "The Kerry dinner table was a nightly foreign-policy seminar. While other boys were eating TV dinners in front of the tube, (John) Kerry was discussing George Kennan's doctrine of containment." His father introduced the adolescent boy to such luminaries as Monnet and West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer. Later, when he was at Yale, John Kerry traded letters with Clementine Churchill, Winston's wife. As early as prep school, John Kerry showed signs that he shared his father's suspicions about America's cold war foreign policy. In a debate at St. Paul's in the late '50s, he argued that the United States should establish relations with Red China. During his junior year at Yale, he won a speech prize for an oration warning, "It is the specter of Western Imperialism that causes more fear among Africans and Asians than communism, and thus it is self-defeating." And, when he was tapped to deliver a graduation speech in 1966, he used the occasion to condemn U.S. involvement in Vietnam, intoning, "What was an excess of isolationism has become an excess of interventionism."

<snip>

There are differences, to be sure, between Richard and John Kerry. Over the course of his political career, John Kerry has occasionally endorsed the use of force, as in the cases of Panama and Kosovo, and he has always found a rhetorical place for morality in his foreign policy pronouncements. But, more often than not, even as John Kerry stumps for president, the similarities shine through. Last month, for example, Kerry charged that the administration's "high-handed treatment of our European allies, on everything from Iraq to the Kyoto climate-change treaty, has strained relations nearly to the breaking point." It should be no surprise to hear John Kerry worry about European allies and to strike such liberal internationalist notes. These ideas aren't just deeply felt; they're in his blood.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/02/opinion/main603542.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Don't bother
Many have tried and failed to find the answer to this particular DU riddle.

 
 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-07-04 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
18. Most terrorists arrested
That's what this Administration has done with terrorists, to my knowledge. Arrested them. We should get together a list of these terrorists all around the world who are in jail and going to be tried. That's what we do with terrorists.

The reason Kerry will be better on terrorism is because he supports the kind of terrorism and money laundering legislation that the Bushies fight against in order to please their special interests. He will pressure Saudi Arabia. He will put the focus where it belongs. He'll reduce our own weapons proliferation so other countries will be more likely to work with us. He'll also address the underlying causes of anti-Americanism and terrorism; our economic policies and the economic conditions of other countries.

We really do have to make this sound like the tough might and right though, we haven't gotten there yet. People have to stop thinking we can just muscle our way through this, like a regular war. It's not going to happen.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC