Reply #122: I can only point you to Kerry's floor speech

[paulk]

You may choose to characterize Kerry as a "Bush war appeaser". You, and others, have consistently characterized Kerry's IWR vote as support and even responsibility for Bush's invasion of Iraq. I'm sure that such actions on your part fit an agenda, and we are all welcome to whatever partisan belief systems we choose to push. All political commentators (and politicians) are subject to one test, however.

Credibility.

If you, or any member of this forum can read this excerpt from Kerry's IWR speech and still conclude that his "yes" vote was a vote in support of Bush's doctrine of preemption, or even a vote in favor of the Iraq invasion as Bush carried it out, then it is your credibility and not John Kerry's that is at stake.


Sen. John Kerry:

"And in voting to grant the President the authority to use force, I am not giving him carte blanche to run roughshod over every country that poses - or may pose - a potential threat to the United States. Every nation has the right to act preemptively if it faces an imminent and grave threat. But the threat we face, today, with Iraq fails the test. Yes, it is grave because of the deadliness of Saddam Hussein's arsenal and the very high probability that he will use these weapons one day if he is not disarmed. But it is not imminent. None of our intelligence reports suggest that Saddam Hussein is about to launch any kind of attack against us or countries in the region. The argument for going to war against Iraq is rooted in enforcement of the international community's demand that Iraq disarm. It is not rooted in the doctrine of preemption. Nor is the grant of authority in this resolution an acknowledgment that Congress accepts or agrees with the President's new strategic doctrine of preemption. Just the opposite. This resolution clearly limits the authority given to the President to use force in Iraq, and only Iraq, and for the specific purpose of defending the United States against the threat posed by Iraq "and" enforcing relevant Security Council resolutions. The definition of purpose circumscribes the authority given to the President to the use of force to disarm Iraq because only Iraq's weapons of mass destruction meet the two criteria laid out in this resolution."