Does anybody honestly think Kerry is just playing at the center?

[Cascadian]

I truly hope so because if he thinks he is going to get any real international support in Iraq he is deeply fooled. I am honestly bothered that Kerry's policy is offering no troop withdrawal. My hope is that Kerry's message of "staying the course" in Iraq is just playing the center to get votes. Should he get elected, he can do a 180 and get our young men and women out.

The "we broke it so we must fix" notion is a lame excuse. I think there are other ways to fix the damage done than to send more soldiers in harm's way.

If Kerry does not change course, his past is going to haunt him in a big way.


John

[Dropkick]

1. I honestly believe...

...that we bear the burden of at least attempting to fix our screw-up in Iraq. Simply pulling out would be disastrous, an abdication of our resposibilities there. But I think we definitely need to make it an international effort, and try to repair some of the damage to our international credibility by taking a role of support, rather than leadership, in rebuilding Iraq.

[lastknowngood]

3. Trying to fix a newcular reactor once the magnetic bottle has

broken is neither smart nor productive. It's best just to get the hell out and limit the damage.

[sendero]

9. And I honestly believe...

... that there is absolutely NOTHING our military can do at this point forward to help Iraq.

We'll just have to wait and see.

[whosinpower]

2. It is hurting him

IMHO.

One of the fundamental flaws of the Iraq war is that it is a bid to remake the entire middle east. A rosy goal perhaps, but a flawed one - and I cannot for the life of me, understand why no politician will state the obvious.

"We broke Iraq". That much is abundantly clear. BUT, what is fueling the insurgency is our clumsy haphazard attempts at colonialism. It cannot work. It never worked in the past with any other imperial power. There is no reason to believe it will work now just because it is the good ole' US of A at the reins of power.

But, I am just one person who is left waiting to hear a clear foreign policy without bullying tactics, without pre-emptive doctrines. I am still waiting for a foreign policy that acknowledges some of the forces at play that reduce people to such a point that terrorism becomes the final option, the only option.

[sandnsea]

4. Kerry supports security in Iraq

He is not for "staying the course" and repeating that for your own political purposes is as deceitful and underhanded as when the Bushies do it.

He has acknowledged on several occasions that stability would be his goal and a functioning government that can begin to rebuild Iraq. Not necessarily a complete American-style democracy. Once that and an Iraqi security force are in place, troops would be withdrawn. He is not for staying the course on some delusion that democracy in Iraq would spread across the region like wildflowers in May.

A change in course and true cooperation with the international community will change the perception of the US presence. That is the most important thing. Once that is done, it is entirely possible that Iraq will turn the corner which will encourage other countries to come in and help.

[Cascadian]

6. It is too little, too late.

You could have said international cooperation would work a year ago but let's just admit that it is not going to get any better. Cut our loses and bring our people home. This will not mean we abandon Iraq, but it will put an end to the daily reports of American soldiers getting killed. Kerry wants to bring more troops to Iraq. How is that fixing the problem? As for the international community, I cannot see how you are going to get countries to support this mess after all what has happened. If you want to fix Iraq, let's just start using money to fund the reconstruction. Let Iraqis decide if they want foreign intervention or not.

John

[sandnsea]

11. That's actually not what he said

He has said recently that it may be too late to have a successful outcome in Iraq. He acknowledges that. What he has said regarding more troops is for the present situation, that considering Bush isn't going to pull our troops out, if the Generals say they need more troops, we ought to send them. That is the reality today. He can't change that. When he spoke of more troops in the past, he didn't support more troops in Iraq, rather more troops in general so that the troops in Iraq wouldn't have their tours extended. So that when a troop's tour is up, he could come home because there would be a troop to replace him. That's what he said.

As to just pulling out of Iraq altogther, I just don't see the wisdom in that if there is any possible way of changing course. Kerry has laid out a plan to change course, not stay the course. He may be able to speak to the Iraqi people, change the US media propaganda machine in Iraq, put reconstruction in the hands of the Iraqis and NGO's, give the Iraqi people and UN a real voice in governance. I have no doubt he could have done it a year ago, maybe January 2005 won't be too late. For the sake of not having Iraq become a terrorist state like Afghanistan, it's worth trying. He is hopeful it won't be too late in January 2005, while acknowledging that it may be.

I think that is a perfectly rational stance to take.

[Dropkick]

16. Well said! nt

[Sparkly]

14. Which Iraqis get to decide?

The ones with the best explosives? We've allowed people from outside Iraq to move in there, we've overthrown a government that was at least stable, and unless there is security on the streets, the most vulnerable Iraqis will not have a say in what their government becomes, nor will they be protected in the process.

The "Iraqi people" is a broad umbrella. "Let the Iraqi people decide" is easy to say, but I think it means ensuring that they get the chance to do so -- as opposed to a particular group taking rule like the Taliban. Would you agree that we owe them an effective Iraqi army, at least?

As for how the international help, it's in everybody's interest to prevent a failed government there, and a terrorist domination. That could lead to many more countries getting involved, and many more people dying in the long run.

There IS no victory for us. We'd ALL like the troops to come home asap, and that includes John Kerry.

[Monte Carlo]

5. You say there are other ways to fix the damage...

Such as?

[Cascadian]

8. Funding to help fix their economy and infrastructure.

What is sending more troops going to solve? We can send them money, instruments, and resources to help them going. This can be an international effort as well. I think Iraqis are smart enough to decide if they want troops there or not.


John

[JohnKleeb]

7. thats what Jim McDermott thinks

I read that somewhere.

[Imperialism Inc.]

10. I'm not so sure that we won't get international support with

a new President. Obviously, that would be very difficult to prove, however.

[union_maid]

13. That's the real hard part

Kerry hinted as much with his statement about foreign leaders wanting him to beat Bush, but there's no way he can guarantee it. The UN and individual countries who hate the course we're on would be wise to help Kerry be as successful as possible. Bush is very much hated and a lot of countries would welcome a more rational US. We're scaring the shit out of everyone now.

[monkeymind]

12. Kerry doesn't give a shit about issues

his only concern is to win elections, and he even treats that like it is owed to him.

[Deja Q]

15. That's the perogative of ANY politician.

What's left to say?

Welcome to DU, BTW! :party: :bounce: