John Kerry the Braggart: Unfit For Command, Part 4

[Drake Tungsten]

I would've voted Libertarian, but they went and nominated a criminal...

[Dinner]

I'm going to vote for Kerry but since I live in California and Kerry's victory there is a for gone conclusion there isn't really much point in me voting. I guess I will just feel better if I vote.

[Berzerker]

I would've voted Libertarian, but they went and nominated a criminal...

What was the crime? I don't keep up much on LP politics these days.

[Drake Tungsten]

Badnarik hasn't paid his income taxes in years, apparently.

[Dinner]

How libertarian of him.

[Drake Tungsten]

I never said the crime was out of character...

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Are you suggesting, Spiffor, that there are evil people in this world? I don't think that concept is pollitically correct. What we need is for John Kerry to talk to these misguided people and show them the path of sensitivity and tolerance (after consulting France of course).

Die, meme, die!

August 13, 2004 PERMALINK
The Bush-Cheney Doctrine Of Sensitive War
(posted Aug. 12 11:45 PM ET)

Yesterday, Dick Cheney tried to wimpify John Kerry:

Senator Kerry has also said that if he were in charge he would fight a "more sensitive" war on terror.

America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being sensitive.

Romance novelist Lynne Cheney also joined in the mudslinging:

I just kind of shook my head when I heard that. With all due respect to the Senator, it just sounded so foolish.

I can't imagine that al Qaeda is going to be impressed by sensitivity...

...This is kind of left-wing foolishness that certainly isn't appropriate for someone who would seek to be Commander-in-Chief.

It goes without saying that the Cheneys were bastardizing Kerry's statement from last week:

I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to American values in history…

…I set out a path to win the peace in Iraq and to get the terrorists, wherever they may be, before they get us.

ABC's The Note, surely speaking for the entire snarky political press corps called Kerry's statement:

…the silliest thing John Kerry has said about national security since his "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it" classic.

No doubt that gave the green light for the rest of the press corps to paint Kerry the loser in this skirmish.

But if Kerry's a silly, left-wing fool, then so is Def. Sec. Don Rumsfeld, Dep. Def. Sec. Paul Wolfowitz, Gen. Richard Myers and former Asst. Def. Sec. Victoria Clarke.

We'll let the following post-9/11 quotes speak for themselves (emphasis added in all).

November 4, 2001
Secretary Rumsfeld Media Availability with Pakistani Foreign Minister

Q: President Musharraf has repeatedly talked about an excess of hope for suspension of military operations, if they are not over, in the month of Ramadhan.

Was this issue discussed today and what are your views on this?

RUMSFELD: I'm certainly aware of the views of the president of Pakistan and indeed the views of any number of countries across the globe.

It is an important question and certainly an issue that all of us are sensitive to.

The reality is that the threats of additional terrorist acts are there.

They are credible, they are real, and they offer the prospects of still thousands of more people being killed.

Our task is to certainly be sensitive to the views in the region, but also to see that we aggressively deal with the terrorist networks that exist.

Jan. 4, 2002
Victoria Clarke News Briefing at Foreign Press Center in Washington, DC

THOMAS GORGUISSIAN, AL-WAFD, EGYPT: ...[Are] you doing any kind of estimate or guessing how the rest of the world is looking to this war?...

CLARKE: …are we listening to what is going on around the world? Absolutely. Absolutely.

We could not do this alone, so we are constantly working with, consulting with, talking with literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people around the world from over a hundred countries on how the best way to prosecute this war.

I think one of the reasons for the success thus far has been that kind of extraordinary sensitivity.

And to say in a very non-patronizing way, we appreciate whatever you can do to contribute to this effort.

And far be it for us to tell you that it's all or nothing, or you have to let us completely run the show and you have to let us say whatever we want to say about your country's contributions.

I think it's been an extraordinarily sensitive appreciation that different countries have different concerns and needs -- appreciate and value that they share with us this desire to root out terrorism and work with them in a very flexible fashion.

So we are extraordinarily sensitive to that, and I think that's what's contributed to the success thus far.

October 31, 2001
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Interview with Al Jazeera

Q: …you consider it also a political decision that the consequences of continuing [military operations] through Ramadan with your troops in Pakistan, where people would be outraged or other places in the Muslim and Arab world.

Of course, you know that President Mubarak and others called for this kind of a truce.

MYERS: Right. And I would just say that we are, I think, very culturally sensitive.

We go to the leaders at the political level and at the military level, and ask for their advice.

So actions we will take I think will be consistent with that advice.

But we're not unaware and we're not insensitive. These are important issues.

November 19, 2003
Stakeout on Capitol Hill After U.S. Senate Briefing

Q: …can you address this question about the military utility and the risks that are inherent in going after targets, the more intensified bombing, the risk increases of collateral damage despite all the care that goes into that.

MYERS: ...The commanders on the ground are responsible for the tactics.

They are very sensitive to the balance between appropriate military action and not trying to turn the average Iraqi against the coalition.

So they work this very hard.

They have taken great steps to minimize collateral damage and I think they’ve done a superb job as I understand it.

Nov. 9, 2001
Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with Radio Networks

Q: ...can I pick up on the Ramadan issue? We know that you and your colleagues have said there's no question of a pause in the terrorist campaign and I understand that.

We understand you can't say what you're going to do in advance.

But are you nevertheless open to some sort of gesture? We noticed for example that you did not bomb on the first Friday of the campaign.

Is it still possible, bearing in mind enormous sensitivity in the Muslim world, that something might be possible, can you give us a hint that you might be --

WOLFOWITZ: I think we've made it clear we're going to be sensitive to the fact that Ramadan is the holiest month on the Muslim calendar and we will have that in mind.

We're not going to write a blueprint for the Taliban or al Qaeda or the people that we're after to say oh, now you not only know that mosques are safe but these other sanctuaries are sanctuaries you can operate in.

But we will be sensitive.

(UPDATE 8/13 7:45 AM ET -- Readers are noting the omission of two key Dubya "sensitive" quotes, one from last week -- "in terms of the balance between running down intelligence and bringing people to justice obviously is -- we need to be very sensitive on that" and one from 3/01 -- "we must be sensitive about expressing our power and influence".)

[Agathon]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I call bull****.

No, you write bull****.

[Lincoln]

I guess mudslinging is better than slinging your medals over a wall in preparation for being commander in chief someday. I wonder why Kerry doesn't talk about that much anymore?

[Ned]

John Kerry knows sensitive wars first hand. You can count on him. Why, when he burned that innocent Vietnamese village down using his lighter, and personally slaughtered all the domestic animals and pets, John Kerry showed extreme levels of sensitivity by allowing the old men and women to first flee for their lives.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Agathon


No, you write bull****.

That allows me to know it when I see it unless of course you'd actually like to back that turd of a post you made earlier up. I think I'd very much like to see that.

[chequita guevara]

(O)(O)

[MrFun]

I saw the anti-Kerry ad made by other swift boat veterans.


I still cannot phathom how they can villify a war veteran as a traitor for being brave enough to step forth, and tell the truth about how some American soldiers behaved towards the Vietnamese during the war.

Since when is being truthful dishonorable?

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Ned
John Kerry knows sensitive wars first hand. You can count on him. Why, when he burned that innocent Vietnamese villiage down using his lighter, and personally slaughtered all the domestic animals and pets, John Kerry showed extreme levels of sensitivity by allowing the old men and women to first flee for their lives.

What a heart! But I think he decided not to burn it before he decided to burn it. When circumstances change a good leader changes with them...

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The point being, whether you choose to beleive the allegations regarding his performance in Vietnam or not, the decision to come forth and describe thaction of some soliders was not how he framed his arguements. He has been on record indicting millions of soldiers (i.e the vast majority as a consequence) as monsters comitting atrocities and war crimes. This IMO is not truthful. Also hence the reason the SBV are so adamant in their pursuit of Kerry, and again IMO would have happened regardless of the republican opponent.