On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 09:05:55AM -0400, John D. Giorgis wrote: > It appears that Kerry believes in pre-emptive strikes in Iraq without > France only in the case of Democratic Presidents, not Republican > Presidents.
Perhaps he believes it is better to take no action rather than to take action and screw up the follow-through due to stupidity and/or poor strategic planning, as happened with both Bush I and (especially) Bush II. Or maybe I am just injecting my own opinion. I certainly thought (and think) taking action in Iraq to remove Hussein and help build a democracy was (and is) a good thing. The problem is when the president and his cabinet are so horribly inept that the result is a much reduced benefit at a much higher cost than many of the original supporters expected and were led to believe. Knowing now what I didn't then about the (in)competency of the Bush II administration, I would not have supported the recent Iraq war. Knowing what I do about Clinton (based largely on the results from Kosovo), I WOULD have supported the recent Iraq war if Clinton or a similarly competent administration were in charge. In short, JDG's statement quoted above is perfectly reasonable, if you substitute competent/incompetent for Democratic/Republican. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
