Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> Marvin Gandall wrote:
>
> >If that is your position, you would be saying, against all evidence and
> >logic, that there was a bipartisan consensus for the invasion of Iraq,
> >and all the past year's noise and talk of a split in the US ruling class
> >over the war was just s
Marvin Gandall wrote:
If that is your position, you would be saying, against all evidence and
logic, that there was a bipartisan consensus for the invasion of Iraq,
and all the past year's noise and talk of a split in the US ruling class
over the war was just so much malarkey.
You don't understand
Marvin Gandall wrote:
But, anyway, that's not the issue. What's important is less what he did
as a opportunist politician running for President, than what he would
have done as the incumbent President. You seem to be suggesting that his
dissembling means he might have, like Bush, invaded Iraq. Agai
Louis Proyect wrote: "This is an interesting question. Kerry insists
that he voted for the war because he was misled. He based his vote on
the "documentation" furnished by the CIA. If he has stated somewhere
that he would have voted differently if he knew back then what he knows
now (as even Colin
Marvin Gandall wrote:
The differences – though tactical – are not inconsequential; Kerry, for
opportunistic electoral reasons and despite his misgivings, voted to
give Bush the authority to invade Iraq (as he earlier voted for Reagan’s
invasion of Grenada), but it is almost certainly true, as he ma
