Kerry statement question

[NeoV]

Is it really beyond the comprehension of the Bush/Cheaney team to think that there might be foreign leaders who would rather see Kerry as the US president than the current administration? Is it really that implausible to them?

Given the administrations strong-arm and preferential tactics, do they really expect the leaders of other countries, or Kerry himself, to provide a list of nations that don't support the Bush/Cheaney ticket for re-election?

This is idiotic - how this gets to be a major issue like it currently is I'll never understand.

More than 100 countries didn't back the US in it's invasion of Iraq - isn't it ENTIRELY possible that some of their leaders don't want to see Bush back after this year's elections? Why is that such a stretch?

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Is it really beyond the comprehension of the Bush/Cheaney team to think that there might be foreign leaders who would rather see Kerry as the US president than the current administration? Is it really that implausible to them?

Given the administrations strong-arm and preferential tactics, do they really expect the leaders of other countries, or Kerry himself, to provide a list of nations that don't support the Bush/Cheaney ticket for re-election?

This is idiotic - how this gets to be a major issue like it currently is I'll never understand.

More than 100 countries didn't back the US in it's invasion of Iraq - isn't it ENTIRELY possible that some of their leaders don't want to see Bush back after this year's elections? Why is that such a stretch?

They are using this to try to paint Kerry as Conspiring Against te Current president with foreign leaders.

Just another Chapter out of the republican political handbook of Painting Democrats as "Treasonous" and Weak on defence.

the thought of foreign leaders not wanting Bush re-elected doesnt shock me. Foreign populations dont like him at all. Hell when he went to Britain ( our strongest ally) remember the public outcry against him.

Still It is for americans to decide who our president is, not foreign governements of peoples. That doesnt mean they cant voice their displeasure against a particular ruler of a foreign country. Our citizens and leaders do it all the time.

 

[bozack]

it really isn't the point that there might be other leaders or what not that want an admin change, but rather the fact that Kerry is stating such and not backing it up with sources or "facts" (which is rather hypocritical as the dems are always calling the repubs out on facts and info)....

also it puts things in a precarious position should Bush win this year...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: bozack
it really isn't the point that there might be other leaders or what not that want an admin change, but rather the fact that Kerry is stating such and not backing it up with sources or "facts" (which is rather hypocritical as the dems are always calling the repubs out on facts and info)....

also it puts things in a precarious position should Bush win this year...

Exactly. Kerry has put current AND future foreign relations in a bit of a spot - especially when Bush wins in November.

CkG

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: bozack
it really isn't the point that there might be other leaders or what not that want an admin change, but rather the fact that Kerry is stating such and not backing it up with sources or "facts" (which is rather hypocritical as the dems are always calling the repubs out on facts and info)....

also it puts things in a precarious position should Bush win this year...

Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

 

[NeoV]

thanks for the well stated replies, and not the usual slanted crap this forum tends to produce...

I still don't see how foreign relations would be "in a bit of a spot" though - if the current administration thinks that every other nation's leaders want to see them back in office, then their view of reality isn't accurate anyway - Certainly, in every US presidential election, there are foreign leaders on different sides.

I think this whole thing is way overblown, and both sides are guilty - this is going to be an ugly campaign..

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: NeoV
I still don't see how foreign relations would be "in a bit of a spot" though - if the current administration thinks that every other nation's leaders want to see them back in office, then their view of reality isn't accurate anyway - Certainly, in every US presidential election, there are foreign leaders on different sides.

Here is the double edged sword though in that if Kerry does not spill with whom he is referring to, it will stick with him till election day and will be a thorn in his side, however if he does come clean and he loses in the fall then relations for said nations will be rather interesting for the next four years....

I agree this must happen every election cycle, but no one has had the gall to come out and state it. Should be interesting where it goes.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

Seems more like an attempt by the Hardliners to make a Mountain out of a Molehill to try and put Kerry on the defensive so the issues where Bush is really lacking will be overshadowed.

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

Seems more like an attempt by the Hardliners to make a Mountain out of a Molehill to try and put Kerry on the defensive so the issues where Bush is really lacking will be overshadowed.

WEll this is true because if it was a straight isssues battle, Bush has no chance. For Bush to Win, hell have to get the public to focus on other things rather than the issues.


Has Bush unvailed ANY plans for the next 4 years besides Terrorism, Terrorism,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Mars, Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism, marriage, Terrorism ,Terrorism, Terrorism, Terrorism ,Terrorism , and finally Terrorism.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: NeoV
thanks for the well stated replies, and not the usual slanted crap this forum tends to produce...

I still don't see how foreign relations would be "in a bit of a spot" though - if the current administration thinks that every other nation's leaders want to see them back in office, then their view of reality isn't accurate anyway - Certainly, in every US presidential election, there are foreign leaders on different sides.

I think this whole thing is way overblown, and both sides are guilty - this is going to be an ugly campaign..

You don't think there is any "suspicion" whirling about? Why does kerry get a pass on saying such things when his statements could possibly put the US on the defensive with "leaders around the world"? If he would have just said that leaders may not like the way Bush is doing things that would have been OK - people have bleated that tune for a while now. But he had to say that he personally has "met/talked to/heard from" these leaders and that they want him to win. There is a big difference.

CkG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

Seems more like an attempt by the Hardliners to make a Mountain out of a Molehill to try and put Kerry on the defensive so the issues where Bush is really lacking will be overshadowed.

And there isn't BS being spewed by the other hardliners to make mountains out of molehills? The game goes both ways - seems the left wants to refuse to acknowledge their use of attacks for the last year.

CkG

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

but.. but.. but Bush is a liar!

Thank god that anands isnt really representative of the general populace, we would all be practicing our double speak.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

but.. but.. but Bush is a liar!

Thank god that anands isnt really representative of the general populace, we would all be practicing our double speak.

It's "nuance"

CkG

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

Seems more like an attempt by the Hardliners to make a Mountain out of a Molehill to try and put Kerry on the defensive so the issues where Bush is really lacking will be overshadowed.

And there isn't BS being spewed by the other hardliners to make mountains out of molehills? The game goes both ways - seems the left wants to refuse to acknowledge their use of attacks for the last year.

CkG

I agree with you that it goes both ways. Take Bushes National Guard Service for example.

 

[Gravity]

I think that Kerry might be regretting that little taunt about now. It's a no win for him and may backfire alltogether. If france and the new spanish leader want him, that's not all that good!

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Seems more like an attempt by the Hardliners to make a Mountain out of a Molehill to try and put Kerry on the defensive so the issues where Bush is really lacking will be overshadowed.

And couldn't the same be said about Bush's National Guard service issue?? seems a little hypocritical even for you Red, but I have to agree with CAD that it goes both ways, the only difference is that here liberal viewpoints are taken as gospel whereas conservatives have to have everything documented for it to be kosher and even that is generally suspect.

Edit, sorry Red, didn't see your response to Cad mentioning this exact point....

 

[TheGameIs21]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: bozack
it really isn't the point that there might be other leaders or what not that want an admin change, but rather the fact that Kerry is stating such and not backing it up with sources or "facts" (which is rather hypocritical as the dems are always calling the repubs out on facts and info)....

also it puts things in a precarious position should Bush win this year...

Exactly. Kerry has put current AND future foreign relations in a bit of a spot - especially when Bush wins in November.

CkG

agreed

 

[TheGameIs21]

Originally posted by: smashp

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


Like Bush has backed up his claims regarding Iraq?

Red, your response proves my point...people here and elsewhere constantly are calling for Bush to back up claims of military service, efforts in Iraq, budgeting ...etc but when people want Kerry to back up a statement it is met with hostility by the libs almost to the point where people should just expect it to be truth simply because Kerry stated it.....

Seems more like an attempt by the Hardliners to make a Mountain out of a Molehill to try and put Kerry on the defensive so the issues where Bush is really lacking will be overshadowed.

WEll this is true because if it was a straight isssues battle, Bush has no chance. For Bush to Win, hell have to get the public to focus on other things rather than the issues.


Has Bush unvailed ANY plans for the next 4 years besides Terrorism, Terrorism,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Mars, Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism ,Terrorism, marriage, Terrorism ,Terrorism, Terrorism, Terrorism ,Terrorism , and finally Terrorism.

The answer is no only to the close minded.