|
Presidential hopeful John Kerry has been telling the American people that he would fight a "better" war against terror, but not exactly how. At the UNITY 2004 conference for minority journalists, Kerry stated, "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." (This was the same conference, by the way, at which the neutral, non-partisan journalists broke out in wild cheers and whistling for Kerry, but heckled Bush as he spoke the very next day. But remember, folks, there's no media bias!) I wondered just how one would fight a "sensitive" war against the kind of subhuman slime who cut the heads off innocent victims on videotape. Kerry has offered few specifics on his plan for fighting terror, aside from forming a "real coalition" of nations (a massive slight on the British, Italians, Poles, Australians, Japanese, Spanish, and dozens of others who have been with us in both Afghanistan and Iraq, if you ask me). He has said he sees fighting terrorism as "primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation." On his web site, Kerry's plan for making America safer consists mainly of tracking terrorists once they arrive, "hardening targets," and making sure first responders have what they need to clean up the carnage after the terrorists strike. Apparently, the lack of mess is supposed to discourage them. Nothing about preventing them from coming here in the first place, of course... nothing about letting them know it's not going to be worth the price. Nothing about stopping the nations which support them from doing so, by either diplomatic or military pressure. That sort of thing just isn't done, it seems. In any case, it looks as though John Kerry needs help coming up with specific ways in which he can fight a more thoughtful and sensitive war on terror. In the spirit of cooperation, I'd like to suggest the following helpful list...
"Armed" with these suggestions, I'm sure John Kerry will be able to convince the terrorists to stop hating us in no time, should he win November's election. As for me... I'll be in the mountains building a bunker. |
| Anony-mouse August 13, 2004 03:57 PM PDT That is, AFTER you pay for my movie ticket on the Friday following the election! After that, feel free to barricade yourself in anywhere you darn well please. :-) | ||
| JM August 13, 2004 04:53 PM PDT I almost hope they raise the prices the weekend after Bush's re-lection, just to make my victory the sweeter. | ||
| Anony-mouse August 13, 2004 04:56 PM PDT If they raise the prices any higher, I'll treat you to a DVD instead. :-P | ||
| JM August 13, 2004 05:06 PM PDT That's ok... you would probably slip "Fakerenheit 9/11" in there. | ||
| Zee (Sister Toldjah) August 14, 2004 10:43 PM PDT Oh goodness! Thanks for the chuckle .. that was great! | ||
| Auzerais August 16, 2004 12:50 PM PDT You obviously omitted THE most "Sensitive" move that Kerry would surely make in the War on Terror. That is, after having conspired with the French and Kofi Annan, to give alQaeda a newly created permanent "Islamic Seat" at the UN. After all, precedent has already been set with the Terrorist PLO and Arafat having their own "observer's seat", along with other terrorist states like Iran and North Korea. I predict that within a year of (god forbid) Kerry taking office, voices will be raised on campuses (with C*ANSWER leading the way) to force the US off the Security Council and the "Global Islamic Movement" taking our place. Kerry would only see this as being truly 'sensitive'. And then, of course, the UN could be 'persuaded' to allow alQaeda to convert Notre Dame Cathedral into a Grand Mosque dedicated to binLaden.... | ||
| newt August 17, 2004 09:47 PM PDT I don't understand all of this, but...you guys have made me laugh more then once! Also, on #1, would social workers help if these dudes behead innocent peeps, too? I mean, just a question I don't want to start a fight... | ||
| woops I F'ed up your pc August 17, 2004 10:17 PM PDT Since children are our futhure, lets send Michael Jackson to Iraq to talk to the terrorist children in training. I'm sure he could really "grab hold" of the situation. | ||
| Harold August 17, 2004 10:28 PM PDT I read this article by "cavalierx" and it's pure nonsense. Bushes war in Iraq has been a disaster. Nearly 1,000 dead soldiers with more coming. Bush has no real plan to get us out of this mess and Kerry does. I always though Democrats were responsible for deficit spending. Yet, with republicans controling the congress in tandom with Bushes economic policies (~ a record $500B deficit in 2004) we will bankrupt our country in no time. Moreover, thousands of good paying jobs are being replaced with low paying crap. Am I a democrat? NO WAY. Been a hard core republican since 1978. But will I vote for Bush? NO WAY. Bush is by far the worst president in US history and I like many others (read my web link above) have been kicking myself in the butt for voting for him. I will be voting for Kerry and websites like Cav's will never change my mind. Wake up fellow republicans! You are being fooled! Harold G. Ohio, USA | ||
| JM August 17, 2004 10:46 PM PDT Liberals crack me up, except when they try to use the deaths of soldiers to attack the President. Then they're simply pathetic, even if they ARE just reading the same tired Michael Moore/Democrat/Communist talking points. First of all, you may as well call it "Kerry's war," since he voted for it (but voted to leave the troops he sent without adequate body armor). As for calling it a disaster, Iraq and Afghanistan are in far better shape than Germany and Japan a year or two after their surrender. Kosovo is in far worse shape, after five YEARS. Second, Kerry's plan is to run away from Iraq as fast as he can. Or to send more troops. It varies from day to day. That sort of indecision is fatal. Third, Democrats plan to spend far more than the Republicans would dare in my worst nightmares. Fourth, the "low paying job" meme was easily debunked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the same non-partisan number-crunchers who stated that 629,000 jobs were created in July. You Libs should be HAPPY to hear that small businesses are expanding while large corporations are not. Oh well. Fifth, your lie about being a Republican is laughable. Did Moby personally tell you to go around telling people you're a republican who changed his mind? Bah. Sixth and most damning, your link leads to Michael Moore's Web Site O' Lies. That's all anyone ever needs to know about you. You are dismissed. | ||
| JM August 17, 2004 11:06 PM PDT >I don't understand all of this, but... Just ask; I'll be glad to explain if I can. By email if you'd rather. | ||
| Leave a Comment: |