August 09, 2004

Kerry's 'Secret Plan' Revealed...sort of

John Kerry laid out his heretofore 'Secret Plan for Bringing Home the Troops' in an op-ed in USA Today. James Joyner does a first-rate job of deconstructing the plan, as does McQ. My thoughts run along similar lines, but I wanted to add a few sentiments:

• Lead NATO to make the security of Iraq one of its global missions and to deploy a significant portion of the force needed to secure and win the peace there. NATO participation will open the door to greater international involvement from non-NATO countries.
I love this one. File this under the Personality Theory of International Relations. Kerry is an absolute idiot. He believes the reason NATO isn't more involved is because George W. Bush (or his administration) doesn't have the leadership capacity to get NATO on board. McQ, rightly, notes that most NATO countries are already on board and James sarcastically asks if this is the same NATO with Germany and France in it? Also, is this the same NATO that is fudging out of it's commitments in Afghanistan--a war that NATO supported (link via Right on Red):
[there is] confusion and delay [over] Nato's provision of extra troops it promised to bolster security for the landmark presidential elections due on 9 October.... there has still been no announcement of when they [the fresh NATO troops] are coming. Meanwhile, the security situation has deteriorated, with mounting attacks on election workers registering voters.
What Kerry is really saying is that Germany and France would cooperate, if only a different President was in office. This theory of international relations completely overlooks the notion of national interest---that nations act in certain ways because it is in their interest to do so. So why would a Kerry administration somehow change the national interests of France and Germany? This is a naive theory of how the world works...and dangerous!!
• Internationalize the reconstruction efforts in Iraq to end the continuing perception of a U.S. occupation and help coordinate the rebuilding.
Since we have already done this, and continue to do so, this is a non-sequitor. This is the I will do what Bush is doing, but since I'm not Bush I will do it better theory of public administration. John Kerry must believe he has super-human powers. It's like saying a new coach could bring more wins over the last one, however the new coach will use the same playbook. Again, file this under a theory in which personality is the driving force behind public policy. Same policy + different administration = success. Again, naive and dangerous.
• Launch a massive and accelerated training effort to build Iraqi security forces that can provide real security for the Iraqi people, including a major role for NATO. This is not a task for America alone; we must join as a partner with other nations.
Again, somehow NATO would get more involved if only there was a different administration. Utterly stupid. Also, if Kerry wants more training to be given to the new Iraqi forces, why the hell isn't he in the Senate authoring a Bill that would fund this project of his--if it is something different than what the administration is already doing? Oops, I forgot, Kerry is too busy to try to get his 'new' not-really-a-plan-plan going in the Senate. How many Bills has Kerry voted on this year, anyway?
• Plan for Iraq's future by working with our allies to forgive Iraq's multibillion-dollar debt and involve our allies in the development of a new Iraqi constitution and the political arrangements needed to protect minority rights. At the same time, we should convene a regional conference with Iraq's neighbors to secure a pledge of respect for Iraq's borders and non-interference in Iraq's national affairs.
Err....again, what is new about this? Kerry's plan is to impose his will on the Saudis or the Kuwaitis, both of which have said they will not forgive Iraq's debt. How about France? Does he know something about France that I don't? Somehow France will be forgive Iraq's debt--the same France that loaned Iraq money, even during the embargo, so that Iraq could buy French goods prohibited them under US law!!!!!!!!!!!!

People, Kerry is more dangerous than I thought. His is a classic example of an ego run amuck. He believes that his personality can somehow change the course of history and the interest of nations. This is not a 'realistic plan' as he claims. It is sheer fantasy.


Posted by: Rusty at 04:09 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 741 words, total size 5 kb.

1 Great post Rusty (thanks for the link too, BTW). Another issue: let's assume Nato WOULD indeed be more cooperative with Kerry, even if his policies were similar to Bush's - what does that say about Nato's seriousness? What kind of ally helps or hinders us depending on the personality or party of the President at the time? I say that's no ally at all. What if the Roosevelt government hadn't cooperated with the Churchill government, purely on the basis of personality or ideology?!? That's insanity. Kerry's platform is shakier than Ted Kennedy in detox.

Posted by: Johnny Walker Red at August 09, 2004 04:44 PM (4AwR3)

2 Excellent reading, I won't even attempt to put everything I've heard, feel, or suppose to be true about Kerry's idiocy here, as it seems it would prolly pale in comparison, but god I wish I could, hell I even wish there were a few ppl like you in .social over on spamcop's NGs to offset the (almost) total leftward lean there...anyway, that's a different subject... I do wonder how a man who continuously, strives to cut the resources needed to protect this country can honestly even say that he wants to, or would be a good CIC?, and while for the last 30 years democrats have vilified the vet* war, and now?, all of a sudden...it's Kerry's claim to fame? WTH's up with that. he flip-flops around more than a fish out of water on almost every subject, and when people try to get the word out about him, they get threatened?, or even sued?...yeah he's the man we need in office alright, and as soon as he's elected, I'll be looking for some communist nation to move to (other than the "United States Of Socialism" well thanks for listening boss, and again..Nice post. "I'm Bill McGee, and I don't approve of John Kerry"

Posted by: Bill McGe at August 13, 2004 09:16 PM (G44bT)

3 When my 5 year old daughter cannot understand why someone would vote for "the guy who would not let daddy do his job" and calls him "rude" for wanting to pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, something is amiss. According to a Kerry v. O'Neill debate in Jun 1971, Kerry wanted to pull out of Vietnam on a set date to get our POW's back no matter the price. Even if that price was as O'Neill said, "under the following pre-conditions that's been suggested a number of times. First of all, we pay reparations to the North Vietnamese; second, we topple the Saigon government; and third, of course, we'd have to cease all aid to that government (http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=KerryONeill )". At what price will he pull troops from Iraq and Afghanistan now? What about Korea? Even giving Kerry the benefit of the doubt that he MIGHT be better than Bush on several issues... for me, as a military wife, I would rather put up with Bush than leave my husband deployed in Iraq in the hands of a war protester!!!

Posted by: Sharon Miller at August 24, 2004 02:10 AM (8mv5O)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
23kb generated in CPU 0.0878, elapsed 0.1833 seconds.
118 queries taking 0.1709 seconds, 247 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.