Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

GRAND CANYON, Ariz. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Monday he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing force against Iraq even if he had known then no weapons of mass destruction would be found.

Taking up a challenge from President Bush, whom he will face in the Nov. 2 election, the Massachusetts senator said: "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to have but I would have used that authority effectively."

Speaking to reporters from the Powell's Landing on the rim of the Grand Canyon above a mile-deep drop, Kerry also said reducing U.S. troops in Iraq significantly by next August was "an appropriate goal."

"My goal, my diplomacy, my statesmanship is to get our troops reduced in number and I believe if you do the statesmanship properly, I believe if you do the kind of alliance building that is available to us, that it's appropriate to have a goal of reducing the troops over that period of time," he said.

On that timetable, Kerry's aim would be to pull out a large number of the 138,000 U.S. troops in Iraq in the first six months of his administration.

"Obviously, we'd have to see how events unfold," he added. "I intend to get more people involved in that effort and I'm convinced I can be more successful than President Bush in succeeding in doing that. It is an appropriate goal to have and I'm going to try to achieve it."

Kerry refused to say if he had any private assurances from Arab or European nations that they would help with security and reconstruction in Iraq but said "right now the administration ... is scrambling and struggling to try to find a way to do that."

"All of this should have happened in the beginning, all of these things should have been achieved beforehand," he said. "American presidents should not send American forces into war without a plan to win the peace."

BUSH CHALLENGE

Bush last week challenged Kerry, who Republicans accuse of flip-flopping on Iraq by voting for the war resolution and against the $87 billion request to fund operations, to say straight out if he would have voted the same way if only to eliminate the danger that Saddam Hussein could have developed weapons of mass destruction.

"Now, there are some questions that a commander-in-chief needs to answer with a clear yes or no," Bush said. "My opponent hasn't answered the question of whether knowing what we know now, he would have supported going into Iraq."

"I have given my answer," Bush said. "We did the right thing, and the world is better off for it."

Kerry challenged Bush to answer some questions of his own -- why he rushed to war without a plan for the peace, why he used faulty intelligence, why he misled Americans about how he would go to war and why he had not brought other countries to the table.

"There are four not hypothetical questions like the president's, real questions that matter to Americans and I hope you'll get the answers to those questions, because the American people deserve them," he told reporters.

Kerry, who is on day 11 of a two-week coast-to-coast campaign trip, used the majestic backdrop of the Grand Canyon to criticize Bush for neglecting America's national parks system and pledged to restore $600 million he said the president had cut from the budget.
Link to the ultra right wing Reuters news article.

There you have it. He would have voted for the same thing even knowing what we know now. Go ahead spinmeisters... get to work on this one.

Please ***BE QUIET**

Originally Posted by Thunderscope Please STFU

There are appropriate and inappropriate ways to deal with situations.
Your actions obviously fall into the latter.

You may not care for what he says. You may find it annoying.
But he is posting it in the right area... and thanks to CheapyD's recent changes, you actually have to go looking for it to complain about it, since it isn't listed on the "Latest Message Board Posts" on the front page.

If it bothers you that much, just ignore it.... just like I ignore just about every trading forum thread on the site. It's really not that hard.

Amazing response. Just the kind of intellect I expected.

I just wish for once Pitts would actually have the NERVE to comment on one of my comments. As far as I'm concerned he's a coward.
He just likes to take the easy things or the things he can kneejerk. Even then after one comment or two he's done.

Originally Posted by PittsburghAfterDark GRAND CANYON, Ariz. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Monday he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing force against Iraq even if he had known then no weapons of mass destruction would be found. Taking up a challenge from President Bush, whom he will face in the Nov. 2 election, the Massachusetts senator said: "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to have but I would have used that authority effectively." Speaking to reporters from the Powell's Landing on the rim of the Grand Canyon above a mile-deep drop, Kerry also said reducing U.S. troops in Iraq significantly by next August was "an appropriate goal." "My goal, my diplomacy, my statesmanship is to get our troops reduced in number and I believe if you do the statesmanship properly, I believe if you do the kind of alliance building that is available to us, that it's appropriate to have a goal of reducing the troops over that period of time," he said. On that timetable, Kerry's aim would be to pull out a large number of the 138,000 U.S. troops in Iraq in the first six months of his administration. "Obviously, we'd have to see how events unfold," he added. "I intend to get more people involved in that effort and I'm convinced I can be more successful than President Bush in succeeding in doing that. It is an appropriate goal to have and I'm going to try to achieve it." Kerry refused to say if he had any private assurances from Arab or European nations that they would help with security and reconstruction in Iraq but said "right now the administration ... is scrambling and struggling to try to find a way to do that." "All of this should have happened in the beginning, all of these things should have been achieved beforehand," he said. "American presidents should not send American forces into war without a plan to win the peace." BUSH CHALLENGE Bush last week challenged Kerry, who Republicans accuse of flip-flopping on Iraq by voting for the war resolution and against the $87 billion request to fund operations, to say straight out if he would have voted the same way if only to eliminate the danger that Saddam Hussein could have developed weapons of mass destruction. "Now, there are some questions that a commander-in-chief needs to answer with a clear yes or no," Bush said. "My opponent hasn't answered the question of whether knowing what we know now, he would have supported going into Iraq." "I have given my answer," Bush said. "We did the right thing, and the world is better off for it." Kerry challenged Bush to answer some questions of his own -- why he rushed to war without a plan for the peace, why he used faulty intelligence, why he misled Americans about how he would go to war and why he had not brought other countries to the table. "There are four not hypothetical questions like the president's, real questions that matter to Americans and I hope you'll get the answers to those questions, because the American people deserve them," he told reporters. Kerry, who is on day 11 of a two-week coast-to-coast campaign trip, used the majestic backdrop of the Grand Canyon to criticize Bush for neglecting America's national parks system and pledged to restore $600 million he said the president had cut from the budget. Link to the ultra right wing Reuters news article. There you have it. He would have voted for the same thing even knowing what we know now. Go ahead spinmeisters... get to work on this one.

From the more complete AP story on Kerry's remarks, picking up on the questions Kerry leveled at Bush:

“Why did we rush to war without a plan to win the peace? Why did you rush to war on faulty intelligence and not do the hard work necessary to give America the truth?
“Why did he mislead America about how he would go to war. Why has he not brought other countries to the table in order to support American troops in the way they deserve it and relieve the pressure on the American people?”
Kerry faulted Bush for the use he made of the authority he had to wage war.
“American presidents should not send American forces into war without a plan to win the peace. This president did not have a plan to win the peace and the evidence is still that they are scrambling and struggling to try to find a way to do it,” the Democrat said.
Specifically, Kerry noted that the administration is scrambling to persuade Arab countries to dispatch Muslim forces to Iraq. “All of this should have happened in the beginning,” he said.
The presidential nominee said he intends “to get more people involved in that effort and I’m convinced I can be more successful than President Bush in succeeding in doing that.”

---------------------------

Sounds to me he's making the distinction between having the authority to go to war versus actually making the decision to go to war. In other words, it was appropriate for Congress to give Bush the power to force Saddam's compliance; without that power, what could Bush have held over Iraq's head? But it wasn't appropriate for Bush to pull out the inspectors, rush into Iraq with half a plan and few allies and then fail to make the place secure.
In other words, it's the kind of intelligent, nuanced view that makes Republicans freak out because their minds work in childish, binary, good/evil, black/white, bad/good terms.

Waiting for your response, PAD.

I like PAD posts

Is PAD really just a version of CAGBot designed to post every single goddamn news story that even remotely places John Kerry in a bad light?

Dude, there's like HOW many right-wing circle jerk message boards where people would eat this stuff up? Why don't you just post this stuff there?

Originally Posted by BigNick I like PAD posts

I'd like them too, if they had the least bit of thought behind them. The problem is, he tends to throw half-baked information up on the board, then run like hell when he's called on the fact that he's passing out crap. The untruths, the half-truths, the smears, the innuendos -- if this is what passes for intelligent Republican political dialogue, then the party's in trouble.

Originally Posted by ElwoodCuse Is PAD really just a version of CAGBot designed to post every single goddamn news story that even remotely places John Kerry in a bad light? Dude, there's like HOW many right-wing circle jerk message boards where people would eat this stuff up? Why don't you just post this stuff there?

so you're saying that he shouldn't post things that put Kerry in a bad light? He obviously doesnt like Kerry, so why would he post things that make kerry look good?

But if you're gonna jump on his case because all of his threads have stories that put Kerry in a bad light, you should also not forget to go into all of Mr. Bad Example, and Dennis_T's threads and jump on their case for only posting things that put Bush in a bad light.

honestly, PAD isnt hurting anything by posting threads that are against Kerry, and MBE and Dennis T arent hurting anything by posting anti Bush threads.

but i have noticed that whenever something bad is posted about Kerry, all the democrats jump in and post things like.. "SHUT UP" or "Do you only post things that put him in a bad light?" and they try to make it seem like the OP is doing something wrong. but if you look, the republicans hard if ever, jump into anti Bush threads and post "SHUT UP" "you always post this kind of crap".

Actually Cracka, I don't see people coming in to tell PAD to shut up, but to tell him that he keeps posting inaccurate info.

apparently you skipped over Thunderscope's post which originally said "Please STFU" and now says "Please ***BE QUIET**"

Originally Posted by Cracka apparently you skipped over Thunderscope's post which originally said "Please STFU" and now says "Please ***BE QUIET**"

Yup, didn't see that one. Then I will change my answer to say MOST people don't tell PAD to shut up.

Originally Posted by Cracka so you're saying that he shouldn't post things that put Kerry in a bad light? He obviously doesnt like Kerry, so why would he post things that make kerry look good? But if you're gonna jump on his case because all of his threads have stories that put Kerry in a bad light, you should also not forget to go into all of Mr. Bad Example, and Dennis_T's threads and jump on their case for only posting things that put Bush in a bad light. honestly, PAD isnt hurting anything by posting threads that are against Kerry, and MBE and Dennis T arent hurting anything by posting anti Bush threads. but i have noticed that whenever something bad is posted about Kerry, all the democrats jump in and post things like.. "SHUT UP" or "Do you only post things that put him in a bad light?" and they try to make it seem like the OP is doing something wrong. but if you look, the republicans hard if ever, jump into anti Bush threads and post "SHUT UP" "you always post this kind of crap".

Cracka,

I 100% agree that "Shut Up!" is an unacceptable argument, and I would hope to never read that in response to anyone's posting. I also don't appreciate name-calling, half-truths and innuendo.

I completely support PAD's right to post whatever pro-Bush information he wants. I just wish he'd do a little fact-checking first, so we could argue on the merits. Instead, I find myself correcting his information more than I find myself addressing whatever point he's trying to make.

I was gonna ask PAD when did he decide to start posting pro-Kerry articles. When you read the whole thing, Kerry's position makes sense and asks some very damning questions of Bush.

Congratulations, PAD! And welcome to the Left side.

Well, Bush DID invade Iraq without WMD proof. So what is your point exactly?

Boy it sure is getting hot in here!