Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] The tables of David and Lee

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Don Rua" <rua AT mindspring.com>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] The tables of David and Lee
  • Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 15:03:19 -0400

Thanks to both David and Lee for putting those tables together. It is definitely interesting to note, but I would give a word of caution to non-Bush supporters, or Kerry-backers:
 
-- The coalition numbers are poor when contrasted to our recent experience and knowledge of the Afghan and Iraq 1 wars. Note that a Bush was running the store for those as well, so it's a weak argument to think that Bush is oblivious to the process or value.
 
-- But the real issue in the numbers is not what the totals are, but whether Kerry would have bigger numbers in Bush's stead. Do not underestimate the Republican's fear of this scenario: Let's say Kerry was in Bush's shoes, and it is time to back up the umpteenth deadline from the UN regarding Saddam. Kerry starts doing his world tour to build a coalition, and he's told basically the same thing by France, Germany, Russia, China, etc., namely: "We don't want any part of this war. Wait for a UN mandate, don't go."
     So, does Kerry magically whip together a huge coalition when Bush couldn't?  Does he get numbers that are double those in David's table? NO. Instead, Kerry doesn't go. He lets the global community set the timetable of our national security. Maybe he sends a few scud missles as a symbolic "I'm tough!" move like Clinton did each time Al Queada marched along their path against us with the Cole, embassies, etc.
    I think that is the real question. We will never know if someone else could have put together a better coalition, but the real fear in some voters minds is that if the UN doesn't decide we should do it, we don't. That Kerry would never have the nerve to do what our leaders thought was necessary, unless the global community gave him 'permission', putting all our defense on the character and talent of their leaders, not ours. That Kerry brings us to the day dreaded for so long, where the US does what it is told, by delegates that we have no opportunity to elect. We cease to follow our own guidance. We cease to look at circumstances, judge for ourselves, and act.
 
Don
 
PS- Ques. for Kerry fans: Has he ever built an across-the-spectrum coalition of Senators, much less heads of state, for any worthwhile initiative? Maybe it doesn't apply, but just curious. I never saw his name much before the recent election.



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page