At Least Get the Facts Straight
As the Republicans are trying to reduce this election to a single issue, "Who is the best leader for the War on Terrorism?", at least that could get their facts strait. Comments taken out of context were Kerry's response to whether US soldiers lives should be risked in Bosnia or Somalia. He didn't believe we should act unilaterally in either situation. But his response now becomes a univeral endorsement of UN action is the only acceptable circumstance for US casualties. See the geniuses below:
Rush Limbaugh, right-wing radio host: "John Kerry believes that American troops dying under the banner of the U.N. flag is acceptable, when dying under the banner of the American flag is not." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 10/20/04]
William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard: "Kerry really does believe that the United Nations is a fundamental, legitimizing body for the use of U.S. force. É His near obsession with gaining the approval of the U.N., and for that matter of France and Germany, for the conduct of U.S. foreign policy would make him the riskiest commander in chief of any presidential candidate since George McGovern." [The Weekly Standard, "Dying for the United Nations," 10/20]
Newt Gingrich, FOX News Channel political contributor: "I understand that Senator Kerry has been quoted as saying he felt much more comfortable if the United States's troops were only used under United Nations operations. I think that's a direct quote from him." [FOX News Channel, Hannity & Colmes, 10/20]
The Washington Times editorial: "When it comes to the question of when it is appropriate for the United States to use force abroad, John Kerry seems to have developed one general principle: It is only acceptable to risk American life and limb if the United Nations or supposed allies like France approve." [The Washington Times, "Kerry's multilateralist fetish," 10/20]
WorldNetDaily.com: "Ten years ago, Sen. John Kerry said the deaths of U.S. military personnel are justified if they are engaged in a United Nations effort, but not if they die while fighting in a unilateral operation." ["Kerry: U.S. deaths justified if on U.N. mission," 10/20]
Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily.com editor and CEO: "John Kerry believes it is better to sacrifice American lives for the United Nations than for the United States. If you don't believe me on this, perhaps you will believe a paper that endorses his candidacy -- the Washington Post." ["U.N. Secretary General Kerry," 10/21]
Rush Limbaugh, right-wing radio host: "John Kerry believes that American troops dying under the banner of the U.N. flag is acceptable, when dying under the banner of the American flag is not." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 10/20/04]
William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard: "Kerry really does believe that the United Nations is a fundamental, legitimizing body for the use of U.S. force. É His near obsession with gaining the approval of the U.N., and for that matter of France and Germany, for the conduct of U.S. foreign policy would make him the riskiest commander in chief of any presidential candidate since George McGovern." [The Weekly Standard, "Dying for the United Nations," 10/20]
Newt Gingrich, FOX News Channel political contributor: "I understand that Senator Kerry has been quoted as saying he felt much more comfortable if the United States's troops were only used under United Nations operations. I think that's a direct quote from him." [FOX News Channel, Hannity & Colmes, 10/20]
The Washington Times editorial: "When it comes to the question of when it is appropriate for the United States to use force abroad, John Kerry seems to have developed one general principle: It is only acceptable to risk American life and limb if the United Nations or supposed allies like France approve." [The Washington Times, "Kerry's multilateralist fetish," 10/20]
WorldNetDaily.com: "Ten years ago, Sen. John Kerry said the deaths of U.S. military personnel are justified if they are engaged in a United Nations effort, but not if they die while fighting in a unilateral operation." ["Kerry: U.S. deaths justified if on U.N. mission," 10/20]
Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily.com editor and CEO: "John Kerry believes it is better to sacrifice American lives for the United Nations than for the United States. If you don't believe me on this, perhaps you will believe a paper that endorses his candidacy -- the Washington Post." ["U.N. Secretary General Kerry," 10/21]
Comments
Bob replies:
Kerry worships the U.N. and has little respect the United States and its military.
Here is the quote the provoked all the above comments:
"If you mean dying in the course of the United Nations effort, yes, it is worth that. If you mean dying American troops unilaterally going in with some false presumption that we can affect the outcome, the answer is unequivocally no."
This sure sounds like he is saying that Americans dying as part of a U.N. effort is okay, but dying as part of a unilateral action is forbidden. Why are the Republicans wrong? What in the hell does he mean?
It seems to me that if a cause is just, it is good to pursue it, with or without the (corrupt) U.N.
__________________________________
Your comment again doesn't put this comment in context. Kerry was being interviewed about police actions such as Bosnia and Somalia.
Placed in the context of the acceptability of sending US troops into an area to quell ethnic cleansing, his response was appropriate to send in US troops. He was saying we shouldn't be doing things like these two actions unilaterally.
How this can be construed as a blanket reservation on defending the US unless the UN was involved is just the typical right wing twisting of anything a political opponent of Karl Rove's man will face.
You can believe what you want.... I suggest you read mediamatter.com's site.