Slate: Where Kerry Stands on Iraq

[Robbien]

If you've had trouble figuring out where John Kerry stands on Iraq, today is your lucky day. The senator finally clarified his position in a speech at New York University. Here's a summary.

1. "Iraq was a profound diversion from" the war on terror. This puts Kerry squarely at odds with President Bush, who says the invasion was a blow against terror.

2. Kerry voted for war authority to scare Saddam Hussein into allowing inspections. In Kerry's words, "Congress was right to give the president the authority. … This president—any president—would have needed the threat of force to act effectively. … The idea was simple. We would get the weapons inspectors back in to verify whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. And we would convince the world to speak with one voice to Saddam: disarm or be disarmed. … Instead, the president rushed to war without letting the weapons inspectors finish their work." This account is consistent with all but one of Kerry's previous statements on Iraq. But it doesn't explain how Kerry would have enforced a U.N. Security Council threat to "disarm" Saddam—or what Kerry would have done if Saddam, rather than Bush, had refused to let the inspectors "finish their work." Nor does it explain how Kerry would have determined that the work was, wasn't, or could never be "finished."

3. The United States shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Kerry asks, "Is really saying that if we knew there were no imminent threat, no weapons of mass destruction, no ties to al-Qaida, the United States should have invaded Iraq? My answer is no—because a Commander-in-Chief's first responsibility is to make a wise and responsible decision to keep America safe." Kerry has often said that he wouldn't have invaded Iraq the way Bush did. But this is his clearest statement that he wouldn't have invaded, period. Bush depicts this as a reversal of what Kerry said a month ago. That depiction is false.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2106946/

there are thirteen points in total outlined in this article and well worth a read

[Voltaire99]

1. Step in the right direction. Now for a very speedy withdrawal timeline.

No more than six months, preferably closer to two or three.

And, of course, he has to hammer home the "Bush = Draft" message over and over.

The big question: do Kerry and his DLC handlers have the balls for this? Merely saying "Iraq is a bad war, I didn't want it to go this far, but oops we're stuck for years and years" is a nonstarter that will hand Bush the election. Kerry needs separation, and that will only fully come with an exit plan and continually raising fears of a draft.

[Karmadillo]

2. I hate to use the words "excellent article" and William Saletan in the

same sentence, but I'm afraid I have no choice.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

3. Indeed, the ending is the best...

We need a clear picture of how Kerry's position on Iraq differs from Bush's. This is it.

[Larkspur]

4. Guess Kerry finally admits Howard Dean was right

7. We're worse off than we were before the war. This is what Howard Dean said last year. At the time, Kerry charged that Dean "didn't even know that it was good to get rid of Saddam Hussein." Dean's position was relative (that capturing Saddam was good, but not worth the direct costs and opportunity costs); Kerry misrepresented it as absolute (that capturing Saddam wasn't good). Now Kerry is embracing Dean's position. "Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell. But that was not, in itself, a reason to go to war," says Kerry. "We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure." He adds that "the invasion of Iraq has made us less secure and weaker in the war against terrorism."

In response, Bush is already doing to Kerry what Kerry did to Dean: misrepresenting the critic of the war as doubting that in absolute terms, it was good to get rid of Saddam.

[Kagemusha]

5. I guess only Nixon can go to China...

and only Kerry can campaign on Dean's position.

I bet that makes perfect sense to someone out there, and that scares me.

[ozone_man]

8. It does scare me

and anger me, after all of the criticism and dirty tricks (Osama ads) he heaped on Dean, that Kerry is starting to take Dean's position. I only hope that he takes it all the way instead of some watered down version (Bush lite) of the Iraq war. The last few days, hearing Kerry on the radio, he sounded darn good, and he sounded like Dean.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skinner]

9. That's a handy little article.

I think it's definitely worth a read.

[MsUnderstood]

10. That was a great read

I didn't like how the author tried to be "fair and balanced" by pointing out that Kerry didn't have a solution just complaints.

Kerry doesn't need the solutions yet, he isn't the president.

We all need to remember that we are not voting on November for how Kerry DID on the war on Terror, we are voting how BUSH DID.