Debate Point: Kerry Should Use The Phrase "Overwhelming Force" Repeatedly

[DrFunkenstein]

One of the real failures of the Bush invasion fiasco was following the Rumsfeld Doctrine. Not the part that says we hold no permanent alliances, just "strategic" ones, but the use of small, fast forces as the centerpiece of a major military operation.

Bush rushed to Baghdad like it was a race - leaving thin supply lines, insufficient artillery support, and - most importantly - no occupational force to quell the predictable chaos that followed in the power vacuum, let alone secure suspected WMD sites.

Here is David Corn on that last point:

"The Pentagon's new, 2,000-person Iraq Survey Team--which will look for WMDs as one of several missions--is not scheduled to hit Iraq until the end of May. (The Bush Administration has not invited the UN to participate in the inspections.)

Why was such a force of specialists not assembled before the war and ready to roll when the invasion was launched? At this point, a WMD search may unearth evidence to shore up Bush's claim that Saddam Hussein had WMDs, but it is unlikely to prevent unconventional weaponry and related material from falling into the wrong hands. The time for that sort of mission is long gone."

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030602&s=corn

Kerry should use the debates as an opportunity to use Rumsfeld and Powell as surrogates for Bush and himself.

Bush = Rumsfeld (Incompetent Pentagon Ideologue)
Kerry = Powell (Cautious, But Forceful Veteran)

Kerry has much in common with Powell, and should use him as a double, even if Powell doesn't approve. Kerry, like Powell, is very hesitant to go to war unnecessarily; likes to have his ducks/allies in a row before embarking; and subscribes to the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force.

Using the phrase "overwhelming force" - and blasting Bush for not using it - is a great way for Kerry to up his manhood while making Bush wither (how's that for a metaphor?).

And it absolutely rings true to Kerry's political persona (and even plays into his Vietnam experiences): Kerry is cautious, to be sure, but when it comes time to make the decision, he goes full on.

Saying "overwhelming force" repeatedly, therefore, will not somehow jar against how the public already perceives him, it will compliment it perfectly.





Two reluctant, but powerful warriors.

[Zinfandel]

1. How long will it take for one of Rove's spies in the Kerry camp to steal

a copy of Kerry's debate strategy? It always happens...we'll find out long after the debates, that Bush had Kerry's debating points to study...

Not to mention, again...The media will be falling all over themselves telling all Americans about how great Bush did in each debate. Whether Bush is chewing on a mouthful of horseshit throughout the whole debate...Bush will still be pronounced the winner to the people who watched the debates and to the 80 to 90% of the American people who didn't watch the debates, and all will believe the media bullshit that Bush won.

Fox will be cuming in their pants saying over and over and over again, how Bush kicked Kerry's ass, and the rest of the media will fall right in line saying it over and over again until even you believe it and start saying Kerry should of done better in the debates...

[LaPera]

4. I have to agree with you Zin. on all points.

[newyawker99]

5. Hi LaPera!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[NewYorkerfromMass]

2. Bush didn't hit Iraq HARD ENOUGH!!!

Damn, I'd say that's a winner in the heartland. You just have to make the case and use the right words.

[DrFunkenstein]

3. That's What I'm Thinking

It is great to talk about making friends with our allies, but Kerry needs to get a little more macho - without sounding forced. But talking up the Powell Doctrine (and General Shinseki's demise) is a great way to make the glove fit.