Quote:
Originally posted by WarChild
But if Kerry was upset, he has only himself to blame. Complaining about the president using the authority you've granted him is rather like locking the barn door after you've deliberately let the cows out."
|
That's a ridiculous point of view.
That's like saying if a Senator voted to give the President fast track authority to negotiate trade deals, and then the president negotiates a horrible deal for the American people, that its the Senator's fault that we got into a bad trade deal.
The vote was to give him authority, authority which congress believed the president would use wisely. They had a handshake agreement with the president agreeing to exhaust diplomacy and do this through the U.N.
(If you remember at first the president asked for authority to invade....then the Senate said no we'll only give you authority if you go through the U.N.)
Kerry says he would have done things differently...I.E. let the weapons inspectors do their jobs and make their final report to the U.N. before invading a country....rather than relying solely on the bad intelligence we had at the time.
Also waiting until we had international support to not only win the war but also win the peace, if war was deemed necessary.
Bush 41 was a good example of exactly how to put an international coalition together to do something of this magnitude.
Dubya is a perfect example of how NOT to run your foreign policy.
We've lost ALOT of credibility in the world and we need a new "CEO" if you will for our stock price to go back up.
(pardon the cliche's)