Here's something LONG about sKerry
Then, when you get to the end of it, note the site it came from.
rr
=====================================
<<Serious neocons, indeed, might be calculating that the bungling Bush is
now more of a liability than an asset for their desire to remodel the Middle
East, and to consolidate America's unchallenged military power in the world.
Kerry might be just what they need, in order to draw the sting of that
left-wing anti-Americanism around the world, and in the US itself, which
inspires so much antiwar feeling today. The Kosovo war showed that a war for
human rights and against oppression, fought by a slick Democrat, plays far
better with world public opinion than all that red-neck bull about dangers
to national security. It will be far easier for President Kerry to fight new
wars than for the mistrusted and discredited Bush. So to those who think
that the election of a Democratic president will put an end to American
militarism, I say, 'You ain't seen nothin' yet.' >>
Full article:
If it's war you want, vote Kerry
John Laughland shows that the Democratic contender is more hawkish than
Bush, and may appeal to the neocons this November As the Bush
administration comes under increasing fire for its decision to attack Iraq,
the Democratic contender, John F. Kerry, is profiting from his perceived
status as a critic of Bush's foreign policy. A patrician grandee with a
pleasing mix of liberal and patriotic views might seem to many Americans a
welcome relief from the bellicose Texan with his faux swagger and his team
of men who seem to have 'military-industrial complex' written across their
menacing foreheads. But if anti-war Americans do elect Kerry for that
reason, they will have duped themselves. Warmongering will be worse under
Kerry than under Bush, and real peaceniks should therefore vote for Dubya.
Bush and Kerry agree on almost everything in foreign policy, but where they
disagree, Kerry is more hawkish. In an indication of the extent of the
militarisation of American political life, John Kerry launched his campaign
for the presidency specifically by profiling himself as a Vietnam war hero,
and by presenting George Bush as a draft-dodger and a coward. Kerry's
subsequent statements on foreign policy and homeland security have continued
to attack Bush as a wet. Kerry said in February, 'I do not fault George Bush
for doing too much in the war on terror. I believe he's done too little.'
Kerry has committed himself to 'a stronger, more comprehensive strategy for
winning the war on terror than the Bush administration has ever envisioned'
(my italics throughout). Those Americans who are uncomfortable with George
Bush's Patriot Act, and the Department of Homeland Security, should blanch
at John Kerry's proposals to enlist the National Guard in Homeland Security
and to 'break down the old barriers between national intelligence and local
law enforcement'. Such barriers are precisely what distinguish free
societies from dictatorships. Kerry seems even more obsessed than Bush with
weapons of mass destruction, as he is constantly harping on about the danger
of WMD being delivered through American ports.
Kerry voted for the war on Iraq and continues to support it wholeheartedly.
He said last December that those who continue to oppose the war 'don't have
the judgment to be president - or the credibility to be elected president'.
Kerry does not even say that Bush has jeopardised US security by attacking
Iraq instead of facing down the al-Qa'eda threat: he is not Richard Clarke.
Instead, Kerry says, 'No one can doubt that we are safer - and Iraq is
better - because Saddam Hussein is now behind bars.' On 17 December last
year, Kerry lent credence to the loony theory that Iraq was the author of
the 9/11 attacks, something George Bush has done at least twice. Yet in
February, Kerry attacked Bush for planning to hand back power to the Iraqis
too quickly - what he called 'a cut and run strategy' - even though Bush
intends the US embassy in Iraq to be the biggest American embassy in the
world, and even though some 110,000 US troops are to remain stationed there
indefinitely.
Above all, John Kerry is, like Bush, committed to the world military
supremacy of the USA. 'We must never retreat from having the strongest
military in the world,' says the possible future president. Kerry claims
that George Bush has actually 'weakened' the military, and so he has
promised 40,000 more active-duty army troops. Indeed, Kerry, who drum-beats
his 'readiness to order direct military action' whenever necessary, has gone
so far as to imply that friendly countries might need to be attacked in the
war on terror. In February he said, 'We can't wipe out terrorist cells in
places like Sweden, Canada, Spain, the Philippines or Italy just by dropping
in Green Berets.'
John Kerry has tried to give off a reassuringly multilateralist aura, and he
says Bush has alienated America's allies. This may be why some people
believe him to be less of a warmonger. But they are wrong. First, Bush is
himself avowedly multilateralist: the Bush White House seldom misses an
opportunity to emphasise his faith in multilateral institutions and
international alliances, to boast of how many countries there are in the
coalition against terror, or to claim that the Iraq war was necessary to
save the credibility of the United Nations. Second, Kerry himself vigorously
rejects the idea that US military action can be subject to a UN veto. In
December, Kerry attacked his then contender, Howard Dean, on this very
issue, and in February he said, 'As president, I will not wait for a green
light from abroad when our safety is at stake.' Even Kerry's commitment to
'a bold, progressive internationalism' is in fact identical to George Bush's
repeated commitments to 'keep open the path of progress' in the 'global
democratic revolution', and to provide 'leadership' in the 'defence of
freedom'. Both Bush and Kerry genuflect to the memory of the same Democratic
presidents, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt.
Kerry is actually more hawkish than Bush about the threat from Islam in
general, and about Saudi Arabia in particular. Both of these are favourite
neoconservative themes. While Bush has often emphasised that America has no
quarrel with Islam, Kerry happily speaks about the specific danger to the
USA from the Islamic world, using language which is not substantially
different from that in the latest neo-con manifesto, An End to Evil by
Richard Perle and David Frum. Kerry explicitly lists certain populations as
representing a special danger to America - Saudi Arabians, Egyptians,
Jordanians, Palestinians, Indonesians and Pakistanis - and he reproaches
George Bush's own grandiose plan to 'democratise' the entire Middle East not
for its overweening ambition, but instead for its timidity. Kerry has
attacked the Bush administration for adopting a 'kid gloves' approach to the
Saudi kingdom, which he has repeatedly accused of complicity in the funding
of Islamic extremism and terror, and he has said the Saudi interior minister
is guilty of 'hate speech' and of promoting 'wild anti-Semitic conspiracy
theories'. This recalls Frum and Perle's surprising classification of Saudi
Arabia as 'an unfriendly power'.
Serious neocons, indeed, might be calculating that the bungling Bush is now
more of a liability than an asset for their desire to remodel the Middle
East, and to consolidate America's unchallenged military power in the world.
Kerry might be just what they need, in order to draw the sting of that
left-wing anti-Americanism around the world, and in the US itself, which
inspires so much antiwar feeling today. The Kosovo war showed that a war for
human rights and against oppression, fought by a slick Democrat, plays far
better with world public opinion than all that red-neck bull about dangers
to national security. It will be far easier for President Kerry to fight new
wars than for the mistrusted and discredited Bush. So to those who think
that the election of a Democratic president will put an end to American
militarism, I say, 'You ain't seen nothin' yet.'
http://www.lewrockwell.com/spectator/spec270.html
