Kerry just needs to concede. Don't drag the lawyers into this again.

Sad sad sad
4 years of stupidity to come.

Reply #16 By: Citizen Island Dog - 11/3/2004 1:54:17 AM Kerry just needs to concede. Don't drag the lawyers into this again.

It may be their very last act before tort reform smacks them hard in the face. (At least I hope so).

On the big plus side: John Edwards is gone from the senate, replaced by a repub, and now likely is going to be living a life in early retirement. Great for us, bad for him.

Kerry will continue in the senate. Hell, he could very easily find himself running for senate minority leader if Dashcle is really booted. That'd be a good place for him.

So Bush is reelected. We now can hope for no more international support.


This is the same President that drove away all of the allies that stood beside us in Afganistan, who brought us into a war that the UN has declared illegal, and that has every European country hating us again (even the UK, as Tony Blair is NEVER going to be reelected even by his own party.


It is true that we should never be governed by a international body, and that we must act with these United States in mind. Alienating the rest of the world does NOT help the United States by any stretch of the imagination. We have effectively damned ourself. President Bush put it best when he said, "You are either with us, or against us." Well, Mr. President, apparently we have alot of enemies.


If you are an American, I can only ask you to stand behind our country. Not because you want to, but because no one else will.

"So Bush is reelected. We now can hope for no more international support."

You weren't gonna get a damn bit more "International Support" with Kerry, unless he BOUGHT it. Our international problems have been brewing for decades and they are trade based and only veneered with Iraq and the rest of this nonsense. Hell, Iraq was an economic interest issue with France and the rest, not some moral, diplomatic problem.

Kerry would have had to sell us completely down the river to gain that kind of approval, and frankly not even he is that big of a weasel.

This is the same President that drove away all of the allies that stood beside us in Afganistan

go back and look at the numbers involved with those who "stood beside us". I appreciate the sacrifices they made, but in the end they were symbolic. THat is how it always works. The US makes a substantial effort, and the others make a symbolic gesture and try to minimize their worry with it.

I can see Kerry conceding, returning to the Senate as the most powerful Democrat, and then running again in 4 years against a non-incumbent Republican candidate.

So he can be defeated again no one will elect him he will be defeated again ! If by chance this would happen to occur.

Hell, he could very easily find himself running for senate minority leader if Dashcle is really booted

Nope, that will be Reid.

As has been said, Hillary only promised to not to quit in her first Senate term. I think all bets are off in 2008.

What are they waiting for on New Mexico? Bush is ahead by more votes than are left to report.

go back and look at the numbers involved with those who "stood beside us". I appreciate the sacrifices they made, but in the end they were symbolic. THat is how it always works. The US makes a substantial effort, and the others make a symbolic gesture and try to minimize their worry with it.

Yeah right. We contribute with what we can. As it is, we Danes have around 25% of our standing forces tied up in international efforts, including Iraq and Afghanistan. Excuse us for not sending out 200,000 troops out of a population of only 5.5 million.

Damn, but it angers me when uninformed people make uninformed statements.

Morten

Let the nightmare be...eh, continue!

"Yeah right. We contribute with what we can. As it is, we Danes have around 25% of our standing forces tied up in international efforts... Damn, but it angers me when uninformed people make uninformed statements."

If you are more informed than me, kudos, but frankly I'm not uninformed. The point made above is that we are going to live and die by international participation. I thank those nations, personally, for every soldier sent to aid our efforts, but, frankly, you have to admit that when looking at the raw numbers those nations that opted not to help probably wouldn't have contributed enough to have made much of a difference.

It's a Machiavellian world. I wish it were safe and congenial enough that every nation, no matter how small, had an equal amount of influence, but that isn't how things work. I appreciate what the French did in Afghanistan, but it would be nuts to say "well, we have 30+ nations and hundreds of thousands of troops at our disposal, but since we lack a few thousand French troops, let's call it off". Iraq was no different.

Again, I respect the contribution of small countries, but if a factory had a strike and only 2% of the workers stayed home, it doesn't shut down production. I don't mean to demean what WAS contributed, but I don't really fret over what wasn't given the numbers involved.

What ticked me was that you called it a "symbolic" effort. There's nothing symbolic in having 25% of a countries military tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan. But yeah...of course you are gonna contribute the majority.

Morten

When I said that the effort was symbolic, I meant that the inclusion or exclusion of these troops isn't going to make or break the effort the way people like Kerry try and pretend. Our alliances are important, but to say that 7,000 ISAF troops would turn Iraq from a "quagmire" to a rousing success is silly.

I apologize for the bruised feelings. Of course some nations made a greater effort than others. The fact is, though, that the ISAF in Afghanistan is something like 7000 troops. That is from 30+ nations. The Danish troop count in Iraq is 500 or so, right?

Those 500 are risking their lives and doing important things, no one is denying that and it is appreciated. You could hardly say, though, that Iraq would be going much more swimmingly if we had another 7000 ISAF troops amid the 100,000+ US troops that are there.

Some people here want to pretend that had we had some huge mandate that the Iraqi people would have been more welcoming and not started lopping off heads. Sadly, that just isn't true.

I suppose people get the government they deserve and the land of free has become a land of bible and all the pastors must be feeeling that chrst has come again