Kerry slams Bush on terror

[Tigermike 3,715]

I thought John Kerry was against the War on Terrorism? I thought he has been saying the US should not be in Iraq & should turn the War on Terrorism over the United Nations? Has John Kerry NOT voted to decrease funding for the military and the CIA? Mr. Kerry must have brown eyes, cause he is full of )*)&^^

Kerry slams Bush on terror

Democrat says he'd send 40,000 additional troops overseas

Los Angeles -- Charging that President Bush's lack of a "comprehensive strategy for victory" in the war on terror has left the country vulnerable to attack, Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry on Friday called for 40,000 additional troops abroad and beefed-up fire and police services at home, along with improved intelligence and diplomacy efforts which he said would help America "win this war we did not seek.''

The Massachusetts senator, speaking at UCLA, laid out what his staff called a comprehensive program on terrorism, including the hiring of 100,000 new firefighters and 100,000 new police to bolster local communities, expand international cooperation to contain dangerous weapons, and improve diplomatic efforts to calm hot spots.

Kerry also said he was "prepared to appoint a special envoy of the quality of Bill Clinton" to forge consensus in trouble spots like the Middle East.

The speech, well received by the audience of several hundred students and invited guests, and Kerry's question-and-answer session after, was a clear effort to undercut sharp GOP criticisms that Kerry's record is weak on defense and national security -- an issue President Bush is expected to emphasize in the coming campaign.

Kerry's speech came a day after a nationally televised debate in Los Angeles with his chief rival, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, and the two longshot candidates left in the Democratic field, Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio and Al Sharpton. Kerry has won 18 of the first 20 Democratic nominating primaries and caucuses and has a big lead in the polls in most of the 10 states voting on Super Tuesday, including California.

The last major joint appearance for the candidates will be at a Sunday debate in New York, which also votes on Tuesday, when 1,151 Democratic delegates are at stake.

Larry Grisolano, Kerry's California campaign strategist, said the Massachusetts senator is focusing on the Democratic contest, but also laying the ground for an aggressive fall campaign.

"Part of what this campaign is about is trying to lay out substantive policy issues," said Grisolano, adding that terrorism, national security and homeland security are "clearly the issues on everybody's mind.''

"It's an area where Sen. Kerry has great strength, as a veteran and as a senator," said Grisolano.

Kerry's national security speech on Friday, though it occasionally echoed the themes of his typical campaign stump speech, delivered some of his most detailed policy positions and his most caustic criticism of Bush to date. Repeatedly, he sought to portray the White House as an administration of broken promises, insufficient planning, failed diplomacy and misplaced priorities.

"Like all Americans, I responded to President Bush's reassuring words in the days after September 11th. But since then, his actions have fallen short,'' Kerry said. "I do not fault George Bush for doing too much in the war on terror; I believe he's done too little.

"President Bush says we can't afford to fund the war on terror. I say we can't afford not to,'' he said.

The result, Kerry added, was that "by virtually every measure, we still have a homeland security that falls far short of the vulnerabilities we have and the threats we face.''

Republicans immediately sought to dismiss Kerry's address as hypocritical -- the product of a politician with a record that has undermined defense funding.

"Had John Kerry's policies on national security been implemented over the last three decades, America would be less secure,'' said Tracy Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Bush-Cheney campaign in California. "Today's speech ignored his own voting record that would weaken our country's ability to fight and win the war on terror.

"He talks about the need to strengthen homeland security despite voting against homeland security legislation six times. He talks about unilateral preemption and the need to strengthen alliances and then insults our allies by ignoring the more than 30-member coalition standing by America's side,'' Schmitt said. "He calls for more intelligence funding but he proposed to cut intelligence funding by $300 million the year after the first world trade center bombing.

But Kerry refused to back down from the GOP charges that he has been soft on national security.

"Day in and day out, George W. Bush reminds us that he is a 'war president' and that he wants to make national security the central issue of this election. I am ready to have this debate. I welcome it.

"I am convinced that we can prove to the American people that we know how to make them safer and more secure - with a stronger, more comprehensive and more effective strategy for winning the war on terror than the Bush administration has ever envisioned."

Kerry said that to replenish what he called "our overextended military," he would add 40,000 active-duty Army troops, "a temporary increase likely to last the remainder of the decade."

He proposed strengthening "the capacity of intelligence and law enforcement at home" and improving international coalitions "to provide better information and the best chance to target and capture terrorists even before they act."

Kerry, a 19-year senator, lambasted what he called "a kid-glove approach" the White House has toward Saudi Arabia. He charged the Bush administration has looked the other way as the Saudi government supplied and laundered terrorist money.

"If I am president, we will impose tough financial sanctions against nations or banks that engage in money laundering or fail to act against it," Kerry said. "We will launch a 'name and shame' campaign against those that are financing terror. And if they do not respond, they will be shut out of the U.S. financial system.''

Regarding Iraq, Kerry said America has "a solemn obligation to complete mission" begun by Bush, but he noted, "American troops (are) still bogged down in a deadly guerrilla war with no exit in sight."

"In a Kerry administration, we will create and train an Iraqi security force equal to the task of safeguarding itself and the people it is supposed to protect," he said

.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file...8/DEMOCRATS.TMP

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Oh PLEASE. And he is going to get these 40,000 new troops from where? Reinstate the draft? And the cops and firemen? Those will be paid for HOW?? Gee, he's a lib - LET ME GUESS.

When Clinton got all the props for putting 100,000 new cops on the street, guess what happened to those cops when the federal money ran out? And in actuality, for that very reason, no where NEAR 100,000 new cops were hired, because the states and cities knew they would be expected to sustain the salaries after the initial glamor wore off, and so they just didn't hire any new cops. :roll:

Bush hasn't done enough? How many more attacks have we had? How many wanted terrorists and thugs have been arrested? And all while fighting the libs at home tooth and nail over every word, every issue, every dollar, and getting criticized left and left.

And an envoy the quality of Bill Clinton to the Middle East? That is an insult to the people in the Middle East if that is the best he can do.

[rexbo 104]

And an envoy the quality of Bill Clinton to the Middle East? That is an insult to the people in the Middle East if that is the best he can do.

Bill Clinton's cuddling up to Arafat is the reason we have the current bloodbath going on between Isreal and the Palestinians. He should be the LAST person we send to the Middle East. In fact, all of the things Clinton stuck his hands in during his 8 years as Hillary's VP are coming back to bite us; Iraq, Osama, Haiti, Isreal/PLO, to name a few...

[channonc 466]

Bill Clinton's cuddling up to Arafat is the reason we have the current bloodbath going on between Isreal and the Palestinians.

Ok, I was definately not a fan of Clinton, but this statement is completely FALSE!!! The fighting b/w the Palestinians and the Israelis have been going on for centuries.

[Tiger Al 0]

Bill Clinton's cuddling up to Arafat is the reason we have the current bloodbath going on between Isreal and the Palestinians.

Ok, I was definately not a fan of Clinton, but this statement is completely FALSE!!! The fighting b/w the Palestinians and the Israelis have been going on for centuries.

I'd also add that there would probably still be discord between Israel and Egypt had Jimmy Carter not "cuddled up" to Anwar Sadat.

[Tigermike 3,715]

Bill Clinton's cuddling up to Arafat is the reason we have the current bloodbath going on between Isreal and the Palestinians.

Ok, I was definately not a fan of Clinton, but this statement is completely FALSE!!! The fighting b/w the Palestinians and the Israelis have been going on for centuries.

I'd also add that there would probably still be discord between Israel and Egypt had Jimmy Carter not "cuddled up" to Anwar Sadat.

I'm sure the Six Day War had nothing to do with it, huh.

War fought in 1967 between Israel on one side and Egypt, Jordan and Syria on the other side. The active Arab states received aid from Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Algeria.

From its beginning to the end, the war lasted 132 hours and 30 minutes (less than 6 days). But the duration was shorter on 2 of the 3 fronts: on the Egyptian side only 4 days, and on the Jordanian side only 3 days. It was only on the Syrian side that the war lasted the whole 6 days.

http://i-cias.com/e.o/sixdaywr.htm

[rexbo 104]

Ok, I was definately not a fan of Clinton, but this statement is completely FALSE!!!  The fighting b/w the Palestinians and the Israelis have been going on for centuries.

It is not false, the carnage in Isreal increased significantly after Clinton's legacy peace deal broke down. Israel and the PLO were a few signatures away for a major deal towards the end of Clinton's term, with Israel making major concessions. Clinton was doing everything possible to pressure Israel into giving up significant ground and brown-nosing Arafat to accept the deal, so that Clinton could leave some kind of 'legacy'. Arafat being the courrupt terrorist that he is, he walked out on the deal at the last minute and then let lose the bombers beginning this latest round of carnage.

How does that old saying go "you do not negotiate with terrorists"? This is something Clinton and the rest of the Democrats have not yet learned...

[channonc 466]

I am a firm believer that there will never be a real peace agreement b/w the Israelis and the Palestinians. The hate is too far seeded. And actually, Clinton came the closest I think there ever will be. Yes, Israel was willing to give up probably much more than it should have, but it was ultimately Arafat that walked out like you said, not forced out by Clinton.

Like I said before, there will never be peace in that region. I think it is rather presumptious of ANY president to think they will be able to kill centuries of hate. It will never happen.

[Tiger Al 0]

Bill Clinton's cuddling up to Arafat is the reason we have the current bloodbath going on between Isreal and the Palestinians.

Ok, I was definately not a fan of Clinton, but this statement is completely FALSE!!! The fighting b/w the Palestinians and the Israelis have been going on for centuries.

I'd also add that there would probably still be discord between Israel and Egypt had Jimmy Carter not "cuddled up" to Anwar Sadat.

I'm sure the Six Day War had nothing to do with it, huh.

War fought in 1967 between Israel on one side and Egypt, Jordan and Syria on the other side. The active Arab states received aid from Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Algeria.

From its beginning to the end, the war lasted 132 hours and 30 minutes (less than 6 days). But the duration was shorter on 2 of the 3 fronts: on the Egyptian side only 4 days, and on the Jordanian side only 3 days. It was only on the Syrian side that the war lasted the whole 6 days.

http://i-cias.com/e.o/sixdaywr.htm

Are you serious or do you just throw stuff out there because it sounds good? Carter, Begin and Sadat signed the Camp David Peace Accords on September 17, 1978. So, are you implying that those three sought to bring about a peace that had already been in effect for eleven years?

[Ranger12 53]

On the original topic, Kerry is just showing more of his duplicity.

On the topic of Clinton and the mideast, even though you all know how much I can't stand Clinton's politics and liberalism, I think it is stretching it by blaming him for the current problems in Isreal and Palastine. Carter also. Look guys, like one person said, that war has been going on for centuries and it is not going to matter who the president of the USA is, not president is going to bring true peace to the mideast. Yes, you could fault some like Clinton for "cuddling" to the Palenstinians instead of our Isrealite allies, but when it come right down to it, the Palenstian terrorists are going to do their own thing and any government be damned that tries to tell them otherwise. This conflict goes back during Biblical times and according the Bible I read, they only person that will bring a temporary "false peace", will be the Antichrist. Even though I am not catholic, as the Pope said, "It is as it was" and to add to that "It is, as it is going to be".