Doug, the argument for preferring W to Kerry was not just because Democrat presidents start more wars, it was this:
>>The multilateralism or "muscular internationalism" that Kerry offers in contrast to Bush's unilateralism is seen as hopeful by the terminally naive; in truth, it beckons even greater dangers. Having given the American elite its greatest disaster since Vietnam, writes the historian Gabriel Kolko, Bush "is much more likely to continue the destruction of the alliance system that is so crucial to American power. One does not have to believe the worse the better, but we have to consider candidly the foreign policy consequences of a renewal of Bush's mandate . . . As dangerous as it is, Bush's re-election may be a lesser evil." With Nato back in train under President Kerry, and the French and Germans compliant, American ambitions will proceed without the Napoleonic hindrances of the Bush gang.<<
In other words because, internationally, Kerry is preferred by more people to W, that, in fact, will constitute an even greater danger -- the facade of "respectability". Unfortunately, no-one knows what is really in Kerry's mind -- and this is another part of the problem -- an aspect which has been ruthlessly exploited by the Republicans in their campaign against him.
Fortunately, as a non-American, I, personally, do not have to make up my own mind whom to vote for, and I submit this merely for discussion purposes. |
