SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (14054)4/12/2004 1:07:54 AM
From: CalculatedRiskRead Replies (3) | Respond to of 81568
 
Kerry has outlined his Plan on CNN and other places. Basically he wants to hand control of Iraq over to an International organization, most likely the UN or NATO. In return, they would take over a bulk of the security.

As we have discussed before, a number of countries have promised troops with a UN mandate. In addition to France; Germany, Russia, India, China and others have offered troops. Of course, Kerry would negotiate commitments from these countries prior to handing over control.

Bush wants help from the International community without giving up control. That will never work.

Here is an article:
boston.com

Excerpt:
'Kerry said the United States now had three options in Iraq. The first -- to continue along the same lines -- would mean American troops would remain exposed, taxpayers would bear billions of dollars in costs and "we will go down a very dangerous road where the outcome is very difficult."

"Option two, you could just say 'Okay, you guys don't want democracy? We'll see you. We're out of here,"' he said. "Not acceptable, because nobody believes that we are better off with an Iraq that is unstable."

The third alternative -- what Kerry called the "smart" approach --- was to reach out boldly and clearly to the international community, explain their stake in not having a failed Iraq and give them a real say in its transformation.'