Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cirrus who wrote (19268)	10/16/2004 10:24:41 AM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

cirrus. From the article you posted the web site of in your last post......" Immediately after Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush administration began offering military assistance to countries willing to support the U.S. led war on terror such as Uzbekistan, Yemen, Jordan and Oman, and lifted restrictions on military aid to Armenia, Azerbaijan, India, Pakistan, Tajikistan, and Yugoslavia to make it possible for military goods and services to be transferred as well. This is not a new trend; in the past, the United States has used its economic power to punish or reward countries for their loyalty to U.S. interests. "....... You said....." The US dangled some enormous payouts to entice countries to participate in the coalition against Iraq."..... As you can see ....." This is not a new trend; in the past, the United States has used its economic power to punish or reward countries for their loyalty to U.S. interests. "....... Was it wrong when other presidents did the same thing to protect America and it's interests? It appears to me that this kind of thing is part of normal foreign policy. Interesting to read, thanks for posting it. You said....." Other countries were offered substantial direct and indirect inducements, or warned that existing aid programs might be "reevaluated", to persuade them to join Bush's "coalition of the willing"...... Again..." This is not a new trend; in the past, the United States has used its economic power to punish or reward countries for their loyalty to U.S. interests. "....... You said....." Do you think those countries that were forced to endorse a war to obtain continued financial assistance are happy with Bush for forcing it down their throats? Bush got his "coalition", but many are quietly furious at Bush for having it jammed down their throats. "..... Again...." This is not a new trend; in the past, the United States has used its economic power to punish or reward countries for their loyalty to U.S. interests. "....... If the countries in question got what they wanted from the USA why would they be " furious "? If what was done is what could be considered normal foreign policy practiced by countries around the world why should it be any different in this case? Or is the problem with you that in this case it was President Bush following normal foreign policy practice. You say " but many are quietly furious "..... Could you pass along whatever information you may have that prompted you to make this statement? I for one would be curious to know which countries are unhappy with the deal they reached with the USA. You said....." Finally, Kerry disagreed with the Bush/Allawi assessment of the situation on the ground - how is that "ridicule"?"...... If you were Allawi or one of those iraqi people depending on the USA to keep their word and stick with them in their fight for freedom how would you feel? what would you think after hearing kerry's words? Kerry should be backing the new Iraqi president and openly offering even more support to the people of iraq in their fight for freedom....but no kerry does what he did 30 years ago and use an ongoing war for political gain for himself. And finally have any other Presidents of the USA used this kind of foreign policy during their terms in office? I don't really know and perhaps you do.