[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: madape
Of course I don't think Kerry really wants US soldiers dead in the street.

I'm pleased that you don't really believe what you posted, and agree that Kerry does not want "US soldiers dead in the street"

But the actions and words of Kerry and his Boston compatriots during both the Vietnam war and the Iraq conflict make me wonder how hard he's cheering for the American soldier. His intent may not be to embolden the Iraqi insurgency, but I think he's doing a fine job of it nonetheless. The Al-Sadr uprising has no chance of overwhelming the coalition forces. They know that, but that's not what they are trying to do. Their intention is to strike us at home, where they see America as weak and unsupportive of military action. They want to kill as many coallition forces as they can, in the hope that domestic US pressure forces us to retreat out of Iraq like we did out of Vietnam and Somalia. They know that the only way to win a war against the US is to force the US not to fight the war.

Disagreeing withe current WH policy in Iraq, as well as the disagreement with our war in Indochina, isn't against the american soldier. The pursuit of illconceived policies that needlessly puts our servicemen in jeapordy is what is being argued against.

I am not agreeing that alSadr understands that he is facing imminent defeat. I can see that he believes that he can win, and he is wrong.

Kerry and Kennedy are our enemies greatest allies. They are facilitating our defeat. Kerry's comment about Al-Sadr being a legitimate voice.. his repeated announcements that the US has made a great mistake in Iraq, his pleading for UN help, his calling Hamas and Hezzbola only "sort-of" terrorists, and his overall support among the American populace, all show our enemies that their tactics are working. To the terrorists, Kerry is a symbol of US cowardice... the great hope of the Islamic Reich. Don't you find it disgusting, that the man who would be president, comes out and supports our enemy?!??

I disagree, dissent is not provided aid to the enemy. To be critical of Bush's policies is NOT the same as giving "support" to our enemy, especially if those policies are illconceived.
As I argued above, the followers of al Sadr are Iraqis and therefore "legitimate" in their own way. We may not like their voice, we may disagree with their methods or intent, but they are the citizens of their country and therefore "legitimate". I agree that there is a role for the UN. If you reread the quote he is not referring to Hamas and Hexbollah as "sort of" terrorists, he is saying that al Sadr, by embracing these two groups, is becoming a "sort of terorist" by association.

He may not outright WANT US soldiers to die in the street. But to me he appears much more interested in being the president than he is in the lives of our soldiers. If he WERE a true patriot, he would be supportive of our troops. He would come right out and call Al-Sadr an evil man, who needs to be crushed. Instead, he's selling our soldiers lives for votes.

A "true patriot" is interested in what's best for our country, best for our armed forces survival. He has a different vision than the current administration, and disagreeing with our current policies does not make him any less a patriot. This is a democracy with dissent a vital lifeblood of that pluralism.