What the heck does Kerry mean?

From Diane Sawyers interview on the 29th.


DIANE SAWYER: Was the war in Iraq worth it?

SEN. JOHN KERRY: We should not have gone to war knowing the information we know today.


Seems like he's mixing tenses here..
Is he saying, that we were wrong because we weren't psychic?
Sounds like a little Monday morning quarterbacking...

What a simple question. Hope no one beats me to it!

Kerry does not believe there was not evidence to start a war in Iraq. I personally do not agree with the statement but that is what he means.

Bad intelligence?
-or-
taking down a pychoctic dictator?

MysticalUnicorn

Thanks,

But It's not that simple..

The man said...WE should not have gone to war then. Knowing what we know NOW..

How COULD we have known then, what we know now?

Thats the point I was trying desperately to make!

I think kerry is implying that bush would still have gone to war now, even knowing what we know. Whereas, kerry wouldn't have.

IOW, if the intelligence were true Kerry was behind the war. Since it wasn't, and if we had known that then, then he would have been against the war.

Bush has said that Saddam himself was the threat and he would have still gone after him, even after knowing the intelligence was bad, because in the futue Saddam would have sought weapons again.

Exactly...I think Kerry is showing that he can admit to mistakes made.

That's better than Bush saying that he would have done the same thing even knowing what he does now. All that shows is that he can't admit when he's wrong. As Kerry said, "You can be certain and be wrong."

SO, if Kerry had been President, and he went to war with Iraq based on
Flawed intelligence..but only found out later..He would have pulled out?

Or

He would have told the US troops...SORRY, I screwed up...you're on your own..

OR

Would he have continued the War, based on OTHER intelligence that still held up to scrutiny. And would be, right now, doing his best to fight the additional forces that have come in to (ahem) ASSIST, those Iraqi "freedom fighters"


OR........Your turn...


(Keep in mind things Kerry has said in the past, regarding Saddam, WMD's)

Originally posted by spacedoubt
SO, if Kerry had been President, and he went to war with Iraq based on
Flawed intelligence..but only found out later..He would have pulled out?

Or

He would have told the US troops...SORRY, I screwed up...you're on your own..

OR

Would he have continued the War, based on OTHER intelligence that still held up to scrutiny. And would be, right now, doing his best to fight the additional forces that have come in to (ahem) ASSIST, those Iraqi "freedom fighters"


OR........Your turn...


(Keep in mind things Kerry has said in the past, regarding Saddam, WMD's)

I seriously doubt Kerry would have used someone like Cheney to bend information towards going to war. Its the reason they are so skittish now with their assesments.

Secondly, I don't think Kerry would have committed to such an invasion with the lack of support we had going in. Having actually been to Vietnam and understanding that winning the war isn't the same as winning the peace he would have thought twice or really exhausted all diplomatic fronts.

At the very least I believe him when he says he would have finished the job in Afghanistan and captured Bin Laden before worrying about Saddam. It was hard for many politicians to go against Bush when he was beating the drums of war against Iraq, the nation was in a fervor and would have viewed it as being weak. That's no excuse, but kudos for him on admitting he would have planned better and that mistakes were made that have caused more American lives than was probably necessary...not to mention the thousands of innocent Iraqi's that have been killed.

Originally posted by spacedoubt
SO, if Kerry had been President, and he went to war with Iraq based on
Flawed intelligence..but only found out later..He would have pulled out?

Based on what Kerry has said, I assume the intelligence would have become suspect over time, as he would have continued inspections and not sent troops in.

Exactly...I think Kerry is showing that he can admit to mistakes made.

That's better than Bush saying that he would have done the same thing even knowing what he does now. All that shows is that he can't admit when he's wrong. As Kerry said, "You can be certain and be wrong."

When did FDR, Lincoln, or Washington admit they were wrong? Or did mistakes not happen in the WWII, Civil War, or Revolutionary War?

I don't believe he even knows! This is what he said right before Christmas last year.

�Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture don�t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president.� (CNN�s �Capital Gang,� 12/20/03; Anne Q. Hoy, �Dean Faces More Criticism,� [New York] Newsday, 12/17/03)

Beats me? Judging from the above statement, I wonder why he's even running for the presidency!

Here's some more quotes for anyone who hasn't read them yet!

Flashback '97 Crossfire on CNN.

John Sununu interviews John Kerry on the"birth" of the Coalition of the UNWILLING.
FLIP
SUNUNU: But senator, the whole process of presenting this through the security council had each of those allies you have mentioned giving a warning in fact to the U.S.. Let's take a look at what each one of 'em had to say. First of all, France said, "The resolution doesn't encourage nor does it justify any escalation." Russia said, "Actions involving force or threatening the use of force could wipe out all of our achievements." And China said, in that very same debate, "We are opposed to the use of force or the threat of force or any actions that might further exasperate tensions. This whole process gave our allies an opportunity not only not to follow America's leadership, not only not to allow us to lead, but to tell us we'd better not do what the president is now saying he might do.


KERRY: Well, John, there's absolutely no statement that they have made or that they will make that will prevent the United States of America and this president or any president from acting in what they believe are the best interests of our country. And obviously it's disappointing. It was disappointing a month ago not to have the French and the Russians understanding that they shouldn't give any signals of weakening on the sanctions and I think those signals would have helped bring about this crisis because they permitted Saddam Hussein to interpret that maybe the moment was right for him to make this challenge.

FLOP



FLIP



SUNUNU: But isn't what he has seen is a loss of U.S. leadership and an erosion under an administration that has failed to lead?

KERRY: On the contrary. The administration is leading. The administration is making it clear that they don't believe that they even need the U.N. Security Council to sign off on a material breach because the finding of material breach was made by Mr. Butler. So furthermore, I think the United States has always reserved the right and will reserve the right to act in its best interests. And clearly it is not just our best interests, it is in the best interests of the world to make it clear to Saddam Hussein that he's not going to get away with a breach of the '91 agreement that he's got to live up to, which is allowing inspections and dismantling his weapons and allowing us to know that he has dismantled his weapons. That's the price he pays for invading Kuwait and starting a war.

FLOP

[edit on 2-10-2004 by spacedoubt]

Originally posted by spacedoubt
SO, if Kerry had been President, and he went to war with Iraq based on
Flawed intelligence..but only found out later..He would have pulled out?

Of course not. Tom Delay would have organized the Republican majority to have him impeached.

At a minimum, whatever candidate the RNC ran against a hypothetical President Kerry now would be Monday morning quarterbacking all over the place saying things like "Kerry lied" and "the buck stops with the President" and "it's our obligation to restore dignity to the office of the President" and "we must restore our place of honor in the world" and you know it.

Then I would start a thread saying "What does Govenor Bush mean when he says We should not have gone to war knowing the information we know today. "

And you would say...

PONG!

I would say what you just said, which is what I just said, except I'd use a different emoticon,
Maybe, or possibly .

Yeah the possibilities are endless..Like some of these threads

[edit on 2-10-2004 by spacedoubt]

Originally posted by Intelearthling
I don't believe he even knows! I wonder why he's even running for the presidency!

Ditto this post. I bet you are right. He has no
idea week to week what he is going to say.
I think he turned orange last week because he
was getting wind burnt being blown around with
the issues.