Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Club: In a world where you're either with us or against us, I can understand why you want to see contradictions in those statements. In the former set, he supported the war at the time, and then began to see things differently as he found out the premises for it were false,
|
Or, alternatively, he supported the war because he thought it was right and consistent what he had been saying since 1998. Then he started to tact for political purposes.
Quote:
|
On the number of troops, I suspect that there's context missing --
|
I suspect not. It has been in most of his recent speeches. It's the new new thing. He said yesterday in a speech that it is wrong that we are building firehouses in Iraq and closing them here. His new tact seems to be to argue that the money for the war is better spent in the US. That is a legitimate position to have, but not given his prior statements. And if he has that position, then he should just come out and say that he is against the Bush policy of "staying the course."
Quote:
|
In any event, I'm not defending the whole of Kerry's Iraq policy.
|
Which one?
Quote:
|
My original point was that what he said on Imus was perfectly consistent with his earlier positions, notwithstanding your fervent desire to find hypocrisy in everything he does.
|
And as I said in my PM, we can agree to disagree. It's very hard to convince anyone of anything on these board. In that regard, do you still believe the NG documents are real?
eft
