Full Version: John Kerry's record part2
Much ado about some of Kerry's votes in the past towards the Military and weaponry.
He has voted against some bombers and missiles and such.
Now I would hate to be accused of being "On the Wrong Side of History"
here but,
in most cases what is the relevance to todays war.
Iraq is debatable (as we have seen ad nauseum)as a valid action in the War on Terror.
except in the cases of terrorist actions against civilians or Soldiers try to keep Iraq out of this.
The War on Terror will not be by any means a conventional one. It will require massive Intel and rapid response strike teams and lots of undramatic not good for TV ratings diplomacy.
Terrorists will not meet us in open battle.
Terrorists do not have tanks, or battleships or ICBMs
Terrorists hide in plain sight within societies structure
So by voting against some Weapon systems does this truly show Kerry as possibly being soft on terrorists?
What value are these weapon systems against terrorist Cells?
He has voted against some bombers and missiles and such.
Now I would hate to be accused of being "On the Wrong Side of History"
here but,in most cases what is the relevance to todays war.
Iraq is debatable (as we have seen ad nauseum)as a valid action in the War on Terror.
except in the cases of terrorist actions against civilians or Soldiers try to keep Iraq out of this.
The War on Terror will not be by any means a conventional one. It will require massive Intel and rapid response strike teams and lots of undramatic not good for TV ratings diplomacy.
Terrorists will not meet us in open battle.
Terrorists do not have tanks, or battleships or ICBMs
Terrorists hide in plain sight within societies structure
So by voting against some Weapon systems does this truly show Kerry as possibly being soft on terrorists?
What value are these weapon systems against terrorist Cells?
Moved to Election 2004
Hey, Christopher, how about helping us out here with some links to the weapons systems that Kerry voted against, so we can weigh the evidence? Thanks! 
Sorry for the short, insubstantial post, but I saw this relevant item of interest and wanted to share it despite not having much time:
McCain statements about Kerry on defense
Obviously not a stirring defense, but all political niceties considered, it's a good remindeder that being on one side of the other does not mean being dogmatic in attacking the other side or that Kerry's defense record is universally disrespected by all Republicans. Sen. McCain goes on to suggest the candidates are focusing too much on their bases and negative rhetoric and not enough on substance.
Hopefully I'll have time later to respond to the specifics here.
McCain statements about Kerry on defense
QUOTE
Asked on NBC's "Today" if he thought Kerry was weak on defense, McCain said: "No, I do not believe that he is, quote, weak on defense. He's responsible for his voting record, as we are all responsible for our records, and he'll have to explain it. But, no, I do not believe that he is necessarily weak on defense. I don't agree with him on some issues, clearly. But I decry this negativism that's going on on both sides. The American people don't need it."
Obviously not a stirring defense, but all political niceties considered, it's a good remindeder that being on one side of the other does not mean being dogmatic in attacking the other side or that Kerry's defense record is universally disrespected by all Republicans. Sen. McCain goes on to suggest the candidates are focusing too much on their bases and negative rhetoric and not enough on substance.
Hopefully I'll have time later to respond to the specifics here.
QUOTE(christopher @ Mar 18 2004, 02:30 PM)
Umm... can you be a bit more precise? The link you posted is a long list of 2003-2004 votes that Kerry mostly missed because he was out campaigning for his next job. Not exactly representative of his long history in the Senate and it doesn't really provide evidence one way or the other.
Or perhaps that's what you're getting at?
What we need to get the ball rolling here is a list of specific defense votes that this topic concerns. Not just a link to ALL of his votes, many of which aren't concerned with anything to do with this topic.
http://bjcat0.tripod.com/kerryrecord.htm
This one is a little more detailed on bill and seems to represent the focus of the attacks on kerry.
I suppose I should add a little to my question. This is not a conventional war by any means. Technically Iraq does not fit in with the enemies we face in the War on Terror. The terrorist activities happening in Iraq at this time are more in line with what we actually face. So what is the relevance of classic military weaponry in regards to the War on Terror?
I could see the use of the Apache. but what good are the rest of them against terrorist cells?
Much of the uproar seems to be about weapon systems which are next to useless against terror cells. Arguments against his voting on budgets for Intelligence services are up for grabs but the rest seems irrelevant
This one is a little more detailed on bill and seems to represent the focus of the attacks on kerry.
I suppose I should add a little to my question. This is not a conventional war by any means. Technically Iraq does not fit in with the enemies we face in the War on Terror. The terrorist activities happening in Iraq at this time are more in line with what we actually face. So what is the relevance of classic military weaponry in regards to the War on Terror?
QUOTE
B-1 bomber, B-2 stealth bomber, AH-64 Apache helicopter, Patriot missile, the F-15, F-14A and F-14D jets, the AV-8B Harrier jet
M1 Abrams tank, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the Tomahawk cruise missile, and the F-16 jet
M1 Abrams tank, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the Tomahawk cruise missile, and the F-16 jet
I could see the use of the Apache. but what good are the rest of them against terrorist cells?
Much of the uproar seems to be about weapon systems which are next to useless against terror cells. Arguments against his voting on budgets for Intelligence services are up for grabs but the rest seems irrelevant
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.