Kerry claimed shortly after Allawi's speech to congress that "The prime minister and the president are here obviously to put their best face on the policy, but the fact is that the CIA estimates, the reporting, the ground operations and the troops all tell a different story.''

Allawi's Speech.
Kerry's Speech.

Sadly, Kerry seems to now be not only an expert on the war, America, and CIA intelligents in this statement, but also an expert on the inner workings of Iraq. Sad because Kerry attempts to sell is an expert on a country that he does not live in, work in, or seem to have an interest in obtaining a government ran by the people of Iraq. This raises the following questions:

1. Is Kerry right that Allawi has unrealistic views on Iraq?

2. Is Allawi a mere puppet to Bush, or does Allawi have a mind of his own?

3. Is Kerry attacking Allawi in the best interest for Americans in Iraq?

4. If Kerry wins the election, would he be able to work along side Allawi in managing Allawi's unrealistic views and goals?

I have to say that i was surprised Kerry would attack Allawi and his credibility. Allawi is a leader in Iraq and for Kerry to attack him is counter-productive. All day long Kerry talks about bringing in our friends and keeping our alliances strong. I do not understand what can be accomplished by criticizing him.

Furthermore, Allawi is an Iraqi...he knows Iraqis and he lives in Iraq. Correct me if i am wrong, but John Kerry has never been to Iraq. So to call Allawi's views 'unrealistic' is pure speculation and baseless. The CIA predicted a tough time in Iraq, yes...but it was just a prediction. Its funny how people are so quick to accept the CIA reports when they didnt give the same benefit of the doubt before.

Kerry shouldnt have attacked Allawi but rather stay focused on Bush. I thought Allawi did an excellent job and made a better case than Bush did in regards to the War on Iraq. If Kerry is elected president, working with Allawi could be tough due to his 'unrealistic views'. But if i remember correctly there are some men in our country's history who had 'unrealistic views'.

1. Is Kerry right that Allawi has unrealistic views on Iraq?

Not unrealistic, he just found a bigger flip-flopper. Last week Allawi said that terrosists were "Flooding into Iraq", today he says everything is Rosey.

2. Is Allawi a mere puppet to Bush, or does Allawi have a mind of his own?
Pure puppet. We have a Briton in Iraq that is about to have his head chopped off, and Allawi is here in the US making a politicol stop for W. Unbelievable. I don't understand how this guy has time for a vacation right now. Bush has shown him a lot on how to lead.

3. Is Kerry attacking Allawi in the best interest for Americans in Iraq?
He had to do something. Allawi should be at home dealing with the mess back there, NOT campaigning for the current administartion. Remember, this war is illegal according to the UN.

4. If Kerry wins the election, would he be able to work along side Allawi in managing Allawi's unrealistic views and goals?

My bet is that Allawi will be dead by then. Sorry, it's just an opinion. And if not, he will be kissing the butt of the American President just as much than as he is doing now.

Yes that would be fortunate for Kerry if he wins.

Other wise he would have to say, sorry about disagreeing with you before the election but I could not support you because it would have supported Bush as well.

1. Is Kerry right that Allawi has unrealistic views on Iraq?

Kerry is just disagreeing with Allawi for the fact that it would cast Bush in a positive light and he can't have that right now.

I was on vacation last week and would like a copy of the statement made by Allawi that said the terrorist are flooding Iraq. Secondly, Allawi in his speech said nowhere that 'everything is rosey.' It seemed more that Allawi is upset with Western Media claim everywhere in Iraq is unstable.



Last time I checked our constitution, Congress does not vote for the President; therefore, Congress can not be a political stop. Secondly, he is not in the U.S. on vacation. First he attended the U.N. for the annual leaders conference with all the other Presidents and PM across the world, and then stopped in Congress to say thank you for helping the people of Iraq. I mean the guy is not windsurfing. Illegal war? It was never put to vote, and i don't know of any resolutions after the war begun making the war 'illegal.' Which resolution is that?



Okay, good opinion. Allawi is wanted by every terrorist in the world and the Coalition is the only thing that stands in their way.

Here ya go Yehoshua (hope you had a good vacation, I need one)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/09/20/britain.allawi/


Of course, he also shares Bush's (imo, naive and inaccurate) view that by Iraq being the flashpoint terrorists will be quiet elsewhere:

"Iraq is on the front line of fighting these terrorists. And, God forbid, if Iraq is broken or the will of Iraq is broken, then London would be a target, Washington will be a target, Paris will be a target, Cairo will be a target, as we have seen in the past."

Doc

The most important thing that Bush has said in the past couple days is that we are fighting terrorists (Al-Queda linked) in Iraq with the insurgency and the Iran-backed operatives. A funny coincidence has been brought up recently. Isnt it weird how Al-Sadr and Zarqawi are almost taking turns in shows of violence and outrage? After the beheadings a few months ago, Al Sadr's militia picked up its end of the insurgency and turned up the heat. While the Al-Sadr thing was going on...nobody was beheaded (i believe anyway). People were kidnapped but were for the most part set free. Now that Al-Sadr's militia has died down again, back to Zarqawi and his tactics. Pretty coincidental in my eyes.

I would rather that the terrorists are fought in Iraq where our military is ready and willing to fight them, then on United States soil where our laws and our freedoms can shield them until they commit an act of terrorism. Whether or not you agree that the Iraq War was part of the War on Terror when we invaded...it is unmistakable at this point that Iraq has become a place terrorists want to go because they know that a free and democratic Iraq is detremental to their goals of a worldwide Islamo-Fascist state. They want to see us fail, they want to see us doubt, and they are manipulating us through the media. Germany, Japan, and all the other democracies we have set up have taken years to work. There was a lot of anger and a lot of resentment in Europe post-WW2 towards Americans because we were there helping. But things worked out.

We must believe that things will work in Iraq. WE MUST. If we do not believe it is possible, than it never will be. Freedom survives on the will of those who support and maintain it. If we lose faith on Iraq, we lose Iraq.

1. Is Kerry right that Allawi has unrealistic views on Iraq?

Kerry has not been to Iraq. Kerry did not attend the speech to the joint session of Congress (only 19 Democratic Senators attended). Allawi received a standing ovation from the assembled Congress, including the Democrats.

Allawi is optimistic. Bush is optimistic. Kerry's campaign is focused on pessimism. It almost has to be.

2. Is Allawi a mere puppet to Bush, or does Allawi have a mind of his own?
Allawi is grateful to Bush for freeing his country from Saddam. Does he have a mind of his own? I should hope so. Right now, his priority needs to be ensuring that the US will continue to support his government. I would be quite concerned if I were Allawi that if Kerry were elected, the US would pull out of Iraq. That isn't partisan on my part, either. It would be a big concern for me.

Now, Kerry has dismissed Allawi's views of the situation. Some in the Kerry camp have suggested that Bush's people wrote his speech for him. That would offend me if I were the Prime Minister of a country. I guess Kerry's "reaching out to allies" doesn't extend to Iraq.

3. Is Kerry attacking Allawi in the best interest for Americans in Iraq?

He should not have challenged Allawi's viewpoint so strongly. He should stick to criticizing Bush. I do think that mixed messages are harmful to the troop morale in Iraq, as well as to the morale of the Iraqi people. Kerry needs to stick to one position on Iraq. Although he has said we need to win, he certainly doesn't inspire confidence that we will stick things out through the hard times.

4. If Kerry wins the election, would he be able to work along side Allawi in managing Allawi's unrealistic views and goals?

It depends on what Kerry's position is that day...

The Iraqi leader needs to get some things out of the US. I think if Kerry works with him, everything will be fine. If he indicates premature withdrawal, then I think there will be real friction.

2. Is Allawi a mere puppet to Bush, or does Allawi have a mind of his own?
Apparently so, according to Joe Lockhart, quoted in the LA Times:

While Kerry was relatively restrained in disputing Allawi's upbeat portrayal, some of his aides suggested that the Iraqi leader was simply doing the bidding of the Bush administration, which helped arrange his appointment in June.

"The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips," said Joe Lockhart, a senior Kerry adviser.
Real classy.....

One has to wonder how this reconciles with Kerry's fervent vision of 'we are the world' cooperation with other nations. And how relations between a President Kerry and Allawi would be seen, by allies, troops and terrorists alike..........

Very true and in Allawi's speech to the joint house session, he commented that: Neither tyranny nor terrorism has a place in our region or our world. And that is why we Iraqis will stand by you, America, in a war larger than either of our nations, the global battle to live in freedom.

This can not be a flip-flop for the following reasons:
1. He knows his challenge;
2. He faces his challenge with optimism;
3. Depsite the flood of terrorist, he will stand firm against them.

I guess in your eyes Gov. Mule, a flip-flopper is someone who faces their extreme challenges rosily (if that's a word), faces their challenges with shear optimism and determination to see his beloved country excel to become an example of freedom in the Middle East.

To me this is not a flip-flopper, but a man strong in his ideals and wants for his country to succeed. He has a passion for his country and a great need to thank the U.S. for making his country something he could be proud of once again.

And what did our representative do for him? Applaud. Well almost all. Two were missing. Why did they miss it? And now they come out against Allawi, why? Is this having compassion for a nation at its birth of democracy? Is this what people want their President to do when a foreign leader comes to their country: turn their back, ignore his comments, and speak against them from a distance away from the leader?



Yes I did. I drove across the U.S. I went through swing states, stopped, talk to the people, got the 'pulse' of the nation through my eyes. I had a great time.

Watch where you point that Iraq expert finger yehoushua, Dubya is such an expert that a year after ‘Mission Accomplish’ things are worse. Yeah that’s the kind of expertise we need. Pretty average but for a C student you get what you vote for.

He and his administration have been providing erroneous and contradictory information (ex: estimated Iraq troop strength) and now Allawi states last week that terrorist have been pouring across the borders (and Colin Powell had a similar assessment) and suddenly this week, auto-magically right before congress, it’s not an issue. Sounds like he’s bucking for a position on Bush’s cabinet.

Kerry voices an opinion on Iraq and you state that he’s an expert. For crying out loud in a bucket the man is running for President and he has to state something, else you’d be on him for being vanilla and not taking a stance. Can’t have it both ways my friend.


Based on your logic please tell me how Dubya is the expert here? Because half his cabinet sealed deals with Saddam under Reagan and his daddy?


In the link you provided, a snip from Kerry’s speech:


It would help if you could turn facts in to factual opinion and not partisan conjecture.

1. Is Kerry right that Allawi has unrealistic views on Iraq?

I’ve read through Kerry’s statements several times and no where do I see Kerry stating that Allawi has unrealistic views. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

2. Is Allawi a mere puppet to Bush, or does Allawi have a mind of his own?

As stated earlier, a week ago he states terrorist are poring over the border and suddenly they’re not. After reading his speech he really has a command on the English language, if fact it sounded a lot like a Bush speech.

But to Allawi’s and Dubya’s credit, and as I posted in another thread, these two leaders must keep a positive attitude or this will get out of hand in a hurry. When things are going bad it’s a delicate balance between the truth and staying realistically positive.

3. Is Kerry attacking Allawi in the best interest for Americans in Iraq?

Again, I don’t see Kerry attacking Allawi. Kerry is merely questioning the inconsistencies coming from the Bush administration and why Allawi changed his opinion in one week.

4. If Kerry wins the election, would he be able to work along side Allawi in managing Allawi's unrealistic views and goals?

It’s apparent from Allawi’s speech that he appreciates the effort and sacrifices and desperately wants his guide his country to self governance. He’ll work with who ever is in office.

If you look at Allawi's Speech, half the speech is about the problems that Iraq is facing. And in the press conference after meeting with Bush, Allawi says "Observers around the world honestly wonder if we in Iraq really can ... overcome the enemies who seek to tear us down...These doubters risk underestimating our country, and they risk fueling the hopes of the terrorists."

Bush said at the same press conference "Iraq is a central front in the war on terror and our only option is victory."

(Press Conferences)



I am on him because he didn't even show for speech, and then he attacks the speaker for speaking on behalf of his country.



I don't think Bush is an expert nor did I state he was. Allawi's the expert. That is what this thread is about. The relationship between Allawi and Kerry. Not 'what does Bush know about Iraq.'

Who on Bush's cabinet sealed deals with Saddam under his father cabinet?



In what way will Kerry help the people of Iraq to secure democracy in their country when he claims: "The prime minister and the president are here, obviously, to put their best face on the policy. But the fact is that the CIA estimates, the reporting, the ground operations and the troops all tell a different story."

Kerry's great plan is to get more nations involved. Yet at the same time, Kerry isn't saying which nations, how he will get nations that believe the war is unnecessary involved, and he is turning his back to the leader of the nation he should plans to help.

Kerry also plans to decrease the number of American troops in Iraq and increase the number of special forces. Kerry claims "You have to provide security. And the only way to provide security adequately is to rapidly train the forces. This administration has not done that."

Is that not what is going on in Iraq? According to the expert, Allawi, "The Iraqi government now commands almost 50,000 armed and combat- ready Iraqis. By January it will be some 145,000. And by the end of next year, some 250,000 Iraqis. The government has accelerated the development of Iraqi special forces, and the establishment of a counter-terrorist strike force to tackle specific problems caused by insurgencies."

I guess we can conclude that Kerry's great plans to securing Iraqi freedom is what is going on right now. So STAY THE COURSE.



"I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement of a few days ago...The prime minister and the president are here, obviously, to put their best face on the policy. But the fact is that the CIA estimates, the reporting, the ground operations and the troops all tell a different story." Kerry's claims of the lack of a realistic view on behalf of Allawi and Bush.

Maybe it’s the word ‘attack’ that I’m having an issue with. I don’t see Kerry ‘attacking’ Allawi, he’s simply questioning his statement from a week ago where ‘terrorist were pouring over the border’ and then before congress this week they’re not.

So it’s ok to call Kerry a flip-flopper but here’s the future leader of Iraq who has changed his opinion in less than a week and we, or Kerry, aren’t supposed to challenge his statement? And when Kerry questions his judgement of the situation he’s accused of ‘attacking’? Mighty strong words for just stating the truth.


Rumsfeld, Powell and the CIA are claiming things are worse than a year ago and will continue to get worse before it gets better. I guess Bush and Allawi missed that briefing. Kerry is just calling it like it is, imagine a politician telling the truth and getting called to the mat.


Mr Cheeny, ok not a cabinet member, just the VP.

From ABC news:

Kerry: Allawi's Take on Iraq Unrealistic
This is the context of Allawi's earlier remarks, I see no discrepancy with his speech.

Kerry's remarks did constitute a rather rude attack on a visiting head of state. Lumping Allawi in with the Bush campaign was a bad idea.

I don't see anywhere in Allawi's speech where he contradicts himself. Can you please point this out.



Allawi is not the future leader of Iraq. Allawi is the current PM of Iraq. Who knows if Allawi will run for PM. Or if Allawi's party will when parliament. In parliamentary styled governments, you vote for your party, and the party votes for the PM.

Kerry should not question a foreign leader of a country that he wants to help become a democracy. It causes people to question if Kerry REALLY wants to help Iraq become a free nation. Kerry needs to extend a hand to Allawi if he wants to help. I mean is it really helpful to criticize someone for statements you think contradict each other.



At the press conference after, which is called out above, both Bush and Allawi stated that Iraq will get worst before it gets better.

This comment from the Kerry campaign is completely in-appropriate.


I thought that Kerry was supposed to be some master diplomat, bringing our 'traditional allies' and others to the table. He has completely dismissed the UK, Australia, Japan and Central Europe, and now he's accusing the PM of a country we are paying to rebuild of being a puppet. How is this helpful? How is it diplomatic? How does it make for "a stronger America" as promised?

3. Is Kerry attacking Allawi in the best interest for Americans in Iraq?

Allawi being in the U. S. is completely immaterial to the issue of a national debate on Iraq.

The U. S, Military commander in Iraq, General John Abazaid, was on Meet the Press this morning. In general, I thought he sugar coated the situation. I did however, like the answer he gave to this question by Russert. I think it speaks directly to the question above.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6106292/

Perhaps, but Kerry's remarks picked out Allwai by name. If he wanted to debate he could have stuck with his opponent Bush. Accusing a visiting friendly head of state of misleading the American people, just to score a couple of political points was pretty grimy.

I recall an old Star Trek episode where Captain Kirk and his crew members were surrounded by the enemy. Kirk said, "We've got 'em, right where they want us." Is this how American troops feel in Fallujah and other hot spots?

Of course Allawi made nice with the President and Congress. He was obligated to say that things are tough but that the "good guys" are going to win. In order to make that sound plausible, Allawi resorted to rhetoric that we hear coming from Bush's mouth during this campaign. Can anyone blame Allawi for making the speeches more positive when addressing the very people who vote for the funds for the continuing support of Iraq?

Yes, Allawi must have some courage when he knows that Islamic anarchists and terrorists would like nothing better than to kill him. I will not question his bravery or his honesty; but I agree with John Kerry that glossing over the difficulties our troops are facing and dying because of in Iraq is tantamount to misleading our people, even if it might be what our people want to hear.

It is all right to disagree with Allawi and criticize his speech. Iraq is a political issue, and it has been from the get-go. People like me opposed it, and we view whatever Bush does with a critical or skeptical eye ever since the weapons of mass destruction weren't found. We've seen a sovereign nation that probably had fewer terrorists in it than our country did become a base of operations for Islamic terrorists against the American military machine. And it happened because we picked a fight with the dictator who was keeping these same terrorists out.

Yes, and what happened to the crew of Star Trek? They were able to get out of the situation. I guess that goes to show that Americans, past, present, and future will always get themselves into tight situations to help others, and will always get out of those situations.



Of course Allawi made nice with the President and Congress? What do you mean of course? Of course he didn't have to come to the US. He could have declined the invite due to hardships in his own country. He didn't have to speak in front of Congress, or meet with the President.

Why not meet with Kerry? I mean if all goes well for Kerry on Thursday, in three months he will be the president. Of course he should also have met with Kerry. But Kerry didn't even bother to go to meeting for congress, and then immediately afterwards in a raspy voice due to his illness, he 'questions' Allawi authority and expertise on Iraq.

The statement "Allawi resorted to rhetoric that we hear coming from Bush's mouth during this campaign" raise the question: how do we know it is Bush rhetoric? Could it be Allawi's rhetoric that Bush resorts to while campaign? Or maybe when numerous people make the same claim, it must be true?



Or it is misleading to deny that positives of Iraq? And no where in Allawi's speech or joint press conference in the rose garden do we here 'misleading' about the dangers. In fact, both Allawi and Bush warned that things will get worst in Iraq before they get better. Odd, but that is also what Kerry is saying. In fact, that is all Kerry is saying. No positive.



It is not alright to disagree with Allawi when your plan is to help his country. Kerry wants to help the people of Iraq, but is doing so by disagreeing with the current Iraq leader? How is this helpful? How is this working towards peace? And the most upsetting is a Senator, Kerry didn't even bother to go to meeting. This is a sign of a person who truly does not want to help the people of Iraq. He should just admit it and move on. Admit like all the people opposed to the war that we need to pull out, throw our hands in the air, and say 'we did the best we could.'

But the real question is, is that Kerry's point of view?

We went through this same question a few months ago regarding a terrorist level briefing. Kerry simply can't leave campaigning, although the Bush people would love nothing more, every time the president and his people concoct some reason for him to do so.

Much of Bush's communication is done through video conferences, etc. Kerry knows what's going on without actually attending.

It's a nice little ploy. If Kerry goes he can't campaign and if he doesn't he's criticized.

So by this logic, Bush is not acting as President? And where was Bush's Press conference? In the Rose Garden. That wasn't in some swing state. AND he met with Allawi, Kerry did not. AND he had a joint press conference with Allawi, Kerry did not. These are things that put Kerry's comments into question.

Let me think which would have more sway with people. Kerry at some hotel holding a press conference discussing a meeting he did not attend OR Kerry holding a press conference on the Capital steps? I don't believe for one second that Kerry leaving PA, for one day to deliver a serious speech against the current leader of Iraq on the Capitol steps after attending a meeting with the leader would in anyway take away form his campaign. It would probably help it with the people in PA. But then again, the Kerry camp has done everything in its power to make Kerry look bad.

To decline an invitation from the President? Have you ever heard "Don't bite the hand that feeds you"? I don't think that he realistically could have declined the invitation without Bush taking it as a personal slight or affront.


I have no problem with him meeting with Kerry. And I'm sure he will should Kerry become President. But I am just as sure that Kerry needs to keep campaigning if he wants to be President.


"...[W]hen numerous people make the same claim, it must be true?"

(Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus, because all the parents say so. )

With Allawi having English as a second (third?) language, it makes sense he would use the simplest terms to express himself in English. Bush does the same thing.
Maybe that's why they sound so much alike.




Bush touts enough of the positives of the occupation of Iraq for both him and Kerry! Kerry is pointing out the problems in Iraq, which are considerable and severe, because he wants to WIN and clean up the quagmire.

What do you expect from someone who is running against the President based on the President's record of declaring war on a non-belligerent country and ending up with a conquered (excuse me, liberated) country infested with every kind of Islamic extremist that doesn't give a damn about democracy and is focused on driving all of the "infidels" out using violence? Have you seen the death toll lately? And what about the dismembered and otherwise seriously injured soldiers who are being shipped home? They've paid a horrible price as well.





Yehoshua, sometimes good friends are constrained to offer criticism. I don't suspect that Allawi is so thin-skinned that he cannot take criticism, especially in the context of a Presidential election campaign.

And yes, it is all right to criticize a public figure. They are big boys. Kerry did not "flame" Allawi or call him names, for heaven's sake.

As has been brought up previously regarding Kerry not attending the session of Congress, he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. He is trying to win the election. We're so sorry if that offends the sensibilities of our Republican fellow citizens, but that's the way it is.


Kerry would have done things differently. He does not agree with the way George W. Bush led the country into a pre-emptive war based on faulty intelligence and an attempt to link Iraq to the events of 9/11. Kerry is committed to having the troops there for a while to see the job through. I personally would like to see the troops pulled out right away if not sooner, but it is for the sake of the Iraqis, whose country WE trashed, that the soldiers should remain.

Be glad I'm not the Democratic Presidential nominee!

Can it be safe to say that Kerry's declined invitation to hear Allawi speak before Congress is a 'personal slight or affront?' I think it is. Allwai could have been just like Kerry and choose not to come; however, Allawi can now assume that one of the men wanting to be the next President of the United States will ignore his country's. This inturn by speaking has called Allawi to bite the hand that feeds, if Kerry is elected.



Kerry choose not to extend a hand of friendship or apply for the ability to meet with Allawi before taking office by turning his back to Allawi when he was here.



Which problems in Iraq are so 'severe' that there is nothing to compare them to in the United States?



Yes I have seen the death toll lately. Have you seen the murder rates in the US lately? Pretty similar. Which just goes to show that there are 'extremist' everywhere. Whether it is the Islamic or the gang banger in major city USA, the still inflict the same amount of violence. The problem, which is what Allawi's speech and qualms with the US was about, is the fact that Western Media is to busy focusing on area's that are yes out of control, like South Central LA, and not on areas of the country that are actually prospering.

Yes there are lots of people who do not give a damn about 'democracy.' Have you seen the projected number of people who are eligible to vote verses the people who probably will vote? Last I heard in California it was 1 in 8. That means that for ever one person who gives a damn about 'democracy' in California, there are 8 people who could care less. Now out of those 8 how many are gang members who resist the authority of police in their neighborhoods and run their on little country within the inner cities? It is all perspective.

And Kerry has the wrong perspective. By turning his back to Allawi and questioning Allawi's motives, Kerry has affirmed his belief in the wrong perspective on the war and the situation in Iraq.



That is odd because after 9/11 Kerry was so sure it was Iraq. He went on all the Sunday shows describing the conditions of Iraq. And even during the Clinton Years, Kerry was strong about going into Iraq. The very idea that Kerry would not have gone into Iraq is against the very things Kerry was saying after 9/11 and until last March. I guess that is why he flip flops.

Maybe they did.

No. Doubtful that Allawi will consider it an affront; however, if he did I am sure he possesses the maturity to get over it and work with Kerry should he become the next President. After all, the man is supposed to keep the welfare of his country before his own feelings.

Allawi should assume nothing about John Kerry--at least I hope he's not foolish enough to depend on the Republicans' take on Kerry. And if he pays attention to the text from last night's Presidential campaign debate, he will KNOW that Kerry has no intentions of just pulling out of Iraq.


Aw gee. And if he had made a big deal of it, Bush could have just as easily said, "Look, Bubba, you're not President. I am. This is my show." And Bush would be right. It was his show.

Would Bush as Governor of Texas have tried to upstage Clinton in a similar situation? Nope.

Why are you so concerned about what Allawi thinks, anyway? It's not enough to have our soldiers fighting and dying for their country and having our tax money go toward their schools and firehouses while our own don't get sufficient funding?


Is this a serious question???? Let's see--bombings in the capital city of Baghdad, open warfare in Fallujah, cities where our military doesn't go because it's "just too dangerous"? And how about Samarra, where a 9 hours+ fight has been going on with insurgents today? How many news articles do you want me to cite? Or are you trying to jerk my chain?



Tell you what--you move to Iraq, and I'll move to LA. Let's see which one of us gets beheaded first.


So maybe they shouldn't vote if they don't give a damn. But it won't be because there haven't been voter registration drives. It is because of their own ignorance and/or apathy. And maybe Andy Rooney is right: we don't need votes from people who are ignorant or who don't care.


Will it even matter one bit what Allawi thinks about Kerry if Kerry isn't elected? Let the man campaign for President, for Pete's sake!


This "flip flop" dismissive attitude is so trite. It enables Bush supporters to put their brains on auto-pilot and not have to think about what Kerry has been saying.

Obviously your information on Kerry comes from the Republican spin machine. I would suggest you read the transcript of last night's Presidential campaign debate on foreign policy. During the debate Senator Kerry articulated quite well his position on the Iraq War.

But if you feel confident enough in your assessment of the Democratic Presidential candidate based on his continuing to campaign rather than fly back to Washington to listen to Allawi and based on the fact that he had an opinion about what is going on in Iraq, nothing of what I said is going to sway you.

(Edited: Thanks, Doclotus! )

A.) Allawi has no Iraqi constituency (though, to be fair, neither did Chalabi). Like Chalabi, he's a former foreign employee of the CIA who hadn't been in Iraq for decades before the invasion and had no following there. His real constituency is the Bush administration, the CIA and, to a lesser degree, the U.S. military in Iraq.

B.) Allawi has flip-flopped on conditions in Iraq from week to week and month to month. One week, things are just great and couldn't be going better. The next, he needs MUCH more help because the situation is rapidly deteriorating.

C.)He's attempting to GAIN a constituency by virtue of his current position, but has much less chance of being successful at that than does George Bush.