Kerry was going to be the democratic nominee in 04, The endorsement of Kerry by North Korea, the Iranians, Cubans, Syrians, Chinese have all expressed one way or another how much they would like to see a Kerry presidency not to mention certain non nationalist groups currently under intense pressure by the Bush administration.

Bet Quadaffi feels like a poker player that gave away his hand.

My question is; Why do you suppose the particular countries mentioned above like Kerry so much - I would especially like to hear from the democrats on this.

Originally posted by Phoenix
My question is; Why do you suppose the particular countries mentioned above like Kerry so much - I would especially like to hear from the democrats on this.

Well Im sorry but Im not a Democrat but I can throw in my two cents. These dicatorships/despotisms/hell holes, use whatever word you like, they would rather deal with a president more concerned with pussyfoot social programs than pressing the blade of American supremacy. China certainly loves funding Democratic candiates due to their fondness for turning a blind eye to flagrant human rights violations. NKorea? well wouldnt they want to keep their weapons system active simmilar to their conduct during the Clinton years. Syria? well Syria would love to sink back into anominity so valued before their hypocrisy and anti western slant was exposed to the general public, and finally Iran? Well wouldnt Iran want a president more friendly to the idea of self determination than aiding the fledgling democratic movement in Iran... Looks like these countries just want a friendly overweight beat cop than the rabid sense of justice SWAT member that Bush serves as.

Originally posted by Phoenix

My question is; Why do you suppose the particular countries mentioned above like Kerry so much - I would especially like to hear from the democrats on this.

Probably because he's not Bush.

He's still Skull & Bones though, which means we're fecked anyway.

Or maybe they know he will be a much better president than Bush.

Looks like these countries just want a friendly overweight beat cop than the rabid sense of justice SWAT member that Bush serves as.

The way Bush is handling the military and economics, we'll be a broke ass country in no time.

Bush is handling Iraq so poorly right now, it makes me sad.

You do realize that most countries don't want wars right? You can tell that by looking around and not seeing wars all over the place. Diplomacy is better than war anyday. Haven't you ever heard the phrase: "the pen is mightier than the sword?" or did you think people actually fought with pens?

MRjingles
war is a part of diplomacy.....without the threat of actions/consequences.....diplomacy is a bunch of lip flapping hot air....how do you think diplomacy gets its power? from the ultimate expression of a countries policy, which is waging millitary/economic conflict against its adversaries....

DRUNK...
so use of these images is not only inappropriate but EVIL? ahh the extremes we cater to....when we are blinded by our own inabillities to allow other points of view to be considered by our consciousness...If you drove the same route to work everyday...refusing to acknowledge any other routes, then when the bridge is out on your path, how will you even begin to know an alternate path to take?

please ignore my post to DRUNK...i got my threads crossed

Originally posted by MrJingles
Or maybe they know he will be a much better president than Bush.

Looks like these countries just want a friendly overweight beat cop than the rabid sense of justice SWAT member that Bush serves as.

The way Bush is handling the military and economics, we'll be a broke ass country in no time.

Bush is handling Iraq so poorly right now, it makes me sad.

You do realize that most countries don't want wars right? You can tell that by looking around and not seeing wars all over the place. Diplomacy is better than war anyday. Haven't you ever heard the phrase: "the pen is mightier than the sword?" or did you think people actually fought with pens?

Yup, as I figured, you think despots and tyrants are good leadership.

Bush is handling the military just fine. The suggestion that he is not is unfounded, and flies in the face of money spent to rebuild it after it was strangled for years and the opinions of ALL the soldiers I know, even the couple of democrats.

Iraq is being handled fine, as well. Could anyone else have done better? Man, you are a lousy armchair quarterback who just hates the current quarterback. I think what you hate must is his sucess. Suchas his economic sucess. We are heads and shoulders better than we were, and we are getting better. Thanks to Bush, the recession Clinton created was shorter and shallower than most. It could have been even better had the Fed moved faster and better.

Do you drink heavily.

I love this ratchetting... "OMG, a vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists!" That is of course, what you're trying to say isn't it?

Look, anybody in their right mind knows 4 more years of Shrub is not good for this country....

The fact that even those NOT in their right minds (i.e. Kim, Khadaffi, etc.) see this too, isn't all that surprising.... It's not that they support Kerry, they simply DON'T want to see Bush, because he's been talking war to them... Gee, sounds like a rational outlook to me...

Thomas, if the military is being handled so spledidly why are there so many army and national guardsman saying they are out as soon as they can? The military is spread too thin, I figured you would have been able to see that. When you have reservists being called out for a year, returning for 6 months only to be sent back into the fray, I think you have some overextension issues. That is mismanagement. I have an uncle who is a retired Col. (intel service) and a higher up in DIA, this guy is old school conservative and he think the pres is a moron who is handleing everything badly. He said to me "God I hate to even breath this out loud but the country and military was better handled by that @$$hole Clinton." That means something to me.

The economy is not as rosy as you try to paint it out to be. The growth we are experiencing is jobless, which means there won't be money in the hands of those who spend it, which keeps the econ moving. Therefore we will eventually start seeing the econ shrinking again. When the White House wants to reclassify fast food workers as "manufacturing" jobs, I think we are in trouble.
Come on, TC you are an old staunch constitutionalist. Quit defending that which even you say is bad.

National Guard troops are being used in many instances overseas. These troops are actually supposed to be used over here to protect the inner workings of our country and her borders.

The Guard is not supposed to be used overseas. That is the purpose of the regular army and it's reservists.

Madman, was that a question or a statement? Did you mean to use a question mark, or was the sentence incorrectly structured? It would appear I'm not the one with the container disorder! You are correct about the miltary branches and their usage, but are you saying that they cannot be called to federal duty? Are you saying that, as a part of the militia, they cannot be used to defend the nation overseas?

Observer, considering how much the military was allowed to deteriorate during the previous administration's watch, what do you expect? Did you think the military can be made whole by just adding water? You are aware that the RA, the AR, and the NG was reorganized to work together, right? This was certainly before Bush. During my short time in the Guard, my batalion saw duty overseas, including Iraq during the first go-around, as well as places in Central America. Nothing really new on this. Sure, I have suspicions in regard to so many of our home-teams being pulled out of the country, it causes my conspiratorial mind to go on orange alert. I have been gravely concerned in the past, however, and nothing came of it. We need to be watchful and vigilant.

The economic numbers are manipulated quite often. The recovery is not jobless as many would have you believe, but I certainly don't suggest that we are rolling in jobs, yet. They'll come. The plants being built in my area, for example, do not have plant workers. It won't be long, though. First, the environment has to be created, then business acts on that environment, and then the people are employed. Relax, it's going to be ok.