[Rhodes22-list] Re: Rhodes22-list Digest, Vol 527, Issue 3

[Loumoore at aol.com]

Ok I can't resist replying:

1. In terms of firepower, it's hard to imagine the United States hitting 
Vietnam much harder.  More bombs were dropped there than the combined total used 
against Germany and Japan during World War II.  At maximum strength, the United 
States had over 550,000 troops in place--virtually the entire strength of our 
army, excluding cold war commitments in Europe.  I guess if you consider 
"winning" to be the total destruction of a country the United States could have 
prevailed by using nuclear weapons but this would have destroyed the nation we 
were fighting to liberate.  In short, the issue is vastly more complicated than 
some suggest. The war was not lost because "liberals" refused to let the 
military unleash American power.  Neither Democrat Johnson nor and Republican 
Nixon were able achieve success.

2. War Records: Who has the moral high ground?  Kerry, who fought for his 
country, witnessed first hand the costs and futility of the Vietnam War, and 
spoke out against the war or Bush and company who supported the war but determined 
it was better to sit it out?

3. The issues: Bush's terrible judgment has placed American forces in a 
terrible position in Iraq; there is an enough muscle there to keep the insurgency 
growing but not enough to end it.  The prewar critics were incredibly accurate 
in their predictions.  (It's not just retread hippies blasting Bush; so are 
respected officers from all branches of service.)  Vast segments of Iraq are 
totally out of control.  It is likely that it will split into at least three 
countries and that as one of these countries will be another Islamic Republic with 
extreme anti-American sentiment--in short, another breeding ground for 
terror.  Thus far Kerry has been remarkably restrained in his criticism of Bush's 
terrible judgment and leadership on Iraq. Like most responsible senators, he 
supported the commander in chief when asked for support in winder 2003.  That 
does not absolve Bush of responsibility for this fiasco.

4. Fighting two wars on three tax cuts is reprehensible  His inaction to the 
loss of jobs, his indifference in regard to the misery of those without health 
insurance (many of them children), and his assault on environmental policy 
dating from the Nixon administration reveal he is morally and politically 
bankrupt. Bush's legacy will be a mountain of debt, a weakened economy, and a failed 
foreign policy that has increased, not lessened the risks we face.

John Kerry is a first-rate alternative to a failed, selfish, and arrogant 
administration.  Stan is right.