 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
War Dog
Captain
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 517
Location: Below Birmingham Alabama
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 12:55 am Post subject: Kerry: Reagan Was Too Tough on Terrorists |
 |
|
Kerry: Reagan Was Too Tough on Terrorists
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/8/145812.shtml
With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
NewsMax
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 2:49 p.m. EDT
| Quote: | "Beyond trying to torpedo Ronald Reagan's efforts to free Central America from the Soviet threat, Sen. John Kerry objected when Reagan tried to punish terrorists who killed Americans, arguing that a 1986 retaliatory bombing raid against Col. Moammar Gadhafi was too harsh.
After Reagan ordered air strikes on Ghadafi's presidential compound as punishment for Lybia's involvement in a Berlin disco bombing that had killed a U.S. soldier, Kerry wrote to the White House complaining that the response was "disproportional."
"While I stated that my initial inclination was to support the President," Kerry began, "I pointed out that two essential tests had to be met in determining whether or not the U.S. action was appropriate. First, the United States had to have irrefutable evidence directly linking the [Gadhafi] regime to a terrorist act and, second, our response should be proportional to that act."
Kerry's revealing words, first uncovered in February by radio host Sean Hannity for his recent book, "Deliver Us from Evil," painted Reagan as an out-of-control cowboy whose reckless strategy was bound to fail.
"It is obvious that our response was not proportional to the disco bombing and even violated the Administration's own guidelines to hit clearly defined terrorist targets, thereby minimizing the risk to innocent civilians," he complained.
Kerry said it was a "mistake" for Reagan to have targeted the "head of state of another country - no matter how repugnant we find the leader."
"We are not going to solve the problem of terrorism with this kind of retaliation," he warned. "There are numerous other actions we can take, in concert with our allies, to bring significant pressure to bear on countries supporting or harboring terrorists."
Here's the full text of Kerry's letter blasting Reagan as it appears in Hannity's book "Deliver Us from Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism":
"While I stated that my initial inclination was to support the President, I pointed out that two essential tests had to be met in determining whether or not the U.S. action was appropriate. First, the United States had to have irrefutable evidence directly linking the Qaddafi regime to a terrorist act and, second, our response should be proportional to that act. The evidence was irrefutable that the Qaddafi regime was behind the Berlin disco bombing which claimed the lives of two innocent victims and injured 200 others.
"However, as to the second test, it is obvious that our response was not proportional to the disco bombing and even violated the Administration's own guidelines to hit clearly defined terrorist targets, thereby minimizing the risk to innocent civilians. I believe it was a mistake for us to select as targets areas of heavy civilian concentration, as well as to include the family and home of the head of state of another country - no matter how repugnant we find the leader.
"The fact that the bombing resulted in the deaths of at least 17 civilians certainly undermined the Administration's own justification for the raid. Beyond this point, however, is the fact that we are not going to solve the problem of terrorism with this kind of retaliation. There are numerous other actions we can take, in concert with our allies, to bring significant pressure to bear on countries supporting or harboring terrorists." |
Oh yeah, democrats and liberals want this appeaser for their President and CIC! No Friggin Way!
THERE ARE 147 DAYS LEFT UNTIL ELECTION DAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2004.
Let's all get out there and win this election! 
Woof!
_________________
"When people are in trouble, they call the cops.
When cops need help, they call the K-9 unit." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Marine4life
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 591
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
And he attended The Honorable Ronald Reagans viewing today, for a photo op. Posing as the Presidents friend. This is why I started that other thread. He makes me sick, Semper Fi.
_________________
Helicopter Marine Attack Squadron 169 which is now HMLA-169. They added Huey's to compliment the Cobra effectiveness. When I served we just had Snakes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Damn, you mean we had the opportunity to bomb a Libyan disco and passed on it?
All this shows is that Kerry was as clueless then as he is now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
publius
Ensign
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
Posts: 69
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kerry was right, Reagan was wrong.
The facts:
- Gadhafi has a Berlin disco bombed and two American servicemen and a civilian are killed.
- Reagan tries to kill Gadhafi in an airstrike and about 40 Iraqis are killed including Gadhafi's baby.
- Gadhafi has Pan Am 103 bombed and 270 men, women and children, mostly Americans, die.
- Gadhafi, the murdering bastard, is still in business.
Who won? Was the price in innocent lives worth Reagan's attack?
The problem with assymetrical warfare where an immoral enemy will respond by killing non-combatant citizens of open societies is that guns and bombs are frequently the wrong medicine. Clamping down hard on money, trade, travel and every other interest of an outlaw regime in concert wth our allies frequently is.
Kerry 1, Reagan 0.
_________________
Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war than we know about peace, more about killing than we know about living. -Gen Omar N. Bradley |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JN173
Commander
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 341
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OOPS 
_________________
A Grunt
2/503 173rd Airborne Brigade
RVN '65-'66
Last edited by JN173 on Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:49 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| publius wrote: | Kerry was right, Reagan was wrong.
The facts:
- Gadhafi has a Berlin disco bombed and two American servicemen and a civilian are killed.
- Reagan tries to kill Gadhafi in an airstrike and about 40 Iraqis are killed including Gadhafi's baby.
- Gadhafi has Pan Am 103 bombed and 270 men, women and children, mostly Americans, die.
- Gadhafi, the murdering bastard, is still in business.
Who won? Was the price in innocent lives worth Reagan's attack?
The problem with assymetrical warfare where an immoral enemy will respond by killing non-combatant citizens of open societies is that guns and bombs are frequently the wrong medicine. Clamping down hard on money, trade, travel and every other interest of an outlaw regime in concert wth our allies frequently is.
Kerry 1, Reagan 0. |
So I presume the restrictions placed on Saddam by the UN reduced his terrorist support and his attempts to amass agents of mass destruction?
40 Iraqis? What were they doing in Libya?
Classic left-wing thinking. Starve an entire nation to avoid limited collateral damage in a targeted military action. The inhumanity of the left is, as always, amazing. Appease despotic regimes to eliminate a few combat casualties while the regime oppresses, tortures, and kills dissidents for years on end. Simply amazing!
_________________
 On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB
Last edited by ASPB on Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| publius wrote: | Kerry was right, Reagan was wrong.
The facts:
- Gadhafi has a Berlin disco bombed and two American servicemen and a civilian are killed.
- Reagan tries to kill Gadhafi in an airstrike and about 40 Iraqis are killed including Gadhafi's baby.
- Gadhafi has Pan Am 103 bombed and 270 men, women and children, mostly Americans, die.
- Gadhafi, the murdering bastard, is still in business.
Who won? Was the price in innocent lives worth Reagan's attack?
The problem with assymetrical warfare where an immoral enemy will respond by killing non-combatant citizens of open societies is that guns and bombs are frequently the wrong medicine. Clamping down hard on money, trade, travel and every other interest of an outlaw regime in concert wth our allies frequently is.
Kerry 1, Reagan 0. |
Actually, besides the element of delusion here, this is why Kerry will lose. For example, were your boy right on this issue, then we should have retaliated in kind and slaughtered that self-same number of Libyans to retaliate for Pan Am 103.
We've seen where your bizarre idea of "Clamping down hard on money, trade, travel and every other interest of an outlaw regime" got us... or are you unfamiliar with the actions taken against Iraq... and the actions Saddam took in literally buying our so-called allies and the UN?
Qaddafi, in case you failed to notice, read the writing on the wall, and is now playing very nice indeed. And he's playing that way because he fears us.
I want all the terrorists around the world to fear us. Terrorists would not fear your favorite war-criminal... they'd laugh at him.
And, at the end of the day, the most important issue confronting America is who best will protect us. The terrorists would vote for Kerry. America, fortunately, will not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nakona
Lieutenant
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| publius wrote: | | Kerry was right, Reagan was wrong. |
You are exactly wrong.
Reagan's strike at Khaddaffi marked the turning point for his actions on the international stage.
Knowing that American WOULD strike at him if it became angry, and not being entirely sure what makes Americans angry, he began easing away from his pro-arab/pro-terror stance to a more pro-africa/pro-practicality position.
The giving up of his WMD programs was the final act in a process began by Reagan.
Reagan 1 / Kerry 0
_________________
13F20P |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fortdixlover
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 1476
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| publius wrote: |
Who won? Was the price in innocent lives worth Reagan's attack?
|
We won. How many lives would have been lost if Ghadafi had deployed the nukes he recently confessed he was developing (until operation kick Saddam?) Reagan's action likely started the surrender ball rolling in Ghaddafi's head.
Note to all liberals and leftists on Psychology of Terrorists 101: "Appeasement doesn't work."
Here's what appeasement of the world's Ghadafis will bring:
FDL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
publius
Ensign
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
Posts: 69
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 95 bxl wrote: | | were your boy right on this issue, then we should have retaliated in kind and slaughtered that self-same number of Libyans to retaliate for Pan Am 103. |
A proportional response doesn't mean an eye for an eye.
| 95 bxl wrote: | | We've seen where your bizarre idea of "Clamping down hard on money, trade, travel and every other interest of an outlaw regime" got us... or are you unfamiliar with the actions taken against Iraq... and the actions Saddam took in literally buying our so-called allies and the UN? |
There was a great deal wrong with the sanctions against Iraq, not the least of which that they amounted to collective punishment. They did succed, however, in leaving Hussein with a shell of an army and no important progress in his quest for WMDs. He was not a threat to Saudi Arabi and never would have been again. Smart, targeted sanctions would be better and support of a coup d'etat justified.
| 95 bxl wrote: | | Qaddafi, in case you failed to notice, read the writing on the wall, and is now playing very nice indeed. And he's playing that way because he fears us. |
He is playing nice. The question is why. Part of the answer is in the timing. Had he feared us so badly from Reagan's attack he would not have killed another 270 innocent people in response to it. In fact, making Libya an international pariah starved it of trade, money, travel and respectability. The fact that Gadhafi importuned the Brits for normalizatoin in the late 90's, long before Bush II came along tells much of the rest of the story. Perhaps Bush II had an influence, why not, but the chronolgy makes clear it was one of secondary not primary motivation.
| 95 bxl wrote: | I want all the terrorists around the world to fear us. Terrorists would not fear your favorite war-criminal... they'd laugh at him.
And, at the end of the day, the most important issue confronting America is who best will protect us. The terrorists would vote for Kerry. America, fortunately, will not. |
I want them to fear us too. I don't want law-abiding peaceful citizens around the world to fear us, and they do.
Who will best protect us? That is the person who will kill terrorists not innocents, who will focus his energies on preventing terrorists from acquiring Soviet, Pakistani, Korean or Chinese nuclear weapons, and who will take care not to sow the seeds of terrorism by wiping out the whole neighborhood when it was only the son who was al Qaeda.
---
| nakona wrote: | You are exactly wrong.
Reagan's strike at Khaddaffi marked the turning point for his actions on the international stage.
Knowing that American WOULD strike at him if it became angry, and not being entirely sure what makes Americans angry, he began easing away from his pro-arab/pro-terror stance to a more pro-africa/pro-practicality position.
The giving up of his WMD programs was the final act in a process began by Reagan. |
I disagree. The timeline mentioned above is part of my argument. Gadhafi also knew that Reagan pulled the marines out of Lebanon when too many Marines to stomach were killed. Gadhafi's concentration on Africa was not because fear of the US drove him to it, why would that be -- he murdered another 270 innocents afterwards -- but because international cooperation severly limited his opportunity to deal with the developed west. His openings to Britain and the US are the demonstration of his desire to play in the big leagues, not benighted Africa.
Kerry was right to recognize a proportional military response coupled with punishing Libya in a variety of non-military ways was the best policy. Kerry would have gotten the same result we have now, but no dead innocents at Lockerbie.
_________________
Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war than we know about peace, more about killing than we know about living. -Gen Omar N. Bradley |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nakona
Lieutenant
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
Posts: 242
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can disagree all you want. You're still wrong.
And you are SO far off on why Khaddaffi has been re-aligning with Africa that it's not even funny.
I'll even tell you why. It's because he's fed up with the Arabs.
_________________
13F20P |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
