(Continued from Part I)
While John Kerry asserts he'd get our allies to the table, hehas implicitly denied the nations standing with us the honor theyare accorded for their efforts and sacrifices.
Indeed, Kerry has referred to those nations as the "coalition ofthe bribed and coerced." His refusal to acknowledge their effortsdrew harsh attacks from Bush during the debates. Similarly, Edwardsgot upbraided by Cheney for failing to acknowledge the deaths ofIraqis fighting for their own freedom against oppositionforces.
Kerry further insulted the coalition members in the seconddebate when he applied a new "global test" to our allies. SaidKerry, "If Missouri, just given the number of people from Missouriwho are in the military over there today, were a country, it wouldbe the third largest country in the coalition... That's not a grandcoalition." Swell, so now not only must we have the "A-list"nations to be credible, they must also pass a population test to beconsidered legitimate.
Those inferences have not been overlooked by those in thealliance. Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski went ballistic atKerry over the deliberate snub, noting Kerry's position was"immoral" and that "the sacrifice of our soldiers is somarginalized." Kwasniewski is most likely not the only one whoshould be angered.
Kerry's words have marginalized the sacrifices of the followingnations: Bulgaria, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Great Britain,Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Poland, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Spain,Thailand and the Ukraine. Besides our nation's losses, thesenations have lost military personnel in Iraq. By marginalizingthose nations' sacrifices, John Kerry has dishonored theirservice.
Moreover, it is noteworthy that several of these nations joinedthe fight despite strident opposition at home. Among those areAustralia, Great Britain, Poland and Italy, with Spain havingwithdrawn already. Those leaders stood on principle to rid theworld of an evil presence, yet the man who wants to lead the nationleading the fight can't bother to acknowledge their guts andlosses.
If Kerry were to be elected, he would inherit a coalitionpredisposed to not trusting him due to his refusal to show them thecourtesy of a compliment for their efforts. It is a strongpossibility that the coalition could crumble because thosecurrently involved would not trust him based upon his verbiage thusfar. Because he would be unable to bring the desired allies ofFrance, Germany and Russia into the mix, the United States would beleft to pick up the debris.
John Kerry's exultations that he could do a better diplomaticjob falls flat given his words and abject marginalization of ourallies' efforts. It does not inject confidence into a world wherethere are sharp fracture lines in the sand over Iraq already. Itdoes not speak well of the job he would do as our potentialCommander-in-Chief. John Kerry's projection of himself as a betterdiplomat simply does not pass when analyzed even superficially.
Perhaps the statement that undercuts Kerry the most comes forKwasniewski. Said the Polish President, "President Bush is behavinglike a true Texan gentleman - he's fighting for the recognition ofother countries' contribution in the Coalition." That is more thancan be said of John Kerry, and he's the man who wants to lead thatcoalition.
Write to Jeff at
mannedarena@yahoo.com
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
