NationStates Jolt Archive

Democratic White House challenger John Kerry on Thursday accused Iraq’s interim leader Iyad Allawi of contradicting himself by defending the US administration policy in Iraq. Kerry said: “I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement of a few days ago, where he said the terrorists are pouring into the country.” Kerry went on that Allawi and President George W. Bush were seeking “to put their best face on the policy. The president says that things are getting better in Iraq and we must just stay the same course,” said Kerry. “Well, I disagree. They’re not getting better and we need to change the course to protect our troops and to win.

What is going on in Iraq???? Who is in charge??? That is the question that i am rasing by posting this new issue.

The US military is in charge. Certainly not Allawi and his weak puppets without any legitimation other than being appointed by his disgrace, the emperor of the US.

Iraq is in charge in Iraq.

More so in January.

Iraq is in charge in Iraq.

More so in January.
Highly unlikely. Can't do democratic elections in a country that is in utter chaos.

Yes, we should change course. We should turn Iraq into an American colony, seize their oil, enslave their population, and kill anyone who is seen as a threat. :p . . .but I don't think that was what Kerry had in mind. But just think, the international community is going to call us imperialists anyways, and we wouldn't want to make a lair out of them. Lol.

This will bacfire on Kerry. Most Americans have no idea that Iraq even has a government, but Kerry has brought that forward. Many Americans will assume that Alawi is doing what he can in Iraq, and find that Kerry is picking on Iraq for purely political reasons, thus alienating them. And a lot of swing voters are dumb enough not to have even known that Iraq was a country before Gulf War I.

This will bacfire on Kerry. Most Americans have no idea that Iraq even has a government, but Kerry has brought that forward. Many Americans will assume that Alawi is doing what he can in Iraq, and find that Kerry is picking on Iraq for purely political reasons, thus alienating them. And a lot of swing voters are dumb enough not to have even known that Iraq was a country before Gulf War I.
Iraq was a country before the latest Iraq playground scenario of the US aswell. It just was not a democracy.

Iraq was a country before the latest Iraq playground scenario of the US aswell. It just was not a democracy.
Aye, but it does not especially resemble a democracy right now.

:eek: Is someone contradicting themselves without Kerry's permission?! Now, shame on them!

:rolleyes:

Ha! There are large chunks of Iraq where the US military does not dare tread. The country is in a shambles, and it has Bush to blame for it.

This will bacfire on Kerry. Most Americans have no idea that Iraq even has a government, but Kerry has brought that forward. Many Americans will assume that Alawi is doing what he can in Iraq, and find that Kerry is picking on Iraq for purely political reasons, thus alienating them. And a lot of swing voters are dumb enough not to have even known that Iraq was a country before Gulf War I.

Hahahahahahahaha! Bush was the one who trumpeted the installation of the Iraqi puppet regime as proof of his success in Iraq. Kerry's only pointing out the the US's own intelligence organizations are concluding that Iraq is an utter mess.

Oh, and all those idiot people who you suggest didn't know Iraq was a country before Gulf War I probably voted for Bush in the 1st election anyway.

Hahahahahahahaha! Bush was the one who trumpeted the installation of the Iraqi puppet regime as proof of his success in Iraq. Kerry's only pointing out the the US's own intelligence organizations are concluding that Iraq is an utter mess.

Oh, and all those idiot people who you suggest didn't know Iraq was a country before Gulf War I probably voted for Bush in the 1st election anyway.
They exist on both sides of the aisle, but the swing voters have the most of them. They go from candidate to candidate, depending on who has the sweetest rhetoric of the time. That depends mostly on who's a populist, and as far as that goes, I believe Kerry has an advantage.

They exist on both sides of the aisle, but the swing voters have the most of them. They go from candidate to candidate, depending on who has the sweetest rhetoric of the time. That depends mostly on who's a populist, and as far as that goes, I believe Kerry has an advantage.
He has an advantage because Bush and this elitist group of an administration gives him plenty of ammunition with every new blunder they make for the "good" of America and the "good" of the world.

He has an advantage because Bush and this elitist group of an administration gives him plenty of ammunition with every new blunder they make for the "good" of America and the "good" of the world.
Oh i know, but Kerry always seems to squander it. If Clinton had been running in this race, he'd have opened a huge lead by now with all the ammunition Bush and co. are handing out. But Kerry doesn't (or at least didn't until recently) know how to turn things to his advantage. It is frustrating.

Oh i know, but Kerry always seems to squander it. If Clinton had been running in this race, he'd have opened a huge lead by now with all the ammunition Bush and co. are handing out. But Kerry doesn't (or at least didn't until recently) know how to turn things to his advantage. It is frustrating.
You should not underestimate the propaganda machine both camps have at their disposal. This is why this entire presidential campaign of both candidates seems so overexaggerated and a farce from over the pond. It's a spectacle without precedence. Surely not even the Roman emperors had this kind of theatre performance before the election.