|Oct 26, 2004, 09:15 AM|
United States, TX
Joined Jul 2003
Another "nuisance" for Kerry
We all know by now that Kerry considers the global war on terrorists (which are all Muslim extremists) a simple nuisance.
Well, here's another example of how clueless Kerry is about what WWWIII is going to turn out to be.
Keep an eye out for this stuff happening around the world. This isn't about American "imperialism"; it's about a world wide effort of one particular group of people attempting to literally dominate the planet or kill everyone they can't dominate. Darn, what a nuisance.
Clearly, WWWIII is going to quite a "nuisance" if John Kerry has his say.
|Oct 26, 2004, 11:31 AM|
Ummm, that's not what Kerry said is it?
As I recall he wants to make terrorism a nuisance, instead of (my interpretation) having it define your (and maybe our) lives.
It seems to me that that is an admirable objective - what fault do you find with it?
|Oct 26, 2004, 12:50 PM|
"As I recall he wants to make terrorism a nuisance, instead of (my interpretation) having it define your (and maybe our) lives."
--except that it's never a nuisance to the victims and their families.
That being said, Kerry doesn't want to MAKE it a nuisance, but simply wishes it were less prominent to the point of being, as he put it, a nuisance.
Admirable? maybe to you. It's easy to take the threat lightly when you're not the target.
|Oct 26, 2004, 12:53 PM|
Joined Feb 2002
Matt they are just repeating Bush talking point jiber-jabber, that's what the 'debate' has become.
Kerry spoke truthfully and realistically when he said he wanted to so neutralize terrorists that they were nothing more than a nusiance.
Just like Bush spoke truthfully and realistically when he said you can't really ever win the war on terror, just reduce the incidence/size of attacks.
Apparently when you speak truthfully, the sound-bite is turned against you by the partisans.
|Oct 26, 2004, 01:03 PM|
He actually said he wanted to return terrorism to a nusiance, implying that pre 9/11 attacks on US interests where soldiers and civilians were killed was just a nusiance.
It's much more telling of the person Kerry is in my opinion than if he said it 'is' a nusiance. Another example that he just does not get it and probably never will.
|Oct 27, 2004, 12:24 AM|
It seems the interpretation of "nuisance" depends on which camp you're in and what points you're trying to score. The Bush camp interpret it as meaning so long as there are no attacks on US soil then the occasional bombing of US embassies or attacks on US military is acceptable to Kerry. The Kerry camp interpret it as meaning that if the threat from terrorists is reduced to virtually zero by the "nuisance" factor of needing continual surveillance at airports, more invasive intelligence etc then it's worthwhile.
Personally I think both Kerry and Bush want the same final outcome, they've just got different ways of expressing it.
|Category||Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|another foreign endorsement for Kerry and confusion.||logan5||Life, The Universe, and Politics||23||Mar 22, 2004 06:25 PM|
|Another Source for Li-Ion||ETKing||Parkflyers||23||Dec 20, 2001 02:40 PM|
|another delay for the Bandit||tic||Electric Sailplanes||1||Dec 02, 2001 12:23 PM|
|another q for computer geeks ... binary math||logan5||Life, The Universe, and Politics||12||Oct 20, 2001 02:43 PM|
|Another use for your brushless gear||Al P||Electric Plane Talk||2||Jul 20, 2001 04:11 AM|