Bush vs. Kerry on Iraq

[adios]

My take on Kerry's position on Iraq:

1. The US can't afford to have the insurgents prevail in Iraq thus the war will continue (he will stay the course) as will the war on terrror.

2. A new government in Iraq should provide stability and security to it's people. A "democratic" type government is NOT necessary thus opening the door to another oppressive dictator ruling the country.

3. The US does not have enough troop strength in Iraq and is bearing too much of the burden for the war. He will seek to increase the number of US troops in Iraq. Also he will enlist the support of the UN security council members and possibly NATO. Even though countries like France and Germany have been unwilling to get involved in Iraq, Kerry stated that he will use "statesmanship" to enlist their support. What are the chances such "statesmanship" will be successful?


My take on Bush's position on Iraq:

1. The US can't afford to have the insurgents prevail in Iraq thus the war will continue (he will stay the course) as will the war on terrror.

2. A new government in Iraq should be a "democratic" type of government as well as providing stability and security to it's people. The door to another oppressive dictator ruling the country should be slammed shut.

3. The US has enough resources to prevail in Iraq. He would welcome more coalition members supporting the cause in Iraq but he won't beg contries that have been unwilling to get involved in Iraq like France and Germany for their help. Certainly obtaining such "help" comes at a cost and that cost is likely to be a prohibitive one.



Kerry has stated throughout the campaign that the US can't afford to "lose" in Iraq and pulling out under the current circumstances would be wrong. Do you think he's telling the truth or is he lying?