<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Horsepucky. <p><hr></blockquote><p>To you maybe but not to me. Once that resolution passed any sensible person following the story knew the only way war was preventable was for Saddam to basically throw open the doors and any sensible person knew this wasn't going to happen. At the time I had hope he would because I didn't want to believe he was so misinformed or crazy that he thought he could refuse the UNs demands and not face consequences. But, then again after 11 years of doing so, why not.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Let me be clear, the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies.<p><hr></blockquote><p>We couldn't.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>In giving the President this authority, I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days--to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough and immediate inspection requirements, and to act with our allies at our side if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force. If he fails to do so, I will be among the first to speak out.<p><hr></blockquote><p>We did, we did, he didn't (again refer to my signature quote, that's some real "speakin out").<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>If we do wind up going to war with Iraq, it is imperative that we do so with others in the international community<p><hr></blockquote><p>We did.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>unless there is a showing of a grave, imminent--and I emphasize "imminent"--threat to this country which requires the President to respond in a way that protects our immediate national security needs.[quote]<br>We didn't act unilaterally so this section is moot.<br><br>[quote]Let there be no doubt or confusion about where we stand on this. I will support a multilateral effort to disarm him by force, if we ever exhaust those other options, as the President has promised, but I will not support a unilateral U.S. war against Iraq unless that threat is imminent and the multilateral effort has not proven possible under any circumstances.<p><hr></blockquote><p>No, who could consider that statement as "confusing"?
<br>I support war if this but not this only after this then before the other is exhausted. Crystal clear.<br><br>In any event we did exhaust those other options so he must have supported "support a multilateral effort to disarm him by force."<br><br>But, what this really is, is not a speech of passion about one's personal convictions but classic politico speak. Again Kerry is setting himself up to have it both ways.<br>Votes for a resolution then gives a speech that basically allows him to swing both ways depending on the outcome.<br><br>How about this...<br>Vote against the resolution then give the exact same speech saying that you will vote for a new resolution once the stated terms of the speech are met. i.e. After I feel ALL diplomatic avenues have been explored then I, John Kerry, will vote for a force resolution. Now, that would have shown some conviction.<br><br>Dean Davis<br><br>-----<br>"I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him." -- John Kerry (D) - May 3, 2003