QandO

August 19, 2004

Kerry for Troop Realignment before he was against it
Posted by McQ

Yesterday Kerry said this:

“Nobody wants to bring troops home more than those of us who have fought in foreign wars,” Kerry said. “But it needs to be done at the right time and in a sensible way. This is not that time or that way.”

[...]

Let's be clear - the president’s vaguely stated plan does not strengthen our hand in the war on terror,” he said. “It in no way relieves the strain on our overextended military personnel. It doesn’t even begin until 2006, and it takes 10 years to achieve. And this hastily announced plan raises more doubts about our intentions and our commitments than it provides real answers.”

On August 1, 2004 he is quoted as saying this:

Asked whether he would promise to have US troops home from Iraq by the end of his first term, Kerry replied: ''I will have significant, enormous reduction in the level of troops. We will probably have a continued presence of some kind, and certainly in the region. If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world -- in the Korean Peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps."

Why does anyone take this man seriously? Troop realignment has been in the works, per Condoleeza Rice, for 3 years. Its been discussed with NATO and Russia for a year. Its been discussed with our Asian allies for a year. And, just 18 days ago, John Kerry thought it was a boffo idea, enough to discuss it on ABC's "This Week".

Now we essentially get a "if Bush is for it I'm against it" reaction from Kerry, less than a month after he threw up a "vaguely stated plan" to do precisely what the administration is doing.

So let's wait a week or two and ask him again. We may see he's for it again.

Who the hell knows?

TrackBack