Monday, August 16, 2004

Expulsia Electoralia

By: Michael Akerman

This is actually just a simple reply to Smith, and probably doesn't need blog post status, but HaloScan won't allow more than 1000 characters in a comment, so I'll post it here. Please note that Michael Smith's post is immediately below this one, but I'll keep this one invisible for a few days to allow Smith's post to be read thoroughly and without bias.


Actually, I was under the impression that Kerry is becoming more and more likely to lose this election. Personally, I'm looking for things to yell at him about, but he's striking me more as "Bush Lite" as far as policy goes.

For instance, when asked about Iraq, Kerry said he agreed that Saddam had to be removed from power, but claimed he would have done it in a more diplomatic way, and would have built up a multinational coalition and gained UN approval.

Guess what, bud: we tried that. When diplomatic measures fail, and a dictator like Saddam is in power, he must be removed by force.

And, to be fair, the importance of UN approval has been constantly overemphasized. With a group of four seated countries who have ultimate veto power over war measures, it takes no more than one of these countries to block UN approval. Additionally, there were more nations supporting the war (the Kingdom of Morocco (go monkeys!(that's a Fahrenheit 9/11 joke(I'm going to have so many closing parenthesis right here...)))) or who didn't care than opposing the war (France).