JOHN KERRY HAS SUPPORTED OUR ENEMIES BEFORE

[Ronnie Raygun]

Kerry's Nicaragua vision

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 17, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Editor's note: Information in this column came from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, a premium online intelligence newsletter published by WorldNetDaily.
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com


Sen. John Kerry wants to be president of the United States so he can promote a brand of multi-nationalism as the solution to the world's problems.

In fact, his views on that subject haven't changed that much since he came back from Vietnam in 1970, urging the United Nations take over command of the U.S. military forces.




In April 1985, Kerry, along with Sen. Tom Harkin, ventured to Nicaragua to meet with President Daniel Ortega, a Marxist revolutionary who idolized Fidel Castro and received aid from the Soviet Union.

Kerry saw another Vietnam in the making because then-President Reagan was aiding freedom fighters in Nicaragua trying to overthrow Ortega's Sandinista regime.

"If you look back at the Gulf of Tonkin resolution," Kerry told the Washington Post on April 23, 1985, "if you look back at the troops that were in Cambodia, this history of the body count and the misinterpretation of the history of Vietnam itself, and look at how we are interpreting the struggle in Central America and examine the CIA involvement, the mining of the harbors, the effort to fund the contras, there is a direct and unavoidable parallel between these two periods of our history."

Kerry, in office only a few months and with no consultation with the administration or the State Department, decided to negotiate with Ortega. He and Harkin walked away from Nicaragua with an agreement for direct talks with Washington. President Reagan flatly rejected it.

"Do we want to see the body bags coming back again?" asked Kerry. "I don't think Congress would let it happen. I think there is a very strong sensitivity just ingrained in people like me, Harkin and [Al] Gore by virtue of the Vietnam experience that sounds alarm bells. I think all across the Hill there is a generational feeling, even with those that didn't go. I don't think it's isolationist. I'm not. I think it's pragmatic and cautious about what we can achieve."

Following his trip to Nicaragua, Kerry insisted: "They just want peace. They don't want their daughter getting blown away on the way to teach! Or their sons disappearing. It's just terrible. I see the same sense of great victimization. The little kids staring wide-eyed and scared. It really hits home the same way as Vietnam. Sending our own troops. I just don't think Congress or the people will allow it. If we haven't learned something by now about talking rather than fighting ..."

Kerry was clearly convinced another Vietnam was shaping up in Central America.

But he was wrong.

Reagan stuck to his policy of supporting the resistance to the Sandinista government. And the first time elections were held, the Sandinistas were swept out of office.

Today, Nicaragua, a strong U.S. ally in the region, has troops fighting side by side with Americans in Iraq.

Kerry apparently forgot that it was his weak-kneed friends in his own party who had started Vietnam and mismanaged the war in a way that it could not be won. It was his weak-kneed friends who pulled the plug on our friends in South Vietnam, cutting off all aid virtually without warning and leaving them defenseless against a communist onslaught from the north – one that resulted in untold death and carnage.

Kerry doesn't understand that sometimes it is more humane to be resolute, to stand up for the defense of our nation's interests, to be tough, to fight for victory.

This man is a disgrace to the U.S. military uniform he once wore. He is a disgrace to the U.S. Senate. And, if elected, he will be a disgrace to the office of the presidency.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Drew Katsikas]

THE

[mburbank]

RUMMY HAS SUPPORTED TERROR BEFORE.

Rumsfled, one of Al Quaeda's top recuiters, went to Baghdad during the original Bush administration, where he had friendly talks with Sadaam and actually shook hands with him.

[Buffalo Tom]

Let us not forget the fact that the Reagan Administration continued to sell arms and provide favourable trade provisions to Iraq in the mid-80s, even after American diplomats and State Department officials told it that Saddam was using poison gas on Iranian troops and on Iraq's Kurdish minority - exactly the type of weapon of mass destruction outlawed by the international community and decried by the current American Administration.

What about the aid and support, both in financial terms and in CIA-sponsored training, given to the mujahadeen by the same Reagan Administration in their war with the Soviets - the same aid and support that gave Osama Bin Laden the wherewithal to mount his terrorist campaigns?

[mburbank]

STOP LIVING IN THE PAST, MAN! Unless you want to talk about things that are Clinton's fault. Then by all means, live in the past.

Besides, that's when the Baath party and the Mujahadeen were good guys. It's not our fault they turned bad. People are zseduced by evil all the time, look at Star Wars or the X-men! Lots of heroes go bad. When eagan, poppa Bush and Rummy and Chenney liked those guys they were heroes.

[The One and Only...]

Jesus, man, doesn't anyone remember that we sold arms to Iran in order to fund the rebels? C'mon, people, it was the Iran-Contra affair, for Christ's sake!!!

[mesobe]

not to mention the US PUT SADDAM IN POWER TO BEGIN WITH



THE US IS THE TRUE ENEMY. THEY SET UP THE TERRORISTS TO ATTACK AMERICANS

[kellychaos]

So our government's duplicitous and that's suprising?! Basically, they support things that suit their interests at the time and only worry about putting out the fires if they come back to bite us on the ass. Unfortunately, it HAS come back to bite us in the ass on multiple occasions (Re: Afghanistan, Panama, Iraq, ect.). Who knows how many more like problems are waiting in the wings due our nation's failure to follow through. I don't; however, blame it on any one administration or party. It's a symptom of the disease which permeates our intelligence agency and the way we handle international affairs. The hate for the U.S. didn't just pop up overnight and it didn't happen for no reason.

[davinxtk]

The only reason this thread is worthwhile is because the word "Contra" was said twice.








I'm going to sit in front of my NES for a few hours.