Kerry Won! So what!!
Yep, Kerry was more articulate and showed a fair command of facts and figures, coming across as a more polished debater than the President. So, who gives a damn. Kerry still flip-flopped on Iraq. Was the war a mistake and, at the same time, necessary to disarm Saadam? He's still too much nuance and too little conviction. Bush came across with more conviction, but in his now familiar down-home package. He's everyman facing off the enemies of America. It's Tru-man the Republi-can!! Al Qeada doesn't give a shit about our choice of words. They'd like to see Kerry in their to prolong this war througfh useless negotiations, legalistic resolutions and "global tests".
Let's do a little simple disection of the Kerry plan for Iraq. We need more allied troops. Say, 200,000. But, we need to bring the US burden down from 90% to 40%. So, we need our allies to cough up about 120,000 soldiers, minus the roughly 10,000 that the British and Australians have over there. Who out there can put 110,000 troops on the ground? Well, none of our European "friends". And the Chinese and Indians aren't going to do it.
So, what exactly does Johnny boy expect? He'll work his charms on Chirac and Schroeder and they'll essentially commit their entire active duty combat arms to helping the great hegemon in the "great diversion"? Not a chance.
Let's face it. The military burden of fighting terrorist regimes and protecting the free world will remain a US one. We're the only country with the resources and, hopefully, the will to do so.
Kerry might have won on style, but the polls show Bush winning on substance. Americans know that success in the war depends on commitment and the will to win. Bush projects those qualities. Kerry's nuanced approach only emphasizes his indecisiveness. The voters see it.
Nuance is fine in the internal policy debate. However, the essence of effective governance, and management for that matter, is turning complex issues into clear, easily defined objectives. Brevity is the real test of our communications and analytical skills.
Let's do a little simple disection of the Kerry plan for Iraq. We need more allied troops. Say, 200,000. But, we need to bring the US burden down from 90% to 40%. So, we need our allies to cough up about 120,000 soldiers, minus the roughly 10,000 that the British and Australians have over there. Who out there can put 110,000 troops on the ground? Well, none of our European "friends". And the Chinese and Indians aren't going to do it.
So, what exactly does Johnny boy expect? He'll work his charms on Chirac and Schroeder and they'll essentially commit their entire active duty combat arms to helping the great hegemon in the "great diversion"? Not a chance.
Let's face it. The military burden of fighting terrorist regimes and protecting the free world will remain a US one. We're the only country with the resources and, hopefully, the will to do so.
Kerry might have won on style, but the polls show Bush winning on substance. Americans know that success in the war depends on commitment and the will to win. Bush projects those qualities. Kerry's nuanced approach only emphasizes his indecisiveness. The voters see it.
Nuance is fine in the internal policy debate. However, the essence of effective governance, and management for that matter, is turning complex issues into clear, easily defined objectives. Brevity is the real test of our communications and analytical skills.
posted by Tov B. Brog at 11:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home