Friday, October 08, 2004
Kerry: Let's Reneg on Alliances
Cori Dauber's rightly calling "Puff Piece" on this fawning, uncritical bit of treacle from the Washington Post.
I'll see that charge, and I raise it to "Ignorance."
In Vietnam, Kerry's combat experience hardened his preference for multilateral over unilateral action. "Vietnam would have been okay to John Kerry if NATO was behind us," said Douglas Brinkley, author of "Tour of Duty," a Kerry biography. "He was not opposing Vietnam, he was opposing 'go it alone' intervention."
Jeez, haven't these people ever heard of SEATO?
From a 1966 State Department legal memorandum to the Senate:
So I guess Kerry, ever the alliance builder, advocates reneging on alliances unless France says it's ok?
Our preexisting security obligations to the government of South Viet Nam, or any other government, recieve zero weight?
What gives?
Splash, out
Jason
I'll see that charge, and I raise it to "Ignorance."
In Vietnam, Kerry's combat experience hardened his preference for multilateral over unilateral action. "Vietnam would have been okay to John Kerry if NATO was behind us," said Douglas Brinkley, author of "Tour of Duty," a Kerry biography. "He was not opposing Vietnam, he was opposing 'go it alone' intervention."
Jeez, haven't these people ever heard of SEATO?
From a 1966 State Department legal memorandum to the Senate:
Later that year the United States undertook an international obligation in the SEATO treaty to defend South Viet-Nam against Communist armed aggression. And during the past decade the United States has given additional assurances to the South Vietnamese Government...
"The President of the United States has full authority to commit United States forces in the collective defense of South Viet-Nam. This authority stems from the constitutional powers of the President. However, it is not necessary to rely on the Constitution alone as the source of the President's authority, since the SEATO treaty-advised and consented to by the Senate and forming part of the law of the land-sets forth a United States commitment to defend South Viet-Nam against armed attack, and since the Congress--in the joint resolution of August 10, 1964, and in authorization and appropriations acts for support of the U.S. military effort in Viet-Nam--has given its approval and support to the President's actions."
So I guess Kerry, ever the alliance builder, advocates reneging on alliances unless France says it's ok?
Our preexisting security obligations to the government of South Viet Nam, or any other government, recieve zero weight?
What gives?
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
Post a Comment
