A friend asked for me to send some links showing my point of view, so I figured it may be a good idea to post a chunk of it here:
I saw one of Kerry’s advisors on O’Reilly today, and he was asked point-blank: what will Kerry do if he becomes president – what will you advise him to do about Iraq as his foreign policy advisor. And this guy’s answer was “evaluate the situation”, “talk to allies”, and “put more pressure on Israel, Syria, and Saudi Arabia”. Israel being the first in the list when the issue at hand is battling Islamofascism? I mean, you and I, we are allowed to make statements, then consider what we said, and admit we were stupid (or at least I reserve that right for myself 😉 ), but someone who is going to be advising the president on foreign policy saying things demonstrably ignorant (and that is not even taking into account the pointlessness of rhetoric of “evaluate” and “talk”)?
I read a bit of “Unfit for command”, and let me tell you, my perception if Kerry keeps deteriorating. Give me something, some indication of the man’s integrity, as no matter how hard I search, very few people seem at all concerned with his integrity, when compared to Bush. Now getting to the links, from me, to you. I’ll start with some right-ish literature and then move into some analysis that I like.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/813stdef.asp – emotional, but points out the main problem with citing Clinton as the good days
Iraq and terrorism – http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/807aspxm.asp
Unless you have information otherwise, you should find this at least disturbing.
Bush and Stupidity – http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/730avutr.asp
Is this a lie? Can you cite the studies? Because this article claims that the study circulating the internet (and that, I suspect, you are citing) is fiction.
Emotional position of the elite and why it is dangerous – http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/580vwath.asp
A bit extreme of an article for my taste, but at the same time it scares me to see in you the resolve to find fault with Bush at all cost like that of the intelligentsia mentioned in the article.
On weak US foreign policy over the past years: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/197abanc.asp – I think this is interesting from a historical perspective, though it is a bit too patriotic for my liking.
And to move away from the Weekly Standard into more analytical stuff:
http://denbeste.nu/essays/strategic_overview.shtml – I think this is pretty solid analysis that, before the events took place, actually suggested that there will be resistance. Not many numbers, which is its weak point, but seems ideologically sound. I don’t agree with everything, but I think this guy has a pretty good grip on reality.
http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson100804.html – a more recent overview of what is going on and projections also glancing sideways at Kerry as an alternative.
http://stratfor.ecnext.com/stratfor/corp/CorporateSample.html – very interesting analysis of events in Iraq in context with Iran, and, in particular, note the bit about Saudi Arabia.
I heard from dad that MacGregor talked very interestingly about the military problems in Iraq, but cautioned that neither Bush nor Rumsefeld are to blame for the current state of affairs that is indeed far from peachy. If you can find the actual clip, I’d be grateful.
A lot of interesting info is available on: http://www.c-span.org/resources/iraq.asp but this is more of just all-around information – including 1441, which you should read if you are still questioning the legality of this war.