The Annotated John Kerry

Remarks of Senator John Kerry
For January 23, 2003
Georgetown University

As our government conducts one war and prepares for another, I come here today to make clear that we can do a better job of making our country safer and stronger. We need a new approach to national security - a bold, progressive internationalism that stands in stark contrast to the too often belligerent and myopic unilateralism of the Bush Administration.
I offer this new course at a critical moment for the country that we love, and the world in which we live and lead.

Well, which is it John? If we “lead” the world, doesn’t that mean that other countries are supposed to “follow” and not pour Vichyssoise down our pants anytime we want to confront a brain-addled dictator? (See: Qadaffi, Milosevic, Hussein) At a minimum, they can keep their wine-stained mouths shut and not publicly oppose us.

But we are not Romans; we do not seek an empire. We are Americans, trustees of a vision and a heritage that commit us to the values of democracy and the universal cause of human rights. So while we can be proud, we must be purposeful and mindful of our principles: And we must be patient - aware that there is no such thing as the end of history. With great power, comes grave responsibility.

John Kerry, trying to sound like Churchill, quotes Stan Lee.

A choice between those who think you can build walls to keep the world out, and those who want to tear down the barriers that separate "us" from "them." Between those who want America to go it alone, and those who want America to lead the world toward freedom.

These are not mutually exclusive. We can “go it alone” and “lead the world (kicking and screaming) towards freedom.”

I am here today to reject the narrow vision of those who would build walls to keep the world out, or who would prefer to strike out on our own instead of forging coalitions and step by step creating a new world of law and mutual security.

Thank God you’re here, Sheriff! Black Bart is robbing the bank!
Well, I should really get some deputies first. Any volunteers?
(averted eyes…..tumbleweed)
What about you, Jean-Chirac? Herr Schroeder?
(silence)
Well, I’m just gonna have to….ask again later.

In a world growing more, not less interdependent, unilateralism is a formula for isolation and shrinking influence. As much as some in the White House may desire it, America can't opt out of a networked world.

What? We can’t fight a war because somebody in Europe has a blog?

We can do better than we are doing today. And those who seek to lead have a duty to offer a clear vision of how we make Americans safer and make America more trusted and respected in the world.

Read some Machiavelli: “This gives rise to an argument: whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the opposite. The answer is that one would like to be both, but since it is difficult to combine the two it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to make way. For generally speaking, one can say the following about men: they are ungrateful, inconsistent, feigners and dissimulators, avoiders of danger, eager for gain, and whilst it profits them they are all yours. They will offer you their blood, their property, their life and their offspring when your need for them is remote. But when your needs are pressing, they turn away.”

Here’s another relevant quote from Mr. M.:
"There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others."

That vision is defined by looking to our best traditions -- to the tough-minded strategy of international engagement and leadership forged by Wilson and Roosevelt in two world wars and championed by Truman and Kennedy in the Cold War.
These leaders recognized that America's safety depends on energetic leadership to rally the forces of freedom And they understood that to make the world safe for democracy and individual liberty, we needed to build international institutions dedicated to establishing the rule of law over the law of the jungle.
That's why Roosevelt pushed hard for the United Nations and the World Bank and IMF. It's why Truman insisted not only on creating NATO, but also on a Marshall Plan to speed Europe's recovery. It's why Kennedy not only faced down the Soviets during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but also signed the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and launched the Peace Corps to put American idealism to work in developing countries. He spoke out for an America strong because of its ideals as well as its weapons.

Gosh, were there any other presidents responsible for ending the Cold War? Anyone? Any others that forged multilateral forces to enforce “the rule of law over the law of the jungle”? (Hint: more recent than Kennedy. Another hint: Republicans).

For us today, the past truly is prologue. The same principles and strength of purpose must guide our way. Our task now is to update that tradition, to forge a bold progressive internationalism for the global age.

OK, got it, message received. Internationalism. Global. Aaaaaand so on.

Nor can we let our national security agenda be defined by those who reflexively oppose any U.S. military intervention anywhere...who see U.S. power as mostly a malignant force in world politics...who place a higher value on achieving multilateral consensus than necessarily protecting our vital interests.

People like, oh, I don’t know….JOHN KERRY! Which is it, man? Consensus or vital interests? For 20 minutes, you’re all “allies” and “global partners”, now you’re Captain America. Geeeez…..

[long snip]

It's critical that we recognize the conditions that are breeding this virulent new form of anti-American terrorism. If you look at countries stretching from Morocco through the Middle East and beyond...broadly speaking the western Muslim world...what you see is a civilization under extraordinary stress.

Perhaps a carpet bombing of squeeze balls and John Tesh CDs would help.

[another long snip]

The Bush Administration has a plan for waging war but no plan for winning the peace. It has invested mightily in the tools of destruction but meagerly in the tools of peaceful construction. It offers the peoples in the greater Middle East retribution and war but little hope for liberty and prosperity.

This is such a pile of turd….I’m going to let it sit there and stink without further comment.

[jump to JK’s strategy]

First, destroying al Qaeda and other anti-American terror groups must remain our top priority. While the Administration has largely prosecuted this war with vigor, it also has made costly mistakes. The biggest, in my view, was their reluctance to translate their robust rhetoric into American military engagement in Afghanistan. They relied too much on local warlords to carry the fight against our enemies and this permitted many al Qaeda members, and according to evidence, including Osama bin Laden himself, to slip through our fingers.

What an ass. He goes on forEVER about how we need to depend on allies. Then he cites the Afghanistan campaign, where we depended on allies, and the rat-bastards escaped. Did Teresa (I’m a Democrat now!) proof this speech?

Second, without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses.

Finally, something we can agree on.

So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. Regrettably the current Administration failed to take the opportunity to bring this issue to the United Nations two years ago or immediately after September 11th, when we had such unity of spirit with our allies.

What were we thinking? While we were putting out fires, searching for survivors, tracking down anthrax, scrambling our intelligence and military forces, mourning the dead, and trying to come to grips with the worst terrorist attack on our soil, we could have been asking the U.N. to draft a resolution against Iraq. Well, hindsight is 20/20.

I’m so annoyed now, let’s just skip to the end. [super long snip]

This is a fateful time - a time for new American leadership in the world and new leadership in America that sets before us the great challenges and honestly addresses what we must do to meet them. The effort will not be easy. The task will not be simple and success will not be swift. But it's our challenge to look to the long term - beyond the next election to the next generation - bending the course of history, recognizing that other nations share it with us, and joining with them in resolve and hope, thereby making safer the life of America and making better the life of the world. With a progressive internationalism. shaped by our bedrock values, and quiet confidence in our strength and in our cause, we must once again demonstrate to an anxious world. America's resolve to bear the burdens and pay the price of leadership so that we may, as President Kennedy said on a cold January day long ago, "assure the survival and success of liberty."

We must strive to shake free from the surly bonds of bad metaphors and build a snow fort against stale rhetoric – one that we pour some water on to make it really hard to knock down. For while we bear the burdens, and pay the piper, and beat the clock, and spin the wheel of fortune, and phrase our answers in the form of a question, we must always, always, remember our allies. They are the voices of disapprobation and opposition that prove our superiority – for only a country like the United States, so assured in its dedication to freedom, would put up with these clowns.