THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VI, Issue # 148, July 7, 2004
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
KERRY WOULD WEAKEN AMERICA'S STANDING
By Christopher G. Adamo
FULL STORY:
Among Americans old enough to remember the taking of American hostages by Iran in November of 1979, few can recollect the incident
without also recalling the shame and humiliation of America’s spineless response to Iran’s aggression. Far from taking decisive action
against what was clearly a premeditated attack, then President James Earl Carter, Jr., reacted by seeking every means possible of
appeasing and consoling the militant Islamists, led by the Ayatollah Khomeni, who had gained control of Iran shortly prior to taking the
hostages.
As the months dragged on, Carter’s obsequious behavior only served to confirm that America would never be able to pander and
appease its way into the good graces of a nation whose ideology demanded perpetual hatred of Western culture. Fortunately, the
election of Ronald Wilson Reagan, which occurred in part because of America’s frustration with Jimmy Carter’s bungling of the hostage
situation, convinced the Iranians that a new approach by the Americans, likely involving the use of military force, would shortly ensue .
Soon after Ronald Reagan’s election, and well before inauguration day, Iranian leaders began responding in earnest to American efforts
at negotiating for the release of the hostages. Not coincidentally, they were freed by their captors at the exact moment Reagan was
sworn in as America’s fortieth President.
More recently, the “Carter model” was tried once again during the 1990s. With Carter himself representing American interests, President
William Jefferson Clinton sought to negotiate an agreement with the North Koreans in order to appease his way out of a nuclear impasse.
The “success” of Carter's mission, so loudly touted by Bill Clinton, Congressional Democrats, and the media, amounted to the U.S.A.
giving North Korea the very means of developing a nuclear arsenal, in exchange for the absurd promise that it would not do so. Of course
North Korea’s leaders never had any intention of abiding by such a laughable agreement, since it possesses neither the diplomatic
honesty to keep its word, nor sufficient respect for the U.S.A. that might have compelled it to do so.
By all indications, a Kerry presidency would quickly revert America back to the embarrassment and abject failure of the Carter and Clinton
years. In a press release on June 28, 2004, John Kerry somewhat reluctantly conceded that the handover of sovereign power to the newly
established Iraqi government constitutes an improvement in that situation. But the initial focus of his comments was his contention that
President George W. Bush ostensibly needs to “repair relationships with NATO allies.” England, Poland, Italy, Turkey, and even
Spain (initially) were supportive of American action in Iraq to the point of sending their own military forces into the region. So what Kerry
suggests is that America needs to come together with France and Germany, who for the sake of their own selfish interests, diligently
worked to undermine any American efforts to oust Saddam Hussein from power.
While President Bush has, in recent weeks, been somewhat conciliatory to the French and Germans, this reflection of his personal
character is a far cry from Kerry’s oft-repeated assertion that it is the U.S.A. which needs to make some sort of amends, as if America, by
not deferring to French and German pacifism and self-serving opportunism, somehow committed an offense against them. Kerry would
insteadhave had the United States appease the French and Germans, who in turn wanted to appease Saddam Hussein and thus the
terrorists with whom he collaborated, as if such action might actually be in the best interests of the United States.
France and Germany may never have expressed displeasure regarding Carter’s deal with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il. And to
individuals who approach international relations in a manner similar to John Kerry, the approval of such European “allies” might signify
something more worthwhile than America’s success in Iraq. However, the end result of that fiasco was that North Korea achieved
nuclear capability and now threatens America and the rest of the hemisphere.
In spite of what he obviously considers to be a flawed approach, Kerry closed his brief statement by expressing “hope” for President
Bush’s success. Worse than mere posturing, his words convey a suggestion that American victory in Iraq resulted from nothing more
than happenstance, since he is openly critical of the conditions under which it occurred. While Kerry now warns of the insufficiency of
sheer “words” and “resolutions,” before the Iraq operation commenced last year, the absence of such things as sheer "words" and
"resolutions" evoked severe disapproval from him. Should America ever dare to trust its future to such incoherent thinking?
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
American Politics & Political Competition
American Government & the U.S. Presidency
The Middle East & the Problem of Iraq
The Problem of Rogue States:
Iraq as a Case History
The Middle East & the Problem of Iran
The Middle East & the Arabs
The Threat of Radical Islam
More on the Threat of Radical Islam
The Far East & U.S. Foreign Policy
War & Peace in the Real World
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming and works in the field of industrial instrumentation.
He is actively involved in Wyoming's political process, serving as a delegate to successive Wyoming State Republican Conventions
and as a member of the Wyoming State Republican Central Committee. He has assisted Republican candidates for local and state
legislatures and for the United States Congress. His articles, which appear regularly in The Progressive Conservative, U.S.A.,
and on a number of other websites, reflect a major concern with the damage being done to Conservatism and Conservative causes by
the Liberal Leftist faction in the Republican Party as well as by the much larger and more powerful Liberal Leftist faction in the
Democratic Party. During the early and middle 1990s, Adamo was Editor of the Wyoming Christian Coalition's official news organ,
The Wyoming Christian. Adamo maintains his own Internet website, which is located at
www.chrisadamo.com.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VI, 2004
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy