« Weapons of Mass Destruction? Another Report by WND | Main | Today's Affirmation »

Playing Both Sides of the Global Test

In lastnight's debate, Cheney rightly criticized Kerry for promising to submit the U.S. to a global test prior to pre-emptive military action. In response, Edwards argued that Kerry qualified his statement. "He also said very clearly that he will never give any country veto power over the security of the United States of America," stated Edwards. The problem with Kerry's original statements as well as Edward's spin on them is that they both cannot be true. A nation cannot submit its actions for approval to the global community and yet remain sovereign over them.

Interestingly, from LGF, the U.N. is developing a Global Test.

Members of an international panel studying United Nations' operations say the group hopes to lay down clear rules declaring when it is legal for a nation to use pre-emptive military force in its own defense. [more]

Today, in an powerful speech, Bush criticized Kerry on "the global test." [hat tip: Powerline]

My opponent has also announced the Kerry doctrine, declaring that American actions in the war on terror must pass a "global test." Under this test, America would not be able to act quickly against threats, because we'd be sitting around waiting for our grade from other nations and other leaders. I have a different view: America will always work with allies for security and peace. But the President's job is not to pass a global test; the President's job is to protect the American people.... The Senator would have America bend over backwards to satisfy a handful of governments with agendas different from our own. This is my opponent's alliance-building strategy: brush off your best friends, fawn over your critics. And that is no way to gain the respect of the world.

Whether one agrees with him or not, Bush has consistently acted to protect the interests of the American people. Kerry, on the other hand, seeks to satisfy all parties by holding to two contradictory positions.

Posted by tim at October 6, 2004 12:54 PM

Articles Related to Politics:

Rudy Giuliani is NOT our Man - Mar 15, 2007
Romney and the Pro-Life Vote - Feb 13, 2007
Giuliani and Social Conservatives - Feb 13, 2007
Giuliani Nears Candidacy, Discusses Abortion (video) - Feb 05, 2007
Will Giuliani Pick a Ginsburg? - Feb 05, 2007
Mitt Romney and the Pro-Life Vote - Feb 02, 2007
Does Giuliani Merit the Pro-Life Vote? - Feb 01, 2007
Napolitano Backs Away from Kerry - Nov 01, 2006
The Troops Respond to Sen. John Kerry - Nov 01, 2006
Failed Statements by Sen. John Kerry - Nov 01, 2006

Comments

I think you mean they cannot both be true. The way you said it, it sounds as if each one is such that it cannot be true.

The two actually are consistent anyway. Kerry said that he wouldn't let any one nation veto our possible military action. My sense is that the global test requires global approval, which means if a bunch of countries disapprove then we'd have to back down. That's not the same as one nation vetoing our possible military action. I don't see the inconsistency.

Posted by: Jeremy Pierce at October 7, 2004 7:43 AM