JFKetchupAss: Qaddafi's bitch
In promoting his new book, Deliver Us From Evil, Sean Hannity has been teasing a "blockbuster revelation" about presumptive Demoscummic presidential nominee John-boy Fuckface KetchupAss. Actually, I should - given his prediliction for a well-turned rich ankle - start calling him John-Boy Fuckface KetchupA$$...but as usual, I digress.
Well, Sean's book came out a couple days ago, and it's an interesting revelation, alright. From a NewsMax e-mail alert:
Sean Hannity's book "Deliver Us From Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism" has just been released this week, and it offers explosive revelations about Sen. John Kerry.
The Fox News Channel star and nationally syndicated radio host has unearthed a letter Kerry wrote harshly criticizing President Reagan for his retaliation against terrorist leader Moammar Gadhafi.
Specifically, the Massachusetts Democrat objected to a retaliatory strike by President Ronald Reagan against the Libyan dictator in 1986. In a never-before-published letter written shortly after Reagan ordered the strikes, Kerry complained that Reagan had overreacted to the bombing by Libyan terrorists of a Berlin disco frequented by American troops.
"Overreacted", John-Boy? The Libyans, led by Colonel Cuckoo, bomb the Hell out of a disco, killing two American soldiers and a Turkish woman (how sexist!), and you say our response is an "overreaction"? What, would you have rather had Uncle Javier de Perez de Cuellar de Loco en de Vaca wag a finger at Qaddafi and cluck, "Shame, shame!", fuckface?
Specifically, the Massachusetts Democrat objected to a retaliatory strike by President Ronald Reagan against the Libyan dictator in 1986. In a never-before-published letter written shortly after Reagan ordered the strikes, Kerry complained that Reagan had overreacted to the bombing by Libyan terrorists of a Berlin disco frequented by American troops.
The Libyan-sponsored bombings killed one U.S. soldier and wounded 51. Kerry claimed that the April 1986 U.S. air strike that nearly killed Gadhafi was not "proportional."
Well, according to published reports, it actually killed two soldiers, plus the aforementioned Turkish woman - but who's counting?
However, that's beside the point. I happen to think that our response was perfectly proportional. It's simple Mob-o-nomics: Send one of ours to the hospital, we send fifty of yours to the morgue. Who's to say that's not proportional???
"While I stated that my initial inclination was to support the President," Kerry wrote, "I pointed out that two essential tests had to be met in determining whether or not the U.S. action was appropriate. First, the United States had to have irrefutable evidence directly linking the Qadaffi [Gadhafi] regime to a terrorist act and, second, our response should be proportional to that act."
Meaning, of course, that we'd have had to get the permission of the Canadians, the Germans and the *spit* French *spit* to pass legislation threatening to go and tattle to ol' Uncle Javi that Momie was being Naughty...!
Which, given the blazing speed with which the DisUnited Nations operates, might have been dealt with...oh, say...this coming July.
Though Kerry admitted that the evidence tying Tripoli to the disco bombing was "irrefutable," the U.S. had failed the proportionality test, he insisted.
"It is obvious that our response was not proportional to the disco bombing and even violated the Administration's own guidelines to hit clearly defined terrorist targets, thereby minimizing the risk to innocent civilians," he complained.
It's not obvious to me, Fuckface. Nor was it obvious to the landslide of people who voted for Reagan's successor, George H.W. Bush - eh, Mr. Liutenant-Governor-to-Michael "the Loser" Du-caca??? (snicker)
Kerry said it was a "mistake" for Reagan to have targeted the "head of state of another country - no matter how repugnant we find the leader." "We are not going to solve the problem of terrorism with this kind of retaliation," he warned. "There are numerous other actions we can take, in concert with our allies, to bring significant pressure to bear on countries supporting or harboring terrorists."
Which serves as proof positive that, had KetchupA$$ been president for 9-11, the Taliban would still be in power in Afghanistan, and Hussein - not to mention his boys - would still be in power in Iraq, feeding dissidents to the shredders.
Remember that when you vote in November.
The senator's comments seem even more dangerously flawed considering the outcome of Reagan's actions. After the bombings, Gadhafi hemmed in his terrorism. In the 1990s, as NewsMax reported, he opened secret ties with the CIA to cooperate with the U.S. in counterterrorism. And just this past year, terrified of being toppled like Saddam Hussein was, Gadhafi, in a stunning move after U.S. and British negotiators applied pressure, opened his nation's nuclear and weapons programs to international inspectors.
This is key, folkz. Say we do it KetchupA$$' way - we go through the United Nations and don't bomb Qaddafi, the Taliban or Iraq.
We then have three lunatic, American-hating Middle East regimes, plus Iran, plus Syria - and need I remind you that Syria is the place where Saddam's WMD likely are?
And the Asses want us to trust John-boy to handle these people?