It's time for me to say, I knew this was going to happen.
On Monday the Los Angeles Times — no right wing rag — reported that despite what candidate Kerry is saying about his planned efforts to internationalize the Iraq (search) occupation, or stabilization force: None of our so-called friends are going to be sending troops to take the place of American troops.
The French love John Kerry. But no, thanks, they won't be sending troops.
The Germans love Kerry. But no, thanks, they won't be sending troops.
The Japanese have 551 troops in Iraq. But they probably won't be sending more.
The Brits have a bunch in Iraq and they don't think it will be possible to send more.
Now remember, John Kerry has been saying he would internationalize the job in Iraq so that American troops could go home.
Kerry's implied that he would be able to get that done, even though President Bush hasn't. He's suggested that Bush has not been able to internationalize the Iraq effort because he doesn't want to, or because other world leaders hate him so much they refuse to lift a finger to help.
Well, it turns out that they don't like Kerry all that much better than Bush — not enough to help anyway.
It leads to the question: If Senator Kerry plans to do things different in Iraq, and we've just discovered that a major component of that different approach is DOA — a non-starter.
So what's left? How is John Kerry going to be so much different than Bush if it turns out that being nice to the French and Germans isn't going to change things at all?
That's My Word.
What do you think? We'd like to hear from you, so send us your comments at firstname.lastname@example.org. Some of your e-mails will be featured on the air or on our site.