Centerfield

Honestly, that sounds like an extended exercise in speculation to me.

And not something, so far as I know, that the Kerry campaign has given any reason to suspect. Edwards spoke pretty forcefully in the VP debate about Israel's right to protect itself.

Krauthammer seems to rely on Kerry advisors' statements that they want to "reengage in the peace process" as the lynchpin for his argument. But that's a very broad statement that any president would make, Bush included.

And then there's this from Kerry:

US presidential hopeful John Kerry has warned that if he won next month's election there would be no reprieve for Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.

"We have been at this for a long time. Mr Arafat has proven his unwillingness and incapacity to be able to act as a legitimate partner in the peace process," Kerry said in a Florida campaign rally on Saturday.

Kerry also said his job if elected would be to "hold those Arab countries accountable that still support terrorists, Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Aqsa Brigades, and others."

The Democrat hopeful also praised Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for his "courageous" plan to withdraw from the Gaza Strip next year.

Speaking two days after bombings at two Egyptian Red Sea resorts that killed at least 34 people, most of them Israelis, Kerry warned that the Jewish state under attack.

"People are trying to continue to create havoc... Israel remains under assault, kids blown up on buses, people sitting at restaurants, trying to live their lives," Kerry said.

"I will not give one inch in our efforts to do that."

I certainly support Israel, and I'm basically sympathetic with Prime Minister Sharon's current policies, but the interests of the United States and Israel, while aligned, are not identical. The US will not "sacrifice" Israel, but some distancing might be worthwhile if it could bring substantial Arab League support for American efforts in Iraq.

Better watch it, Rick. Anything less than unconditional acceptance of all Israel's actions could get you called an Anti-Semite. That's certainly the tack they're trying to take against Kerry, despite his constant assurances of support for Israel.

Interests not perfectly alligned...perhaps. However, there are fundamental principles that the United States must not abandon in any effort to 'appease' the Arab League and the EU.

1) Yasser Arafat can neither be considered a "leader" of any kind of the Palestinian people, nor can he be accepted as a negotiating representative in any peace effort.

2) The Palestinian Leadership must be willing to give-up their demands for the so called "right of return," which is code word for eliminating the Jewish posture of Israel. This demand is seen as the element which led to the breakdown of the Camp David talks in 2000. The Palestinian Authority has never given up on this "demand", even as recent as an Op-Ed in the New York Times, two weeks ago.

3) Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weaponry capability.

4) By and large, the word of the United Nations General Assembly should be ignored.

So, Krautie can write all he likes about code words, (never mind that the Right have more code words than any one else - 'latte drinking', 'upper west side liberal', and who can forget Trent Lott's 'all these problems...') but all of Kerry's talks on Israel have recognized at least these four fundamental premises.

If we're listing right-wing code words, let's not forget "appease." Couching Kerry's positions in terms of the "limits of appeasement" surrenders the fight from the very beginning.

So it's bad to have a President who wants to have open communication and working together with other nations...? Krauthammer appears to be suggesting that this is impossible to do. Yet pretty much every President before this version of Bush, including his father, managed it.

Krauthammer is a windbag.

I just wish he would tell us...right now he sounds like Nixon. Who says that he's not lying? What makes people so sure that he has a clue? Kerry voted for the war that has isolated America (though in my opinion, anti-Americanism has always been strong), so now I am supposed to believe that he has the solution?

Rachel:

It's pretty clear that Bush doesn't have the solution. They've botched it up so badly and spent their entire cache of political capitol to do it.

Why am I sure that Kerry has a clue? He's worked with leaders of other nations and spent a lot of time over the years learning how to build relationships.

And I do know for certain that four more years of Bush will make things much worse.

Publius obviously does not consider this a well-reasoned argument at all.