tipped from Atrios
On Hugh Hewitt's radio show today:
HH: "Today you brought attention to John Kerry's plan to wage a more 'sensitive' war on terror. What do you think John Kerry meant when he said 'sensitive,' Mr. Vice President?"
VP: "Well, I'm not sure what he meant (laughing). Ah, it strikes me the two words don't really go together, sensitive and war. If you look at our history, I don't think any of the wars we've won, were won by us being quote sensitive. I think of Abraham Lincoln and General Grant, they didn't wage sensitive war. Neither did Roosevelt, neither did Eisenhower or MacArthur in World War II. A sensitive war will not destroy the evil men who killed 3,000 Americans, and who seek chemical, nuclear, and biological weapons to kill hundreds of thousands more."
snip
HH: "Will the Najaf offensive continue until that city is subdued even if that means a siege of the Imam Ali shrine?"
VP: "Well, from the standpoint of the shrine, obviously it is a sensitive area, and we are very much aware of its sensitivity. On the other hand, a lot of people who worship there feel like Moqtada Sadr is the one who has defiled the shrine, if you will, and I would expect folks on the scene there, including U.S. commanders, will work very carefully with the Iraqis so that we minimize the extent to which the U.S. is involved in any operation that might involve the shrine itself."
Its almost like he said that on purpose.
Update [2004-8-15 0:21:26 by lapin]:Reading further down in the interview we find this exchange:
HH: "Earlier today you said in your speech, and it was very well received by the audience, that a "good defense is not enough" in the era in which we live. Applying that doctrine to Iran and its seemingly unlimited quest to acquire nuclear weapons,
what's that mean for our willingness to allow them to continue that hunt?"
VP: "Well we are working with our allies in the international community, the International Atomic Energy Agency, to persuade the Iranians that they really don't want to go down this road of developing nuclear weapons, it's not in their interest to do so. We will have to see how that works out, but the president is following it very closely, and I would expect you will see a lot of discussion and debate about this this fall, it is the kind of subject that may well find its way before the U.N. Security Council in the near future with the possibility of sanctions being approved or of further steps authorized by the international community, so that Iran does not continue to pursue nuclear weapons."
Uh-oh. We know what happened the last time they talked like this.