BOTH PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES, GEORGE BUSH AND JOHN KERRY, HAVE OUTSTANDING VIEWS ON COMBATING ISLAMIC TERRORISM. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CAN ONLY GO UNDER A "BURQA" WITH EMBARRASSMENT.
BUT HERE ARE TEN REASONS, SUGGESTED BY AN AMERICAN HINDU:
1. Bush has clear priorities. He sees the inhuman Islamic >fundamentalism and the murderous mullahs as the largest danger for >the Western world. >
>2. Bush has learned the lessons of history. Military strength, not >pleasant talk, is the only thing that helps against violent fanatics. >And with Bush — unlike with Kerry — there is no doubt about this.
> >3. Under Bush, the US, as a superpower, will continue to bear the >financial, military and casualty burden in the fight against >terrorism in a "holy war" which Islamic fanatics unilaterally >declared.
> >4. Along with fighting terror and the terrorists, a re-elected Bush >will do everything he can to prevent nuclear proliferation. That is >especially true with regard to the nuclear ambitions of Iran and >North Korea. >
>5. Bush has learned that America can defeat every country in war, but >needs allies in peace. Thus, his second term will be characterized by >cooperation with international partners. But he will not depend on >how Syria or Libya vote at the UN. >
>6. Bush knows that Europe and Germany don't have the military at >their disposal to become involved in any further foreign military >engagements. Therefore he won't ask them for help. Kerry will do >exactly that — and will further burden already damaged German- >American relations. >
>7. Under Bush, America will remain a reliable partner for Israel in >its fight for survival. That must especially be in our German >interest. >
>8. Republicans have always been stronger supporters of free trade >than Democrats. That is also true of Bush when compared to Kerry. And >that is good for Germany as an export nation. >
>9. Every new American administration makes mistakes. Bush has already >made his. Kerry, on the other hand, has of yet held no (executive) >position in the government. He would be worse prepared than most >Presidents preceding him. >
>10. With Bush, we know what to expect. With Kerry, nobody knows what >he stands for and where he wants to lead America — and the world.
NOW GIVE FIVE REASONS WHY PARTITIONED INDIA ELECTED A MOHAMMEDAN, ABDUL KALAM, AS HER SUPREME COMMANDER, THE MAN WITH GUN AND AS PRESIDENT, THE MAN WITH PEN.