U.S.: Wondering...

Kerry says he'll fight a better war on terror (see Drudge for this bit of insanity). That is a proposal. It is not an objective. Neither is it a process, a plan.

Thus, Kerry makes a statement which is unsupported by any evidence. In other words, he does not present us with an argument for defeating terror. All he has is an assertion. He will fight a better war.

Lacking any information about his argument, his goals, the plan for achieving the goal or the strategy he will employ to bring his goal to fruition, why should anybody vote for Kerry based on vague and baseless assertions?