Clark: Terror Fight Will Decide Election

[DrFunkenstein]

WASHINGTON - The 2004 White House race will be won by the candidate who voters think is more capable of winning the fight against terrorism, Democrat Wesley Clark said Sunday.

"The day has passed when the Democratic Party can run as a domestic policy issues-only party. You have to be able to handle foreign policy and international security in an election," the retired Army general said. "I'm the only one who's got hands-on practical experience in doing it."

"This is going to be ... a referendum on the war on terror," he told CNN's "Late Edition."

Clark also said even if the United States should bring democracy to Iraq, the country eventually will have a government, much like Iran's, controlled religious leaders from the Shiite wing of Islam.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&e=19&u=/ap/democrats_clark

<>

John Kerry:
18 Years on the Foreign Relation Committee.
8 Years as Chair of the Subcommittee addressing terrorism.
Literally wrote the book on the subject.

<http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0684846144.01._PE6_PIdp-schmooS,TopRight,7,-26_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg>

[Jim Sagle]

1. But he could be wrong. And then he'd be toast.

[whirlygigspin]

2. Oh please,

The "war" on terror is just Bush fighting his old pal Bin Laden.

[molly]

9. Really?

please explain.

[mikehiggins]

3. Clark could be wrong but only

If Iraq is wrapped up, and bin Laden is out of the picture, and al Quida is effectively neutralised, and there is no threat of terrorist attacks anywhere around the world and, and, and...

However, after all these casualties and all these billions of dollars it'll be pretty hard for the GOP to turn its back on the scenario they have spent all this time and money and energy into scripting and just go back to "hey, ain't things rosy here in the U.S.?"

As Bush and Blair learned last month, the terrorists aren't going away and even if bin Laden is dead in a ditch somewhere, unless they can produce the body he will always be the Che Guevara of the Moslem extremists.

This one is between Kerry and Clark. Dean's credentials on foriegn affairs are, well, he doesn't have any. If Kerry gets beaten by Dean in New Hampshire, which seems very likely, Clark is the last man standing who has hands-on experience in foriegn affairs.

So, if the issue in November is Medicare ripoff and the sale of the Government to special interests, Dean might be the go to guy for the Democrats. If it looks like the War on Terror and the disaster in Iraq will be the issues (and don't forget Afghanistan, where the Taliban is making a comeback) things will be entirely different.

I'm for Clark because that's how I see things playing out. If Dean gets the nod I'll send him money and work for his election. From where I sit, though, I cannot imagine any way in which Bush's disastrous foriegn policy can get swept under the rug fast enough to save his ass from the flame.

And I don't think I'm alone in that opinion. Just what was the topic of MoveOn's ad? Or the GOP's? Clark is the stronger candidate in that scenario and we will need every edge we can get.

[DrFunkenstein]

4. Don't Forget The Proliferation of Nuclear Materials

"This Administration's approach to the menace of loose nuclear materials is strong on rhetoric, but short on execution. It relies primarily and unwisely on the threat of military preemption against terrorist organizations, which can be defeated if they are found, but will not be deterred by our military might.

It is time instead for the most determined, all-out effort ever initiated to secure the world's nuclear materials and weapons of mass des. We must offer our own blueprint for the mission of threat reduction. Comprehensively securing materials and keeping them from falling into the wrong hands demands a global perspective and international action.

The only answer - the clear imperative - is a multilateral framework implementing a global consensus that weapons of mass destruction under the control of terrorists represent the most serious threat to international security today, and warrants an urgent and global response.

We must marshal a great international effort to inventory and secure these materials wherever they may be and in whatever quantity. We must create mechanisms to help those that would be responsible stewards but lack the financial and technical means to succeed.

We must establish worldwide standards for the security and safekeeping of nuclear material and define a new standard of international legitimacy, linking the stewardship of nuclear materials under universally accepted protocols to acceptance in the community of nations."

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

<>

[sandnsea]

5. Which is why I choose Kerry

He can take on Bush on either one, foreign policy or domestic. If people knew more about his background on both, I think they'd understand. But it's tough to get the point through when all the press wants to talk about is his hair and his money and gossip column politics.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Maybe so....

but that pic above tells you what's missing......

Which leaves Clark.

Last elected President with Next elected President

[sandnsea]

7. Sorry, don't see it

No idea what you're talking about.

[RandomUser]

8. The last day of the RNC primary convention ends on Sept. 11, 2004

Loads of media coverage, big bully pulpit, resonance with American people and that day, Bush officially secures nomination and launches post primary season re-election bid -- guess what they'll be talking about?

The carefully crafted 9-ll timing shows exactly what they plan to make the meat of the election about. $200million on ads about patriotism and 9-11. His speech at the convention and his ads meshing with all the 9-11 memorial programs and documentaries, touching the soul of America's patriotism, loss, sacrifice, determination to stop terrorism.

It's no coincidence that they're scheduling the convention to end on the day of 9-11.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. That article had an inaccurate piece of reporting

Overall the article you provided a link to was a good report. The last paragraph floored me however. It distorted Clark's position about the future government of Iraq. Here is how the AP reported it:

"Clark also said even if the United States should bring democracy to Iraq, the country eventually will have a government, much like Iran's, controlled religious leaders from the Shiite wing of Islam."

Now here is the relevant part of the interview (the context was a discussion on how to organize a transfer of sovereigntyback to the citizens of Iraq:

"BLITZER: What if they elect democratically a fundamentalist, Islamic, ayatollah-led regime in Iraq?

CLARK: Well, I think what we'll want to do is do the best we can, in terms of setting up the conditions, in terms of the election, to ensure that it's representative.

But ultimately, Wolf, the United States won't have any control over that, whether it's this year or next year or the year after. If they want to elect a theocratic regime, they're going to elect a theocratic regime at some point, despite what Donald Rumsfeld has said."

Clark made no prediction that Iraq would eventually form a government much like Iran's. He simply said that the people of Iraq will eventually do what the people of Iraq want to do. Rumsfeld doesn't get to decide for Iraq. That is a much cleaner, and more powerful message about the current administration thinking they can dictate to the world, than was the distortion AP printed. The media creates News all the time. They put words into candidates mouthes. Constant vigilance is required.

I called AP's number, (after finding it through a Google search by the way, God I love Goog)le and said I wanted to report an inaccuracy in reporting. I was asked what the dateline was (it was Washington), and then given a number for that bureau. Eventually I talked to someone who tracked down the story (it's helpful to have the incorrect story handy when you call). I read him the interview transcript and he noted my observation. I don't know if a correction will be issued, but AP should always be reminded that we are paying close attention to their coverage.