Campaign Clips for 18 August 2004

Kerry - Edwards	Bush - Cheney
Who Doesn't "Understand the Threats of the 21st Century"? “Despite this administration's near obsession with missile defense, the greatest threat facing our homeland comes from terrorists who would do us harm," said Kerry National Security Adviser Rand Beers. "In the months preceding 9/11 George W. Bush and his closest advisors were preoccupied with missile defense and their misunderstanding about the threats we face continues to this day. John Kerry believes an effective missile defense is crucial to our national security strategy. But John Kerry also understands the importance of facing our most pressing national security threats while continuing to develop and deploy a national missile defense which we know will work.” Full story	Yesterday, President Bush discussed a forward-looking plan for missile defense to protect America in a dangerous world: "It's the beginning of a missile defense system that was envisioned by [former President] Ronald Reagan — a system necessary to protect us against the threats of the 21st century," he said. "We want to continue to perfect this system, so we say to those tyrants who believe they can blackmail America and the free world, 'You fire, we're going to shoot it down.' " Opponents of the program don't understand the threats that lie ahead, he said. "They're living in the past," said Bush, who campaigned in 2000 as a supporter of missile defense and has doubled the project's funding despite objections from many Democrats. "We're living in the future. We're going to do what's necessary to protect this country." Full story
General Clark on Redeployment: Why Now? “President Bush’s decision to redeploy approximately 70,000 U.S. troops from Europe and Asia will significantly undermine U.S. national security. As we face a global war on terror with Al Qaeda active in more than 60 countries, now is not the time to pull-back our forces, and I question why President Bush would want to do this now. “First, removing U.S. forces from the Korean Peninsula at a critical juncture in diplomatic efforts to dismantle North Korea’s nuclear program will send a dangerous signal of weak U.S. resolve to Kim Jong Il. “Second, withdrawing forces from Europe will further undermine already strained relations with long-time NATO allies, will be interpreted as the distancing of the U.S. from NATO, and will set back U.S. efforts to encourage greater NATO participation in Iraq. “This ill-conceived move and its timing seem politically motivated rather than designed to strengthen our national security. ” Full story Senior Military on Bush Redeployment Plan Washington, DC - Eight senior retired military officials released the following statement today in response to President Bush's proposal to redeploy 70,000 U.S. troops: “President Bush’s unilateral withdrawal plan will not make America safer and it will not relieve the current burden on our troops. Given today’s threats, we should be reaching out to the world, rebuilding our alliances and finding real solutions to relieve the strain on our overstretched military. John Kerry will keep faith with our troops and their families who are overburdened by the extended deployments of their loved ones. “In the past three years North Korea has reportedly made enough new bomb material for six to nine nuclear weapons. Unilaterally withdrawing 12,000 troops from South Korea will weaken our negotiating position when we need to be strong. Instead of keeping U.S. personnel forward deployed and ready to go after Al Qaeda in more than sixty countries around the world, President Bush’s plan would take them further from the action. Full story	Kerry today: Finally, I want to say something about the plan that the President announced on Monday to withdraw 70,000 troops from Asia and Europe. Nobody wants to bring troops home more than those of us who have fought in foreign wars. But it needs to be done at the right time and in a sensible way. This is not that time or that way. Kerry on August 1, seventeen days ago: I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world. In the Korean Peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps. There are great possibilities open to us. Full story

Re troop re-deployment: I have no particular opinion of my own on this. Both sides are taking each other out of context. The Kerry campaign asks "Why now", when what Bush announced was a ten year plan. Meanwhile, the Bush campaign counterattacks by taking one out-of-context sentence to try to make Kerry seem like he's waffling. The was in the context of being asked about bringing US troops home from Iraq:

"I will have significant, enormous reduction in the level of troops. We will probably have a continued presence of some kind, and certainly in the region. If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world -- in the Korean Peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps"

Re missle defense: my response to President Bush: How about living in the present and making the future? The missile threat today is far, far below the threat of a suitcase bomb. Missle defense doesn't belong on the list of priorities right now. Non-proliferation and safeguarding existing nuclear weapons and materials should be the top priority in nuclear defense policy. Programs like Nunn-Lugar are in place, but they're already underfunded and the administration is talking about cutting them further while also not spending allocated money for development of improved technology for detecting nuclear materials at ports of entry.