Clark says he can keep U.S. safe from attacks

[demdave]

Wesley Clark said yesterday the two greatest lies of the last three years are that the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks couldn't have been prevented and that another attack is inevitable.

He said a Clark administration would protect America in the future.

"If I'm president of the United States, I'm going to take care of the American people," Clark said in a meeting with the Monitor editorial board. "We are not going to have one of these incidents."

http://concordmonitor.com/stories/front2004/clark010904_2004.shtml

[KittyWampus]

1. Title Of Article:No Need To Fear If Right Steps Taken

Clark's comments to the Monitor came in response to being asked how to keep America from becoming a "giant Jerusalem" - a place where people live in constant fear of a suicide bombing or other terrorist attack.


Clark... envisioned a future in which Americans "have more confidence in ourselves as a people." He continued: "Nothing is going to hurt this country - not bioweapons, not a nuclear weapon, not a terrorist strike - there is nothing that can hurt us if we stay united and move together and have a vision for moving to the future the right way."

"I'm looking to leaders today who are not out there trying to unnecessarily scare the public. But I think it's equally dangerous to try to reassure the public," said Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease and Research at the University of Minnesota. "We have to tell the truth, and the truth of the matter is that America still remains vulnerable."

Note: Clark has been saying that we need to get money to the states for Homeland Security.

Asked whether the current administration is doing enough to keep the country secure, Clark said he would increase homeland security efforts.

He added: "But if you're asking me, as a citizen, you know, should you be worried about this, I'm going to tell you, you should not be worried about this. And if I'm president of the United States, I'm going to take care of the American people. We are not going to have one of these incidents.

Clark most certainly would NOT ignore warnings from Intelligence Agencies or underfund Security efforts. His Foreign Policy would certainly put us on a sounder path.

In a follow-up interview last night, Clark said he agrees with the assessment that the country remains vulnerable and said he would spend more on homeland security: on the order of $50 billion. In addition, he stressed the need to work with allies to target the terrorist threat abroad.

Clark reaffirmed his belief that taking appropriate measures would keep America safe.

"I think it could have been prevented," he said of the Sept. 11 attacks. "I think it can be prevented again if we have the right leadership. That's me. I will protect America."

[demdave]

3. A little off topic, but I have always wondered

If 2 of us, as in this case, post different pieces of the same article, is that in violation of the DU's rules? I think it, sometimes, is the only way to get the whole tone and meaning of an article.

Does anyone know???

[KittyWampus]

5. Don't Think So. There's Plenty More At Link

[demdave]

6. Cool, I was always worried that I would somehow bust a copyright law.

[KansDem]

2. Well, this is certainly more than Bush has done (eom)

[Skwmom]

4. Cheney is on the record saying another attack

is a given, so they've taken the position to basically do nothing and let it happen. I think Clark is trying to point out this is not the position we should take.

[DoYouEverWonder]

7. The only way for Clark or anyone else

to protect us from more major attacks is to take on the BCF. Is Clark willing to do that? And is he willing to expose the rogue elements in our so called intelligence community that created al Qaeda who are the real source of terrorism against US interests?

[CJCRANE]

8. What's also needed is a simple

change of diplomatic rhetoric from "you're either with us or against us" to "let's sort this out together".

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

19. Clarification please

What is the BCF?

[DoYouEverWonder]

26. BCF means

Bush Crime Family.

[Voltaire99]

9. Sorry to see him contributing to the fear

We need less talk of terror and more talk about the real domestic problems facing us. Clark is trading overmuch on the only area of expertise he has -- militarism -- and that is to the detriment of both this race and the national conversation.

Besides, our security issues can't be solved through military means, anyway: it's only through sane and moral policy that we have even a hope. I think Clark partly understands that (he refers to the need for vision), but he doesn't go out of his way to address the foreign policy errors that have made us vulnerable.

[ozone_man]

10. Clark is scarier than Bush.

"If I'm president of the United States, I'm going to take care of the American people,"

Man this fear factor stuff turns me right off. I think that if we take the trash out of the White House, we can do away with the fear factor crap.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

20. So does that mean....

..if Clark gets the nomination you plan to vote for Bush?

[KittyWampus]

13. Perhaps You Didn't Read The Question He Was Asked

Clark's comments to the Monitor came in response to being asked how to keep America from becoming a "giant
Jerusalem" - a place where people live in constant fear of a suicide bombing or other terrorist attack.

And if you'd read the article you'd know that Clark in NO WAY relies on militarism.

[Mackay]

11. AND he's immune to kryptonite!

Or so he would like you to think.

[MikeG]

21. You see, Osama is really Lex Luthor.

I've never seen him without his turban.

[truthisfreedom]

12. i feel less afraid already.

honestly, this is a better tactic than bushco's fear program.

[leesa]

14. This guy just doesn't get it. You can't prevent terrorism by buffing up

Homeland Security. The key is to stop abusing other countries and he never mentions that option. His only answer is "anti-terrorism" measures which will certainly enrich the military-industrial complex and those making the bucks from expensive security scams but it will do nothing to prevent terrorism. You spend a million preventing one mode of "terrorism" and they can just use another tact. Just wasting money. Stop bombing peoples families and friends to steal their resources and stop overthrowing populist governments. It's easy and cheap.

[T Bone]

17. I'm sure he 'gets it' he just can't say it

you wrote>>The key is to stop abusing other countries<< - Clark is a Rhodes Scholar. He knows that. You know that. I know that. He can't say it because of the way Americans have been propagandized. He would be skewered in the media. Just because he can't say it, doesn't mean he wouldn't work to stop the abuse/ and get results from that angle. An angle that the bu$hies are completely oblivious to.

[KittyWampus]

27. You Realise Clark's Mentioned Butting Pentagon Spending

Don't You?

[dd123]

15. Do Clark supporters really think this is realistic?

I guess Clark really is learning how to be a politician.

[gulliver]

16. Yes I do.

Dump Bush and a large part of the problem goes away. Bush has failed the test of terrorism. Osama Bin Laden should thank Bush. It's doubtful that any president, Democrat or Republican, could have done a more miserable job of making the country more secure.

Clark is the kind of guy who can impress our allies and restore the international prestige and credibility lost by Bush. Make friends, more security.

[goforit]

18. Well, Gen. Clark, you have to start by arresting the #1 Terrorist org.....

and they and the whole company of felons reside at
1600 Pennsylvannia Ave.

Then you can prosecute them.

[tinrobot]

22. That pledge...

Is a very hard one to keep...

Grain of salt, folks, grain of salt.

[Kool Kitty]

23. Everything has to be taken with a grain of salt,

that's so true. But it seems a much more hopeful message than Cheney's "another attack is a given" and Bush's ham-handed "either you're with us or against us" posturing. In my opinion, at least.

[mattgunns81]

24. Rev. AL Wants the Clintons gone

The secrets efforts of Bill & Hillary Clinton to torpedo Sharpton and stop his run for President

Sharpton’s real views on Bill Clinton, and why he believes the ex-president has "duped" and "betrayed" African-Americans – Sharpton calls Clinton "America's first beige president."

Why Sharpton has threatened to "take out" Democratic Leadership Council - home to presidential hopeful Joe Lieberman as well as the Clinton-Gore party elite.

How the “New Democrat" house organs such as New Republic magazine have warned that Sharpton is out to "destroy" the entire Democrat party.

Find out about Sharpton's plans to encourage black voters to "divorce" the Democrats, and why the radical reverend bucks the accepted wisdom within his own community with repeated references to Bill Clinton as "America's first beige president."

[Kool Kitty]

25. And this pertains to the subject of this thread

HOW?

[dfong63]

28. a rash promise

... and an empty one, like Bush's promise to create a million jobs. Bush failed to keep his promise. but were there any consequences? no. likewise, Clark's promise is an empty one.

what i'd like to see attached to any presidential promise is, "If I fail to keep this promise, I will resign immediately."

[Bushknew]

29. The image that Democrats

canÕt protect America or that Dem policies appease terrorist must be changed.

IÕm glad Clark said that, all Dems need to destroy the perception that their policies
appease terrorists.

I think itÕs impossible to stop small suicide attacks but I think it is possible to stop a major attack like 911 again.

So itÕs not an empty promise.

[Fleshdancer]

30. This is a great statement in my opinion

It took me a few hours to figure out how I felt about Clark's statement, but after watching a tidbit of Hannity and colmes last night, I realized Clark is brilliant for saying this.

Hannity responded the same way most of us do after hearing Clark's comment: "It's ridiculous! No one can claim something like this."

That's the point.

If no one can make this sort of claim, than this would include Bush. Bush can NOT guarantee our safety any more than any of the Democratic candidates. So why vote for him?

Think about it.

edit: and it would be wise for other Democratic candidates to keep their mouths shut on this. If asked, they should respond with "I would be interested in knowing if the White House can make this sort of claim". We need to make Bush respond to this.

[psychopomp]

31. Hmmm...

Does Gen. Clark have an inside scoop on what *really* happened on 9.11?

This can be a very chilling statement ("I'm going to energize our secret military apparatus") or encouraging (I know why these attacks happened and I will take concrete steps to remove the fear of the U.S. from the Arab world").