How does Saddam capture impact your candidate?

[wndycty]

This is my first poll. I want to see the reaction as it relates to supporters of different candidates. Basically the question is how do supporters of the top 5 candidates feel Saddam's capture impacts their candidate. Given the limited the slots for poll questions this is a simple up/down poll. Either it helps or hurts your candidate there is no "no impact" option. Additionally I apologize to Braun, Kucinich, Lieberman or Sharpton supporters as I did not have enough room for them.

[knight_of_the_star]

1. He (Clark) can still criticize Bush's conduct

On how bad the post-conflict planning was, on how it took him WAY too long to get Saddam, on how there are STILL troops dying over there, about how he said he would get bin Laden "dead or alive", the list goes on and on and on...

EDIT: Specify my candidate :P.

[wndycty]

2. I think it helps Clark

:kick:

[lastliberalintexas]

3. Can't vote

It doesn't impact any of our candidates. We STILL have never found WMD. We still invaded with no credible evidence that Iraq was an imminent threat. We still lost 500 American soldiers- one more today, btw. We still have an untold number of wounded Americans and wounded or dead Iraqis. We're still going broke to pay for Halliburton/Carlyle's war for oil. We are still facing attacks from Iraqi insurgents. We're still facing fighting amongst the Kurds/Turks and esp the Sunnis/Shi'ites. We're still facing the prospect of a long stay in a country where the people don't want us.

Capturing one man- even Hussein- doesn't change any of that. And once the euphoria of today wears off and the American people realize that, Shrub's approval ratings will nosedive again.

(And I didn't even touch on domestic problems this administration is facing.)

[HoosierClarkie]

4. Don't forget that Clark is in the Hague today.

Also, IMO I feel that the attacks will still continue and this adiministration will be shown that they overestimated the impact of capturing Saddam has on the insurgency. Just like they underestimated the resistance. It will show that * didn't and still doesn't have a plan. Furthermore, troops will be more pressed to get out of there due to the fact that * "purpose" for the war is over.

[wndycty]

5. Kick

:kick:

[wndycty]

6. Kick

:kick:

[Ksec]

7. Wheres Dennis at? You know he finished second in a recent poll

Cmon people. Get with the program. DK is comin on like a herd of buffalo

[FrenchieCat]

9. OK...

Helps Clark....who is strongest in foreign policy...and therefore becomes our strongest candidate to put up against Bush, now strengthened by Saddam's capture.

Bush will run on this perceived success. Only Clark can neutralize Bush with Clark's immense knowledge on all things international.

http://tinyurl.com/z6v9

Wesley Clark calls for transparant trial of Saddam

By ANTHONY DEUTSCH, Associated Press Writer

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - U.S. presidential candidate Wesley Clark called Sunday for a transparent trial for captured Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein that ensured him full legal rights under international law.

The retired general and former NATO commander said Saddam's capture was welcome news that could have an impact on the anti-coalition insurgency in Iraq.

"I hope this will see a diminishing in the violence against American soldiers in Iraq," he told reporters as he arrived in the Netherlands.

Clark did not say who should try Saddam, but said the trial should be conducted with "the highest legal standards. There can be absolutely no doubt about the rights of the accused."

The case "needs to be as public as possible and the evidence needs to be aired and charges brought," he said.

Clark, contesting for the Democratic nomination for president, declined to comment when asked how Saddam's capture could affect the race or the standings of President George W. Bush.

Clark was on his way to The Hague where he has been summoned to testify in the war crimes trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.
______________

12/7/03 Hardball Interview with General Wesley K. Clark:

MATTHEWS: General, do you think Osama bin Laden, if we catch him, when we catch him, should be tried here at the U.S. or in the Hague, the international court?

CLARK: I would like to see him tried in the Hague, and I tell you why. I think it's very important for U.S. legitimacy and for building other support in the war on terror for trying them in the Hague,e under international law with an international group of justices, bringing witnesses from other nations. Remember, 80 other nations lost citizens in that strike on the World Trade Center. It was a crime against humanity, and he needs to be tried in international court.

MATTHEWS: Well, 3,000 Americans were killed here. Do you believe he should be held exempt from capital punishment, because if you send him to Hague he will be. They don't have capital punishment at the Hague.

CLARK: I think that's a separate issue.

MATTHEWS: No, it's a key issue, because the sentencing limitation, they do not execute people at the Hague.

CLARK: I think that you can adequately punish Osama bin Laden, and you've got to look beyond simple retribution against an individual. You have to look at what's in the long-term security interest in the security in America and you have to look at how we handle the war on terror from here on out.

MATTHEWS: But doesn't life in Holland beat life in a cave?

CLARK: Not in a Dutch prison. Chris, they're under water, they're damp, they're cold, they're really miserable.

KNOWLEDGE OF FOREIGN POLICY VERSUS UNINFORMED INDIFFERENCE

11/31/03 Hardball Interview with Dean:

MATTHEWS: Who should try Osama bin Laden if we catch him? We or the World Court?

DEAN: I don't think it makes a lot of difference. I'm happy...

MATTHEWS: But who would you like to, if you were president of the United States, would you insist on us trying him, since he was involved in blowing up the World Trade Center, or would you let The Hague do it?

DEAN: You know, the truth is it doesn't make a lot of difference to me as long as he is brought to justice. I think that's the critical part of that.

MATTHEWS: How about Saddam Hussein? Should we try him in criminal and execute him...

DEAN: Again, we are allowing the Bosnian war criminals to be tried at The International Court in The Hague. That suits me fine. As long as they're brought to justice and tried, and so far we haven't had to have that discussion because the president has not been able to find either one of them.

[burning bush]

8. If Saddam Had Been Caught/Killed From Day One, It Would Change Zip

True?

Saddam's capture has only closed the door on that issue, taken it off the list of possibilities for an October surprise, and allows us to address other areas, like why we went to Iraq in the first place, and what is happening in the US economy. Dean is on record saying that winning the Iraq war was never the problem, so why is it a problem now?

Will it always come back to the economy after all?

I hope so, because I think Dean has the best chance against Bush in a battle over the economy.

Deficit spending, a squandered surplus, corporate malfeasance, and an unbalanced budget all play to Dean's hand.

[Eloriel]

10. Dean supporter who thinks it doesn't matter to my candidate

at all.

So he has to lay off bashing Bush about the war for one day. Big deal.

Our men and women are still dying and getting maimed, and will. There was still no reason for the war, and still no WMDs. It was still lies that got us there. In fact, Saddam himself said, in captivity, that there were no WMD. So actually I guess I was wrong -- thay certainly helps Dean.