Democrats are terrorist appeasers / Democrats are soft on defense.

[Bushknew]

Clinton did nothing against terrorism or to get Bin Ladin.

Democratic foreign policy was soft and did not work.

Democrats are terrorist appeasers. Democrats are soft on defense.

The 04 election will be won or lost by how well Democrats can answer these charges.

What are your best arguments and favorite articles to counter these charges?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Democratic foreign policy was soft and did not work.

Really:

"Powell said Iraq is not a threat and that sanctions worked."

<<Powell - We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked.

He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place, but we are always willing to review them to make sure that they are being carried out in a way that does not affect the Iraqi people but does affect the Iraqi regime's ambitions and the ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and we had a good conversation on this issue.>>

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton did nothing against terrorism or to get Bin Ladin.

Clinton sent hit squad for bin Laden in 1999.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,31-116658,00.html

<<Mr Clinton confirmed that a year earlier his Administration had given the CIA approval to kill bin Laden. "At the time we did everything we can do," Mr Clinton said in New York.

"I authorized the arrest and, if necessary, the killing of Osama bin Laden and we actually made contact with a group in Afghanistan to do it. We also trained commandos for a possible ground action, but we did not have the necessary intelligence to do it in the way we would have had to do it.>>

[BeFree]

1. Republicans are leading a Lynch Mob

With no facts in hand, and the purported facts being proven as bald face lies, just as quick as they were spoken - the Republicans led a Lynch Mob into Iraq.

American Justice was subverted, then denied, to any and all who even questioned the Republicans. Justice was denied - especially - to the Thousands of dead Iraqi civilians.

But Justice will win out in the end. Otherwise, we are doomed.

[Bushknew]

2. We are doomed if Democrats fold when

they are called terrorist appeasers or soft on defense.

We can not let it pass.

[Bushknew]

3. We are doomed if Democrats fold when

they are called terrorist appeasers or soft on defense.

We can not let it pass.

[moondust]

4. Democrats are SENSIBLE on defense.

Democrats are SENSIBLE on defense. Democrats are SENSIBLE on defense. Democrats are SENSIBLE on defense. Democrats are SENSIBLE on defense. Democrats are SENSIBLE on defense.

[kentuck]

5. But all the WMDs were only on paper....

and we invaded another country without definite proof - now they are desperately hunting for "mass graves" as justification. This is about the 7th different justification. Meanwhile, thousands of people have died because of his decision. Bush's decision. The buck stops with him.

[NewJeffCT]

6. You might also respond

That when Bush took office, his team's top defense priority was Star Wars - they thought Clinton was too obsessed with bin Laden & terrorism. They let the Hart-Rudman report warning of imminent terrorist attacks in the US sit in an in-basket for 9 months collecting dust until after 9/11. And, don't forget, one of the report authors is Warren Rudman, a conservative Republican.

[lovedems]

7. The republicans only APPEAR strong on terrorists and that is by

scaring the shit out of us. I think the dems are better on defense and terrorist because they can go after them with out scaring the crap out of the entire country (world)! We have all said hundreds of times on DU that the terror alerts will come into play the closer we get to the election. If they want to pat themselves on the back for being tough on terror by scaring the elderly and children then they can go f themselves. Appearance doesn't equal results and when Clinton was in office there were results that went highly unnoticed by the public.