For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 1, 2004
Remarks by President Bush and Senator Kerry in First 2004 Presidential Debate
Convocation Center
University of Miami
Coral Gables, Florida
9:02 P.M. EDT
MODERATOR: Good evening, from the University of Miami Convocation
Center in Coral Gables, Florida. I'm Jim Lehrer, of the News Hour, on
PBS. And I welcome you to the first of the 2004 Presidential Debates
between President George W. Bush, the Republican nominee, and Senator
John Kerry, the Democratic nominee.
These debates are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential
Debates. Tonight's will last 90 minutes, following detailed rules of
engagement worked out by representatives of the candidates. I have
agreed to enforce their rules on them. The umbrella topic is foreign
policy and homeland security. But the specific subjects were chosen by
me; the questions were composed by me. The candidates have not been
told what they are, nor has anyone else.
For each question, there can only be a two-minute response, a
90-second rebuttal, and at my discretion, a discussion extension of one
minute. A green light will come on when 30 seconds remain in any given
answer; yellow at 15; red at 5 seconds; and then flashing red means
time is up. There is also a backup buzzer system if needed.
Candidates may not direct a question to each other. There will be
two-minute closing statements, but no opening statements.
There is an audience here in the hall, but they will remain
absolutely silent for the next 90 minutes -- except for now, when they
join me in welcoming President Bush and Senator Kerry. (Applause.)
Good evening, Mr. President; Senator Kerry.
As determined by a coin toss, the first question goes to you,
Senator Kerry. You have two minutes.
Do you believe you could do a better job than President Bush in
preventing another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States?
SENATOR KERRY: Yes, I do. But before I answer further, let me
thank you for moderating. I want to thank the University of Miami for
hosting us. And I know the President will join me in welcoming all of
Florida to this debate. You've been through the roughest weeks anybody
could imagine. Our hearts go out to you, and we admire your pluck and
perseverance.
I can make America safer than President Bush has made us. And I
believe President Bush and I both love our country equally, but we just
have a different set of convictions about how you make America safe. I
believe America is safest and strongest when we are leading the world
and when we are leading strong alliances.
I'll never give a veto to any country over our security, but I also
know how to lead those alliances. This President has left them in
shatters across the globe. And we're now 90 percent of the casualties
in Iraq, and 90 percent of the costs. I think that's wrong, and I
think we can do better.
I have a better plan for homeland security. I have a better plan
to be able to fight the war on terror: by strengthening our military,
strengthening our intelligence; by going after the financing more
authoritatively; by doing what we need to do to rebuild the alliances;
by reaching out to the Muslim world, which the President has almost not
done; and beginning to isolate the radical Islamic Muslims, not have
them isolate the United States of America.
I know I can do a better job in Iraq, where I have a plan to have a
summit with all of the allies, something this President has not yet
achieved, not yet been able to do to bring people to the table. We can
do a better job of training the Iraqi forces to defend themselves. And
I know that we can do a better job of preparing for elections. All of
these, and especially homeland security, which we'll talk about a
little bit later.
MODERATOR: Mr. President, you have a 90-second rebut.
PRESIDENT BUSH: I, too, thank the University of Miami and say our
prayers are with the good people of this state who've suffered a lot.
September the 11th changed how America must look at the world. And
since that day our nation has been on a multi-pronged strategy to keep
our country safer. We've pursued Al Qaeda wherever Al Qaeda tries to
hide; 75 percent of known Al Qaeda leaders have been brought to
justice. The rest of them know we're after them.
We've upheld the doctrine that said, if you harbor a terrorist,
you're equally as guilty as the terrorist. And the Taliban, no longer
in power; 10 million people have registered to vote in Afghanistan in
the upcoming presidential election.
In Iraq, we saw a threat and we realized that after September the
11th, we must take threats seriously before they fully materialize.
Saddam Hussein now sits in a prison cell; America and the world are
safer for it.
We continue to pursue our policy of disrupting those who
proliferate weapons of mass destruction. Libya has disarmed. The A.Q.
Khan network has been brought to justice. And, as well, we're pursuing
a strategy of -- of freedom around the world, because I understand free
nations will reject terror; free nations will answer the hopes and
aspirations of their people; free nations will help us achieve the
peace we all want.
MODERATOR: New question, Mr. President, two minutes. Do you
believe the election of Senator Kerry on November the 2nd would
increase the chances of the U.S. being hit by another 9/11-type
terrorist attack?
PRESIDENT BUSH: I don't believe it's going to happen. I believe
I'm going to win because the American people know I know how to lead.
I've shown the American people I know how to lead. I have -- I
understand everybody in this country doesn't agree with the decisions I
made. And I made some tough decisions. But people know where I
stand. People out there listening know what I believe, and that's how
best it is to keep the peace.
This nation of ours has got a solemn duty to defeat this ideology
of hate, and that's what they are. This is a group of killers who will
not only kill here, but kill children in Russia; that will attack
unmercifully in Iraq hoping to shape our will. We have a duty to
defeat this enemy. We have a duty to protect our children and
grandchildren. The best way to defeat them is to never waver, to be
strong, to use every asset at our disposal, is to constantly stay on
the offensive, and at the same time, spread liberty.
And that's what people are seeing now is happening in Afghanistan.
Ten million citizens have registered to vote. It's a phenomenal
statistic, that if given a chance to be free, they will show up at the
polls. Forty-one percent of those 10 million are women.
In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's
incredibly hard. You know why? Because an enemy realizes the stakes.
The enemy understands a free Iraq will be a major defeat in their
ideology of hatred. That's why they're fighting so vociferously. They
showed up in Afghanistan when they were there because they tried to
beat us, and they didn't. And they're showing in Iraq for the same
reason. They're trying to defeat us. And if we lose our will, we
lose. But if we remain strong and resolute, we will defeat this
enemy.
MODERATOR: Ninety-second response, Senator Kerry.
SENATOR KERRY: I believe in being strong and resolute and
determined. And I will hunt down and kill the terrorists, wherever
they are. But we also have to be smart, Jim. And smart means not
diverting your attention from the real war on terror in Afghanistan
against Osama bin Laden and taking it off to Iraq, where the 9/11
Commission confirms there was no connection to 9/11, itself, and Saddam
Hussein, and where the reason for going to war was weapons of mass
destruction -- not the removal of Saddam Hussein.
This President has made, I regret to say, a colossal error of
judgment. And judgment is what we look for in the President of the
United States of America.
I'm proud that important military figures are supporting me in this
race: Former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, John Shalikashvili.
Just yesterday, General Eisenhower's son, General John Eisenhower,
endorsed me. General -- Admiral William Crowe; General Tony McPeak,
who ran the Air Force war so effectively for his father, all believe I
would make a stronger Commander-in-Chief. And they believe it because
they know I would not take my eye off of the goal: Osama bin Laden.
Unfortunately, he escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora. We had him
surrounded. But we didn't use American forces, the best trained in the
world, to go kill him -- the President relied on Afghan warlords that
he outsourced that job to. That's wrong.
MODERATOR: New question; two minutes, Senator Kerry. "Colossal
misjudgments" -- what colossal misjudgments, in your opinion, has
President Bush made in these areas?
SENATOR KERRY: Well, where do you want me to begin? (Laughter.)
First of all, he made the misjudgment of saying to America that he was
going to build a true alliance; that he would exhaust the remedies of
the United Nations and go through the inspections. In fact, he first
didn't even want to do that. And it wasn't until former Secretary of
State Jim Baker and General Scowcroft and others pushed publicly and
said, you've got to go to the U.N., that the President finally changed
his mind -- his campaign has a word for that -- and went to the United
Nations.
Now, once there, we could have continued those inspections. We had
Saddam Hussein trapped. He also promised America that he would go to
war as a last resort. Those words mean something to me as somebody who
has been in combat. Last resort. You've got to be able to look in the
eyes of families and say to those parents: I tried to do everything in
my power to prevent the loss of your son and daughter. I don't believe
the United States did that. And we pushed our allies aside.
And so, today, we are 90 percent of the casualties and 90 percent
of the cost -- $200 billion, $200 billion that could have been used for
health care, for schools, for construction, for prescription drugs for
seniors, and it's in Iraq. And Iraq is not even the center of the
focus of the war on terror. The center is Afghanistan where,
incidentally, there were more Americans killed last year than the year
before; where the opium production is 75 percent of the worlds opium
production; where 40 to 60 percent of the economy of Afghanistan is
based on opium; where the elections have been postponed three times.
The President moved the troops, so he's got 10 times the number of
troops in Iraq than he has in Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden is.
Does that mean that Saddam Hussein was 10 times more important than
Osama bin Laden -- excuse me -- Saddam Hussein more important than
Osama bin Laden? I don't think so.
MODERATOR: Ninety-second response, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BUSH: My opponent looked at the same intelligence I
looked at, and declared, in 2002, that Saddam Hussein was a grave
threat. He also said in December of 2003 that anyone who doubts that
the world is safer without Saddam Hussein does not have the judgment to
be President. I agree with him. The world is better off without
Saddam Hussein.
I was hoping diplomacy would work. I understand the serious
consequences of committing our troops into harm's way. It's the
hardest decision a President makes. So I went to the United Nations.
I didn't need anybody to tell me to go to the United Nations, I decided
to go there myself. And I went there hoping that, once and for all,
the free world would act in concert to get Saddam Hussein to listen to
our demands. They passed a resolution that said, disclose, disarm, or
face serious consequences. I believe when an international body
speaks, it must mean what it says.
Saddam Hussein had no intention of disarming. Why should he? He
had 16 other resolutions and nothing took place. As a matter of fact
-- my opponent talks about inspectors -- the facts are that he was
systematically deceiving the inspectors. That wasn't going to work.
That's kind of a pre-September 10th mentality, to hope that somehow
resolutions and failed inspections would make this world a more
peaceful place. He was hoping we'd turn away. But there's,
fortunately, others besides myself who believe that we ought to take
action, and we did. The world is safer without Saddam Hussein.
MODERATOR: New question, Mr. President, two minutes. What about
Senator Kerry's point, the comparison he drew between the priorities of
going after Osama bin Laden and going after Saddam Hussein?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Jim, we've got the capability of doing both. As a
matter of fact, this is a global effort. We're facing a -- a group of
folks who have such hatred in their heart, they'll strike anywhere with
any means. And that's why it's essential that we have strong
alliances, and we do. That's why it's essential that we make sure that
we keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of people like al
Qaeda, which we are. But to say that there's only one focus on the war
on terror doesn't really understand the nature of the war on terror.
Of course, we're after Saddam Hussein -- I mean, bin Laden. He's
isolated. Seventy-five percent of his people have been brought to
justice. The killer in -- the mastermind of the September the 11th
attacks, Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, is in prison. We're making progress.
But the front on this war is more than just one place.
The Philippines -- we've got help -- we're helping them there to
bring -- to bring al Qaeda affiliates to justice there. And, of
course, Iraq is a central part of the war on terror. That's why
Zarqawi and his people are trying to fight us. Their hope is that we
grow weary and we leave. The biggest disaster that could happen is
that we not succeed in Iraq. We will succeed. We've got a plan to do
so. And the main reason we'll succeed is because the Iraqis want to be
free.
I had the honor of visiting with Prime Minister Allawi. He's a
strong, courageous leader. He believes in the freedom of the Iraqi
people. He doesn't want U.S. leadership, however, to send mixed
signals, to not stand with the Iraqi people. He believes, like I
believe, that the Iraqis are ready to fight for their own freedom.
They just need the help to be trained. There will be elections in
January. We're spending reconstruction money. And our alliance is
strong. That's the plan for victory. And when Iraq is free, America
will be more secure.
MODERATOR: Senator Kerry, 90 seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: The President just talked about Iraq as a center of
the war on terror. Iraq was not even close to the center of the war on
terror before the President invaded it. The President made the
judgment to divert forces from under General Tommy Franks from
Afghanistan before the Congress even approved it, to begin to prepare
to go to war in Iraq. And he rushed to war in Iraq without a plan to
win the peace.
Now, that is not the judgment that a President of the United States
ought to make. You don't take America to war unless you have a plan to
win the peace. You don't send troops to war without the body armor
that they need. I've met kids in Ohio, parents in Wisconsin, places,
Iowa, where they're going out on the Internet to get the state of the
art body gear to send to their kids -- some have got them for a
birthday present. I think that's wrong. Humvees, 10,000 out of 12,000
humvees that are over there aren't armored. And you go visit some of
those kids in the hospitals today who were maimed because they don't
have the armament.
This President just -- I don't know if he sees what's really
happened out there. But it's getting worse by the day. More soldiers
killed in June than before; more in July than June; more in August than
July; more in September than in August. And now we see beheadings.
And we've got weapons of mass destruction crossing the border every
single day, and they're blowing people up. And we don't have enough
troops there.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Can I respond?
MODERATOR: Let's do a -- one of these one-minute extensions. You
have 30 seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you, sir.
First of all, what my opponent wants you to forget is that he voted
to authorize the use of force, and now says it's the wrong war at the
wrong time at the wrong place. I don't see how you can lead this
country to succeed in Iraq if you way "wrong war, wrong time, wrong
place." What message does that send our troops? What message does
that send our allies? What message does that send the Iraqis?
No, the way to win this is to be steadfast and resolved, and to
follow through on the plan that I've just outlined.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds, Senator.
SENATOR KERRY: Yes, we have to be steadfast and resolved, and I
am. And I will succeed for those troops, now that we're there. We
have to succeed. We can't leave a failed Iraq. But that doesn't mean
it wasn't a mistake of judgment to go there and take the focus off of
Osama bin Laden. It was. Now we can succeed, but I don't believe this
President can. I think we need a President who has the credibility to
bring the allies back to the table and to do what's necessary to make
it so America isn't doing this alone.
MODERATOR: We'll come back to Iraq in a moment, but I want to come
back to where I began, on homeland security. This is a two-minute new
question, Senator Kerry. As President, what would you do specifically,
in addition to, or differently, to increase the homeland security of
the United States than what President Bush is doing?
SENATOR KERRY: Jim, let me tell you exactly what I'll do, and
there are a long list of things. First of all, what kind of mixed
message does it send when you've got $500 million going over to Iraq to
put police officers in the streets of Iraq and the President is cutting
the COPS program in America? What kind of message does it send to be
sending money to open firehouses in Iraq, but we're shutting
firehouses, who are the first responders, here in America?
The President hasn't put one nickel, not one nickel, into the
effort to fix some of our tunnels and bridges and more exposed subway
systems. That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when
the Republican Convention was there. We hadn't done the work that
ought to be done.
The President -- 95 percent of the containers that come into the
ports, right here in Florida, are not inspected. Civilians get on to
aircraft and their -- their luggage is X-rayed, but the cargo hold is
not X-rayed. Does that make you feel safer in America?
This President thought it was more important to give the wealthiest
people in America a tax cut rather than invest in homeland security.
Those aren't my values. I believe in protecting America first. And
long before President Bush and I get a tax cut -- and that's who gets
it -- long before we do, I'm going to invest in homeland security, and
I'm going to make sure we're not cutting COPS programs in America, and
we're fully staffed in our firehouses, and that we protect the nuclear
and chemical plants. The President also, unfortunately, gave in to the
chemical industry, which didn't want to do some of the things necessary
to strengthen our chemical plant exposure. And there's an enormous
undone job to protect the loose nuclear materials in the world that are
able to get to terrorists. That's a whole other subject.
But I see we still have a little bit more time, let me just quickly
say, at the current pace the President will not secure the loose
material in the Soviet Union -- former Soviet Union for 13 years. I'm
going to do it in four years. And we're going to keep it out of the
hands of terrorists.
MODERATOR: Ninety second response, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BUSH: I don't think we want to get to how he's going to
pay for all these promises. It's like a huge tax gap -- anyway,
that's for another debate.
My administration has tripled the amount of money we're spending on
homeland security, to $30 billion a year. My administration worked
with the Congress to create the Department of Homeland Security so we
could better coordinate our borders and ports. We got a thousand extra
Border Patrol on the Southern border, more than a thousand on the
Northern border. We're modernizing our borders. We spent $3.1 billion
for fire and police -- $3.1 billion.
We're doing our duty to provide the funding. But the best way to
protect this homeland is to stay on the offense. We have to be right
100 percent of the time, and the enemy only has to be right once -- to
hurt us. There's a lot of good people working hard. And by the way,
we've also changed the culture of the FBI to have counterterrorism as
its number one priority. We're communicating better. We're going to
reform our intelligence services to make sure that we get the best
intelligence possible. The Patriot Act is vital -- it's vital that the
Congress renew the Patriot Act, which enables our law enforcement to
disrupt terror cells.
But again, I repeat to my fellow citizens, the best way to protect
you is to stay on the offense.
MODERATOR: Yes, let's do -- yes, 30 seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: The President just said the FBI had changed its
culture. We just read on the front pages of America's papers that
there are over 100,000 hours of tapes unlistened to. On one of those
tapes may be the enemy being right the next time. And the test is not
whether you're spending more money; the test is, are you doing
everything possible to make America safe. We didn't need that tax
cut. America needed to be safe.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Of course, we're doing everything we can to
protect America. I wake up every day thinking about how best to
protect America. That's my job. I work with Director Mueller of the
FBI. He comes into my office when I'm in Washington every morning
talking about how to protect us. There's a lot of really good people
working hard to do so. It's hard work.
But again, I want to tell the American people, we're doing
everything we can at home -- but you better have a President who chases
these terrorists down and bring them to justice before they hurt us
again.
MODERATOR: New question, Mr. President; two minutes. What
criteria would you use to determine when to start bringing U.S. troops
home from Iraq?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Let me first tell you that the best way for Iraq
to be safe and secure is for Iraqi citizens to be trained to do the
job. And that's what we're doing. We got 100,000 trained now, 125,000
by the end of this year, over 200,000 by the end of next year. That is
the best way. We'll never succeed in Iraq if the Iraqi citizens do not
want to take matter in their own hands to protect themselves. I
believe they want to. Prime Minister Allawi believes they want to.
And so the best indication about when we can bring our troops home,
which I really want to do -- but I don't want to do so for the sake of
bringing them home, I want to do so because we've achieved an objective
-- is to see the Iraqis perform, is to see the Iraqis step up and take
responsibility.
And so the answer to your question is, when our generals on the
ground and Ambassador Negroponte tells me that Iraq is ready to defend
herself from these terrorists, that elections will have been held by
then, that there's stability and that they're on their way to -- you
know, a nation of -- that's free. That's when. And I hope it's as
soon as possible. But I know putting artificial deadlines won't work.
My opponent, one time, said, well, get me elected, I'll have them out
of there in six months. That's -- you can't do that and expect to win
the war on terror.
My message to our troops is, thank you for what you're doing, we're
standing with you strong, we'll give you all the equipment you need,
and we'll get you home as soon as the mission is done -- because this
is a vital mission. A free Iraq will be a ally in the war on terror.
And that's essential. A free Iraq will set a powerful example in a
part of the world that is desperate for freedom. A free Iraq will help
secure Israel. A free Iraq will enforce the hopes and aspirations of
the reformers in places like Iran. A free Iraq is essential for the
security of this country.
MODERATOR: Ninety-seconds, Senator Kerry.
SENATOR KERRY: Thank you, Jim. My message to the troops is, also,
thank you for what they're doing, but it's also, help is on the way. I
believe those troops deserve better than what they are getting today.
You know, it's interesting, when I was in a rope line just the other
day coming out here from Wisconsin, a couple of young returnees were in
the line, one active duty, one from the Guard. And they both looked at
me and said, we need you, you got to help us over there.
Now, I believe there's a better way to do this. You know, the
President's father did not go into Iraq, into Baghdad, beyond Basra.
And the reason he didn't is, he said, he wrote in his book, because
there was no viable exit strategy. And he said our troops would be
occupiers in a bitterly hostile land. That's exactly where we find
ourselves today. There's a sense of American occupation.
The only building that was guarded when the troops went into
Baghdad was the Oil Ministry. We didn't guard the nuclear facilities.
We didn't guard the foreign office where you might have found
information about weapons of mass destruction. We didn't guard the
borders. Almost every step of the way, our troops have been left on
these extraordinarily difficult missions. I know what it's like to go
out on one of those missions where you don't know what's around the
corner. And I believe our troops need other allies helping. I'm going
to hold that summit. I will bring fresh credibility, a new start, and
we will get the job done right.
MODERATOR: New --
PRESIDENT BUSH: Jim --
MODERATOR: All right, go ahead. Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it's worthy for a follow-up --
MODERATOR: Sure.
THE PRESIDENT: -- if you don't mind.
SENATOR KERRY: Let's change the rules, we can add a whole --
MODERATOR: We can do 30 seconds each here.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. My opponent says help is on the way,
but what kind of message does it say to our troops in harm's way,
"wrong war, wrong place, wrong time"? That's not a message a
Commander-in-Chief gives -- or "this is a great diversion." As well,
help is on the way, but it's certainly hard to tell it when he voted
against the $87 billion supplemental to provide equipment for our
troops, and then said he actually did vote for it before he voted
against it. That's not what Commander-in-Chiefs does when you're
trying to lead troops.
MODERATOR: Senator Kerry, 30 seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: Well, you know, when I talked about the $87
billion, I made a mistake in how I talk about the war. But the
President made a mistake in invading Iraq. Which is worse? I believe
that when you know something is going wrong, you make it right. That's
what I learned in Vietnam. When I came back from that war, I saw that
it was wrong. Some people don't like the fact that I stood up to say
no, but I did. And that's what I did with that vote. And I'm going to
lead those troops to victory.
MODERATOR: All right, new question, two minutes, Senator Kerry.
Speaking of Vietnam, you spoke to Congress in 1971, after you came from
Vietnam, and you said, quote, "How do you ask a man to be the last man
to die for a mistake?" Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?
SENATOR KERRY: No, and they don't have to, providing we have the
leadership that we put -- that I'm offering. I believe that we have to
win this. The President and I have always agreed on that. And from
the beginning -- I did vote to give the authority because I thought
Saddam Hussein was a threat. And I did accept that -- that
intelligence. But I also laid out a very strict series of things we
needed to do in order to proceed from the position of strength. And
the President, in fact, promised them. He went to Cincinnati and he
gave a speech in which he said: We will plan carefully; we will
proceed cautiously; we will not make war inevitable; we will go with
our allies. He didn't do any of those things.
They didn't do the planning. They left the planning of the State
Department on the State Department desks. They avoided even the advice
of their own general, General Shinseki, the Army Chief of Staff --
said, you're going to need several hundred thousand troops. Instead of
listening to him, they retired him. The Terrorism Czar, who has worked
for every President since Ronald Reagan, said: Invading Iraq in
response to 9/11 would be like Franklin Roosevelt invading Mexico in
response to Pearl Harbor. That's what we have here.
What we need now is a President who understands how to bring these
other countries together to recognize their stakes in this. They do
have stakes in it; they've always had stakes in it. The Arab counties
have a stake in not having a civil war. The European countries have a
stake in not having total disorder on their doorstep. But this
President hasn't even held the kind of statesman-like summits that pull
people together and get them to invest in those stakes. In fact, he's
done the opposite, he pushed them away. When the Secretary General,
Kofi Annan offered the United Nations, he said, no, no, we'll go do
this alone.
To save for Haliburton the spoils of the war, they actually issued
a memorandum from the Defense Department saying, if you weren't with us
in the war, don't bother applying for any construction. That's not a
way to invite people.
MODERATOR: Ninety seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: That's totally absurd. Of course, the U.N. was
invited in. And we support the U.N. efforts there. They pulled out
after Sergio de Mello got killed, but they're now back in helping with
elections. My opponent says we didn't have any allies in this war?
What's he say to Tony Blair? What's he say to Alexander Kwasniewski,
of Poland. You can't expect to build alliance when you denigrate the
contributions of those who are serving side-by-side with American
troops in Iraq.
Plus, he says the cornerstone of his plan to succeed in Iraq is to
call upon nations to serve. So what's the message going to be? Please
join us in Iraq for a grand diversion? Join us for a war that is a
wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time?
I know how these people think. I deal with them all the time. I
sit down with the world leaders frequently and talk to them on the
phone frequently -- they're not going to follow somebody who says this
is the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time. They're not
going to follow somebody whose core convictions keep changing because
of politics in America.
And, finally, he says we ought to have a summit. Well, there are
summits being held. Japan is going to have a summit for the donors.
There's $14 billion pledged and Prime Minister Koizumi is going to call
countries to account to get them to contribute. And there's going to
be an Arab summit of the neighborhood countries. And Colin Powell
helped set -- helped set up that summit.
MODERATOR: Thirty-seconds, Senator.
SENATOR KERRY: The United Nations, Kofi Annan, offered help after
Baghdad fell. And we never picked him up on that did what was
necessary to transfer authority and to transfer reconstruction. It was
always American-run.
Secondly, when we went in, there were three countries -- Great
Britain, Australia, and the United States. That's not a grand
coalition. We can do better.
MODERATOR: Thirty-seconds, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, actually, he forgot Poland. And now, there
are 30 nations involved, standing side-by-side with our American
troops. And I honor their sacrifices. And I don't appreciate it when
a candidate for President denigrates the contributions of these brave
-- brave soldiers. It's -- you cannot lead the world if you do not
honor the contributions of those who are with us. He called them the
"coerced and the bribed." That's not how you bring people together.
Our coalition is strong. It will remain strong, for my -- so long
as I'm the President.
MODERATOR: New question, Mr. President, two minutes. You have
said there was a, quote, "miscalculation of what the conditions would
be in postwar Iraq." What was the miscalculation, and how did it
happen?
PRESIDENT BUSH: No, what I said was that because we achieved such
a rapid victory, more of the Saddam loyalists were around. In other
words, we thought we'd whip more of them going in. But because Tommy
Franks did such a great job in planning the operations, we moved
rapidly, and a lot of the Baathists and Saddam loyalists laid down
their arms and disappeared. I thought we would -- they would stay and
fight, but they didn't. And now we're fighting them now.
It's -- and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get
the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it
is. But it's necessary work. And I'm optimistic. See, I think you
can be realistic and optimistic at the same time. I'm optimistic we'll
achieve -- I know we won't achieve if we send mixed signals. I know
we're not going to achieve our objective if we send mixed signals to
our troops, our friends, the Iraqi citizens.
We've got a plan in place. The plan says there'll be elections in
January, and there will be. The plan says we'll train Iraqi soldiers
so they can do the hard work -- and we are. And it's not only just
America, but NATO is now helping. Jordan is helping train police. The
UAE is helping train police. We've allocated $7 billion over the next
months for reconstruction efforts, and we're making progress there.
And our alliance is strong.
Now, I just told you, there's going to be a summit of the Arab
nations. Japan will be hosting a summit. We're making progress. It
is hard work. It is hard work to go from a tyranny to a democracy.
It's hard work to go from a place where people get their hands cut off,
or executed, to a place where people are free, But it's necessary
work, and a free Iraq is going to make this world a more peaceful
place.
MODERATOR: Ninety seconds, Senator Kerry.
SENATOR KERRY: What I think troubles a lot of people in our
country is that the President has just sort of described one kind of
mistake, but what he has said is that even knowing there were no
weapons of mass destruction, even knowing there was no imminent threat,
even knowing there was no connection of al Qaeda, he would still have
done everything the same way. Those are his words. Now, I would not.
So what I'm trying to do is just talk the truth to the American
people and to the world. The truth is what good policy is based on.
It's what leadership is based on. The President says that I'm
denigrating these troops. I have nothing but respect for the British
and for Tony Blair and for what they've been willing to do. But you
can't tell me that when the most troops any other country has on the
ground is Great Britain with 8,300, and below that, the four others are
below 4,000, and below that, there isn't anybody out of the hundreds,
that we have a genuine coalition to get this job done.
You can't tell me that on the day that we went into that war and it
started, it was principally the United States of America and Great
Britain and one or two others; that's it. And today we are 90 percent
of the casualties and 90 percent of the costs. And meanwhile, North
Korea has gotten nuclear weapons. Talk about mixed messages, the
President is the one who said we can't allow countries to get nuclear
weapons. They have. I'll change that.
MODERATOR: New question, Senator Kerry. Two minutes. You've just
-- you've repeatedly accused President Bush -- not here tonight, but
elsewhere before -- of not telling the truth about Iraq, essentially of
lying to the American people about Iraq. Give us some examples of what
you consider to be his not telling the truth.
SENATOR KERRY: Well I've never, ever used the harshest word, as
you did just then, and I try not to. I've been -- but I'll,
nevertheless, tell you that I think he has not been candid with the
American people. And I'll tell you exactly how. First of all, we all
know that in his State of the Union message he told Congress about
nuclear materials that didn't exist. We know that he promised America
that he was going to build this coalition -- I just described the
coalition. It is not the kind of coalition we were described when we
were talking about voting for this. The President said he would
exhaust the remedies of the United Nation and go through that full
process. He didn't. He cut it off, sort of arbitrarily. And we know
that there were further diplomatic efforts underway. They just
decided, the time for diplomacy is over and rushed to war without
planning for what happens afterwards.
Now, he misled the American people in his speech when he said, we
will plan carefully. They obviously didn't. He misled the American
people when he said, we'd go to war as a last resort. We did not go as
a last resort. And most Americans know the difference.
Now, this has cost us deeply in the world. I believe that it is
important to tell the truth to the American people. I've worked with
those leaders the President talks about. I've worked with them for 20
years, for longer than this President, and I know what many of them say
today, and I know how to bring them back to the table.
And I believe that fresh start, new credibility, a President who
can understand what we have to do to reach out to the Muslim world, to
make it clear that this is not -- you know, Osama bin Laden uses the
invasion of Iraq in order to go out to people and say that America has
declared war on Islam. We need to be smarter about how we wage a war
on terror. We need to deny them the recruits. We need to deny them
the safe havens. We need to rebuild our alliances.
I believe that Ronald Reagan, John Kennedy, and others did that
more effectively, and I'm going to try to follow in their footsteps.
MODERATOR: Ninety-seconds, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BUSH: My opponent just said something amazing. He said,
Osama bin Laden uses the invasion of Iraq as an excuse to spread hatred
for America. Osama bin Laden isn't going to determine how we defend
ourselves. Osama bin Laden doesn't get to decide. The American people
decide. I decided. The right action was in Iraq.
My opponent calls it a mistake; it wasn't a mistake. He said I
misled on Iraq. I don't think he was misleading when he called Iraq a
grave threat in the fall of 2002. I don't think he was misleading when
he said that it was right to disarm Iraq in the spring of 2003. I
don't think he misled you when he said that if -- anyone who doubted
whether the world was better off without Saddam Hussein in power didn't
have the judgment to be President. I don't think he was misleading. I
think what is misleading is to say you can lead and succeed in Iraq if
you keep changing your positions on this war. And he has. As the
politics change, his positions change. And that's not how a
Commander-in-Chief acts.
Let me finish -- the intelligence I looked at was the same
intelligence my opponent looked at, the very same intelligence. And
when I stood up there and spoke to the Congress, I was speaking off the
same intelligence he looked at to make his decisions to support the
authorization of force.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds -- we'll do a 30-second here.
SENATOR KERRY: I wasn't misleading when I said he was a threat.
Nor was I misleading on the day that the President decided to go to war
when I said that he had made a mistake in not building strong
alliances, and that I would have preferred that he did more diplomacy.
I've had one position -- one consistent position -- that Saddam Hussein
was a threat; there was a right way to disarm him and a wrong way. And
the President chose the wrong way.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BUSH: The only thing consistent about my opponent's
position is that he's been inconsistent. He changes positions. And
you cannot change positions in this war on terror if you expect to
win. And I expect to win. It's necessary we win. We're being
challenged like never before, and we have a duty to our country and to
future generations of America to achieve a free Iraq, a free
Afghanistan, and to rid the world of weapons of mass destruction.
MODERATOR: New question, Mr. President, two minutes. Has the war
in Iraq been worth the cost in American lives? Ten thousand fifty two
-- I mean, 1,052 as of today.
PRESIDENT BUSH: No, every life is precious. Every life matters.
You know, my hardest -- the hardest part of the job is to know that I
committed the troops in harm's way, and then do the best I can to
provide comfort for the loved ones who lost a son or a daughter or
husband and wife.
And, you know, I think about Missy Johnson, this fantastic young
lady I met in Charlotte, North Carolina, she and her son, Brian. They
came to see me. Her husband, P.J., got killed. He'd been in
Afghanistan, went to Iraq. You know, it's hard work to try to love her
as best as I can, knowing full well that the decision I made caused her
loved one to be in harm's way. I told her after we prayed and teared
up and laughed some, that I thought her husband's sacrifice was noble
and worthy, because I understand the stakes of this war on terror. I
understand that we must find al Qaeda wherever they hide. We must deal
with threats before they fully materialize -- and Saddam Hussein was a
threat -- and that we must spread liberty, because in the long run, the
way to defeat hatred and tyranny and oppression is to spread freedom.
Missy understood that. That's what she told me her husband
understood. So you say, was it worth it? Every life is precious.
That's what distinguishes us from the enemy. Everybody matters. But I
think it's worth it, Jim. I think it's worth it, because I think -- I
know in the long-term, a free Iraq, a free Afghanistan will set such a
powerful example in a part of the world that's desperate for freedom.
It will help change the world, that we can look back and say, we did
our duty.
MODERATOR: Senator, ninety seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: I understand what the President is talking about,
because I know what it means to lose people in combat. And the
question, is it worth the cost, reminds me of my own thinking when I
came back from fighting in that war, and it reminds me that it is vital
for us not to confuse the war, ever, with the warriors. That happened
before.
And that's one of the reasons why I believe I can get this job
done, because I am determined, for those soldiers and for those
families, for those kids who put their lives on the line. That is
noble. That's the most noble thing that anybody can do. And I want to
make sure the outcome honors that nobility.
Now, we have a choice here. I've laid out a plan by which I think
we can be successful in Iraq: with a summit; by doing better training,
faster; by cutting -- by doing what we need to do with respect to the
U.N. and the elections. There's only 25 percent of the people in
there. They can't have an election right now. The President is not
getting the job done.
So the choice for America is, you can have a plan that I've laid
out in four points, each of which I can tell you more about, or you can
go to JohnKerry.com and see more of it -- or you have the President's
plan, which is four words: More of the same. I think my plan is
better. And my plan has a better chance of standing up and fighting
for those troops. I will never let those troops down, and will hunt
and kill the terrorists, wherever they are.
MODERATOR: All right, sir, go ahead. Thirty seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: I understand what it means to be the
Commander-in-Chief, and if I were to ever say, this is the wrong war at
the wrong time and the right -- wrong place, the troops would wonder,
how can I follow this guy. You cannot lead the war on terror if you
keep changing positions on the war on terror, and say things like,
well, this is just a grand diversion. It's not a grand diversion.
This is an essential, that we get it right. And so I -- the plan he
talks about simply won't work.
MODERATOR: Senator Kerry, you have 30 seconds, right.
SENATOR KERRY: Secretary of State Colin Powell told this President
the Pottery Barn rule, if you break it, you fix it. Now, if you break
it you made a mistake, it's the wrong thing to do. But you own it, and
then you've got to fix it and do something with it. Now, that's what
we have to do. There's no inconsistency.
Soldiers know, over there, that this isn't being done right yet.
I'm going to get it right for those soldiers, because it's important to
Israel, it's important to America, it's important to the world, it's
important to the fight on terror. But I have a plan to do it. He
doesn't.
MODERATOR: Speaking of your plan, new question, Senator Kerry, two
minutes. Can you give us specifics -- in terms of a scenario, time
lines, et cetera -- for ending U.S. -- major U.S. military involvement
in Iraq?
SENATOR KERRY: The time line that I've set out -- and, again, I
want to correct the President, because he's misled again this evening
on what I've said -- I didn't say I would bring troops out in six
months. I said, if we do the things that I've set out and we are
successful, we could begin to draw the troops down in six months. And
I think a critical component of success in Iraq is being able to
convince the Iraqis and the Arab world that the United States doesn't
have long-term designs on it.
As I understand it, we're building some 14 military bases there
now. And some people say they've got a rather permanent concept to
them. When you -- when you guard the Oil Ministry, but you don't guard
the nuclear facilities, the message to a lot of people is, maybe, well,
maybe they're interested in our oil.
Now, the problem is that they didn't think these things through
properly, and these are the things you have to think through. What I
want to do is change the dynamics on the ground. And you have to do
that by beginning to not back off of Fallujahs and other places, and
send the wrong message to the terrorists. You have to close the
borders. You've got to show you're serious in that regard. But you've
also got to show that you're prepared to bring the rest of the world in
and share the stakes.
I will make a flat statement -- the United States of America has no
long-term designs on staying in Iraq. And our goal, in my
administration, would be to get all of the troops out of there, with
the minimal amount you need for training and logistics as we do in some
other countries in the world after a war to be able to sustain the
peace. But that's how we're going to win the peace, by rapidly
training the Iraqis, themselves.
Even the administration has admitted they haven't done the
training, because they came to Congress a few weeks ago and asked for a
complete reprogramming of the money. Now, what greater admission is
there, 16 months afterwards, oops, we haven't done the job, we got to
start to spend the money now, will you guys give us permission to shift
it over into training?
MODERATOR: Ninety seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: There's 100,000 troops trained, police, Guard,
special units, border patrol. There's going to be 125,000 trained by
the end of this year. Yes, we're getting the job done. It's hard
work. Everybody knows it's hard work because there's a determined
enemy that's trying to defeat us.
Now, my opponent says he's going to try to change the dynamics on
the ground. Well, Prime Minister Allawi was here; he is the leader of
that country. He's a brave, brave man. When he came, after giving a
speech to the Congress, my opponent questioned his credibility. You
can't change the dynamics on the ground if you've criticized the brave
leader of Iraq. One of his campaign people alleged that Prime Minister
Allawi was like a puppet. That's no way to treat somebody who's
courageous and brave, that is trying to lead his country forward.
The way to make sure that we succeed is to send consistent, sound
messages to the Iraqi people that when we give our word, we will keep
our word; that we stand with you; that we believe you want to be free
-- and I do. I believe that the 25 million people, the vast majority
long to have elections. I reject this notion -- and I'm not suggesting
that my opponent says it, but I reject the notion that some say that if
you're Muslim you can't be free, you don't desire freedom. I disagree,
strongly disagree with that.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: I couldn't agree more that the Iraqis want to be
free and that they could be free. But I think the President, again,
still hasn't shown how he's going to go about it the right way. He has
more of the same.
Now, Prime Minister Allawi came here and he said the terrorists are
pouring over the border. That's Allawi's assessment. The National
Intelligence Assessment that was given to the President in July said:
Best case scenario, more of the same of what we see today; worst case
scenario, civil war. I can do better.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes, let me --
MODERATOR: Yes, thirty seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: The reason why Prime Minister Allawi said they're
coming across the border is because he recognizes that this is a
central part of the war on terror. They're fighting us because they're
fighting freedom. They understand that a free Afghanistan or a free
Iraq will be a major defeat for them. And those are the stakes. And
that's why it is essential we not leave. That's why it's essential we
hold the line. That's why it's essential we win -- and we will. Under
my leadership, we're going to win this war in Iraq.
MODERATOR: Mr. President, a new question, two minutes. Does the
Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take
the United States into another preemptive military action?
PRESIDENT BUSH: I would hope I never have to. I understand how
hard it is to commit troops. I never wanted to commit troops. I never
-- when I was running -- when we had the debate in 2000, I never dreamt
I would be doing that. But the enemy attacked us, Jim, and I have a
solemn duty to protect the American people, to do everything I can to
protect us.
I think that by speaking clearly and doing what we say and not
sending mixed messages, it is less likely we'll ever have to use
troops. But a President must always be willing to use troops. It must
-- as a last resort.
The -- I was hopeful diplomacy would work in Iraq. It was falling
apart. There was no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was hoping
that the world would turn a blind eye. And if he had been in power --
in other words, we had said, let's let the inspectors work, or let's
hope to talk him out, maybe an 18th resolution would work, he'd have
been stronger and tougher, and the world would have been a lot worse
off. There's just no doubt in my mind. We would rue the day had
Saddam Hussein been in power.
So we use diplomacy every chance we get -- believe me. And I -- I
would hope to never have to use force. But by speaking clearly and
sending messages that we mean what we say, we've affected the world in
a positive way. Look at Libya. Libya was a threat. Libya is now
peacefully dismantling its weapons programs. Libya understood that
America and others will enforce doctrine, and the world is better for
it.
So to answer your question, I would hope we'd never have to. I
think by acting firmly and decisively, it will mean it's less likely to
-- less likely we have to use force.
MODERATOR: Senator Kerry, 90 seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: Jim, the President just said something
extraordinarily revealing and, frankly, very important in this debate.
In answer to your question about Iraq and sending people into Iraq, he
just said, the enemy attacked us. Saddam Hussein didn't attack us.
Osama bin Laden attacked us. Al Qaeda attacked us.
And when we had Osama bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora
Bora, 1,000 of his cohorts with him in those mountains, with the
American military forces nearby and in the field -- we didn't use the
best trained troops in the world to go kill the world's number one
criminal and terrorist. They outsourced the job to Afghan warlords who
only a week earlier had been on the other side fighting against us,
neither of whom trusted each other. That's the enemy that attacked us,
that's the enemy that was allowed to walk out of those mountains,
that's the enemy that is now in 60 countries with stronger recruits.
He also said Saddam Hussein would have been stronger -- that is
just factually incorrect. Two-thirds of the country was a no-fly zone
when we started this war. We would have had sanctions, we would have
had the UN inspectors. Saddam Hussein would have been continually
weakening if the President had shown the patience to go through another
round of resolution, to sit down with those leaders and say: What do
you need? What do you need now? How much more will it take to get you
to join us? We would be in a stronger place today.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: First, listen, of course I know Osama bin Laden
attacked us. I know that. And, secondly, to think that another round
of resolutions would have caused Saddam Hussein to disarm, disclose is
ludicrous in my judgment, it just shows a significant difference of
opinion. We tried diplomacy. We did our best. He was hoping to turn
a blind eye, and, yes, he would have been strong had we not dealt with
him. He had the capability of making weapons, and he would have made
weapons.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds, Senator.
SENATOR KERRY: Thirty-five to 40 countries in the world had a
greater capability of making weapons at the moment the President
invaded than Saddam Hussein. And while he has been diverted with nine
out of ten active duty divisions of our Army either going to Iraq,
coming back from Iraq or getting ready to go, North Korea's got nuclear
weapons and the world is more dangerous. Iran is moving towards
nuclear weapons and the world is more dangerous. Darfur has a
genocide; the world is more dangerous. I'd have made a better choice.
MODERATOR: New question, two minutes, Senator Kerry. What is your
position on the whole concept of preemptive war?
SENATOR KERRY: The President always has the right and always has
had the right for preemptive strike. That was a great doctrine
throughout the Cold War, and it was always one of the things we argued
about with respect to arms control. No President, through all of
American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt
in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if
and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do in a way that passes the
test, that passes the global test, where your countrymen, your people
understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove
to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.
Here we have our own Secretary of State who's had to apologize to
the world for the presentation he made to the United Nations. I mean,
we can remember when President Kennedy, in the Cuban missile crisis,
sent his Secretary of State to Paris to meet with de Gaulle, and in the
middle of the discussion to tell them about the missiles in Cuba, he
said, here, let me show you the photos. And de Gaulle waved them off,
and said, "No, no, no, no. The word of the President of the United
States is good enough for me." How many leaders in the world today
would respond to us as a result of what we've done in that way?
So what is at test here is the credibility of the United States of
America and how we lead the world. Well, Iran and Iraq are now more --
Iran and North Korea are now more dangerous. Now, whether preemption
is ultimately what has to happen, I don't know yet. But I'll tell you
this, as President, I'll never take my eye off that ball. I've been
fighting for proliferation the entire time -- anti-proliferation the
entire time I've been in the Congress. And we've watched this
President actually turn away from some of the treaties that were on the
table. You don't help yourself with other nations when you turn away
from the Global Warming Treaty, for instance, or when you refuse to
deal at length with the United Nations. You have to earn that
respect. And I think we have a lot of earning back to do.
MODERATOR: Ninety seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Let me -- I'm not exactly sure what you mean,
passes the global test. You take preemptive action if you pass a
global test? My attitude is you take preemptive action in order to
protect the American people, that you act in order to make this country
secure.
My opponent talks about me not signing certain treaties. But let
me tell you one thing I didn't sign -- and I think it shows a
difference of our opinion, the difference opinions -- and that is I
wouldn't join the International Criminal Court. This is a body based
in The Hague where unaccountable judges and prosecutors could pull our
troops, our diplomats up for trial. And I wouldn't join it. And I
understand that in certain capitals around the world that that wasn't a
popular move. But it's the right move, not to join a foreign court
that could -- where our people could be prosecuted. My opponent is for
joining the International Criminal Court. I just think trying to be
popular kind of in the global sense, if it's not in our best interest
makes no sense. I'm interested in working with other nations, and do a
lot of it. But I'm not going to make decisions that I think are wrong
for America.
MODERATOR: New question. Mr. President, do you believe that
diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with North
Korea and Iran? Taking them in any order you would like.
THE PRESIDENT: North Korea, first -- I do. Let me say, I
certainly hope so. Before I was sworn in, the policy of this
government was to have bilateral negotiations with North Korea. And we
signed an agreement with North Korea that my administration found out
that was not being honored by the North Koreans. And so I decided that
a better way to approach the issue was to get other nations involved,
just -- besides us.
And in Crawford, Texas, Jiang Zemin and I agreed that the nuclear
weapons-free north -- peninsula -- Korean Peninsula was in his
interest, and our interest, and the world's interest. And so we began
a new dialogue with North Korea, one that included not only the United
States but now China -- and China has got a lot of influence over North
Korea, in some ways more than we do.
As well, we included South Korea, Japan and Russia. So now there
are five voices speaking to Kim Jong-il, not just one. And so if Kim
Jong-il decides again to not honor an agreement, he's not only doing
injustice to America, he'd be doing injustice to China, as well. And I
think this will work. It's not going to work if we open up a dialogue
with Kim Jong-il. That's what he wants. He wants to unravel the
six-party talks -- or the five -- the five nation coalition that's
sending him a clear message.
On Iran, I hope we can do the same thing -- continue to work with
the world to convince the Iranian mullahs to abandon their nuclear
ambitions. We work very closely with the foreign ministers of France,
Germany, and Great Britain, who have been the folks delivering the
message to the mullahs that if you expect to be part of the world of
nations, get rid of your nuclear programs. The IAEA is involved.
There's a special protocol recently been passed that allows for instant
inspections. I hope we can do it. And we've got a good strategy.
MODERATOR: Senator Kerry, 90 seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: With respect to Iran, the British, French and
Germans were the ones who initiated an effort without the United
States, regrettably, to begin to try to move to deter the nuclear
possibilities in Iran.
I believe we could have done better. I think the United States
should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test
them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful
purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have
put sanctions together. The President did nothing.
With respect to North Korea, the real story, we had inspectors and
television cameras in the nuclear reactor in North Korea. Secretary
Bill Perry negotiated that under President Clinton. And we knew where
the fuel rods were, and we knew the limits on their nuclear power.
Colin Powell, our Secretary of State, announced one day that we were
going to continue the dialogue and work with the North Koreans. The
President reversed him publicly, while the President of South Korea was
here. And the President of South Korea went back to South Korea
bewildered and embarrassed because it went against his policy. And for
two years, this administration didn't talk at all to North Korea.
While they didn't talk at all, the fuel rods came out. The
inspectors were kicked out. The television cameras were kicked out.
And, today, there are four to seven nuclear weapons in the hands of
North Korea. That happened on this President's watch. Now, that, I
think, is one of the most serious sort of reversals or mixed messages
that you could possibly send.
MODERATOR: I want to make sure -- yes, sir -- but in this one
minute, I want to make sure that we understand -- the people -- the
people watching you understand the differences between the two of you
on this. You want to continue the multinational talks, correct?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Right.
MODERATOR: And you want -- you're wanting to do it --
SENATOR KERRY: Both. I want bilateral talks which put all of the
issues from the Armistice of 1952, the economic issues, the human
rights issues, the artillery disposal issues, the DMZ issues and the
nuclear issues on the table.
MODERATOR: And you're opposed to that; right?
PRESIDENT BUSH: The minute we have bilateral talks the six-party
talks will unwind. It's exactly what Kim Jong-il wants. And by the
way, the breach on the agreement was not to plutonium, the breach on
the agreement is highly enriched uranium, that's what we caught him
doing. That's where he was breaking the agreement.
Secondly, you said -- my opponent said that he'd work to put
sanctions on Iran. We've already sanctioned Iran. We can't sanction
them anymore. There are sanctions in place on Iran. And, finally, we
were a
party to the convincing -- to working with Germany, France and
Great Brittan to send their foreign ministers into Iran.
MODERATOR: New question, two minutes, Senator Kerry. You
mentioned Darfur, the Darfur region of Sudan. Fifty thousand people
have already died in that area, more than a million are homeless and
it's been labeled an act of ongoing genocide, yet, neither one of you
-- or anyone else connected with your campaigns or your administration
that I can find -- has discussed the possibility of sending in troops.
Why not?
SENATOR KERRY: Well, I'll tell you exactly why not, but I first
want to say something about those sanctions on Iran. Only the United
States put the sanctions on alone, and that's exactly what I'm talking
about. In order for the sanctions to be effective we should have been
working with the British, French and Germans and other countries. And
that's the difference between the President and me. And, there, again,
he sort of slid by the question.
Now, with respect to Darfur, yes it is a genocide. And months ago,
many of us were pressing for action. I think the reason that we're not
saying send American troops in at this point is several-fold. Number
one, we can do this through the African Union, providing we give them
the logistical support. Right now, all the President is providing is
humanitarian support. We need to do more than that. They've got to
have the logistical capacity to go in and stop the killing, and that's
going to require more than is on the table today.
I also believe that it is -- one of the reasons we can't do it is,
we're overextended. Ask the people in the Armed Forces today. We've
got Guards and Reserves who are doing double duties, we've got a
backdoor draft taking place in America today. People with stop-loss
programs, where they're told, you can't get out of the military; nine
out of our 10 active duty divisions committed to Iraq one way or the
other, either going, coming, or preparing. So this is the way the
President has overextended the United States.
That's why, in my plan, I add two active duty divisions to the
United States Army, not for Iraq, but for our general demands across
the globe. I also intend to double the number of Special Forces so
that we can do the job we need to do with respect to fighting the
terrorists around the world. And if we do that, then we have the
ability to be able to respond more rapidly. But I'll tell you this, as
President, if it took American forces, to some degree, to coalesce the
African Union, I'd be prepared to do it, because we could never allow
another Rwanda. It's a moral responsibility for us in the world.
MODERATOR: Ninety seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Back to Iran, just for a second. It was not my
administration that put the sanctions on Iran. That happened long
before I arrived in Washington, D.C.
In terms of Darfur, I agree it's genocide, and Colin Powell so
stated. We have committed $200 million worth of aid. We're the
leading donor in the world to help the suffering people there. We will
commit more, over time, to help.
We are very much involved at the U.N. on the sanction policy of the
Bashir government in the Sudan. Prior to Darfur, Ambassador Jack
Danforth had been negotiating a north-south agreement that we would
hope would have brought peace to the Sudan. I agree with my opponent
that we shouldn't be committing troops, that we ought to be working
with the African Union to do so, precisely what we did in Liberia -- we
helped stabilize the situation with some troops, and when the African
Union came, we moved them out. My hope is that the African Union moves
rapidly to help save lives. Fortunately, the rainy season will be
ending shortly, which will make it easier to get aid there and help the
long suffering people there.
MODERATOR: New question, President Bush. There are clearly, as we
have heard, major policy differences between the two of you. Are there
also underlying character issues that you believe -- that you believe
are serious enough to deny Senator Kerry the job as Commander-in-Chief
of the United States?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Whoo, that's a loaded question. (Laughter.)
First of all, I admire Senator Kerry's service to our country. I
admire the fact that he is a great dad. I appreciate the fact that his
daughters have been so kind to my daughters in what has been a pretty
hard experience for, I guess, young girls -- seeing their dads out
there campaigning. I admire the fact that he served for 20 years in
the Senate, although I'm not so sure I admire the record. I won't hold
it against him that he went to Yale. Nothing wrong with that.
I -- my concerns about the Senator is that in the course of this
campaign I've been listening very carefully to what he says, and he
changed his positions on the war in Iraq, changes positions on
something as fundamental as what you believe in your core, in your
heart of hearts is right in Iraq. You cannot lead if you send mixed
messages. Mixed messages send the wrong signals to our troops, mixed
messages send the wrong signals to our allies, mixed messages send the
wrong signals to the Iraqi citizens.
And that's my biggest concern about my opponent. I admire his
service. But I just know how this world works, and that in the
councils of government, there must be certainty from the U.S.
President. Of course, we change tactics when need to, but we never
change our beliefs, the strategic beliefs that are necessary to protect
this country and the world.
MODERATOR: Ninety-second response, Senator.
SENATOR KERRY: Well, first of all, I appreciate- the personal
comments the President just made, and I share them with him. I think
only if you've -- if you're doing this, and he's done it more than I
have in terms of the presidency, can you begin to get a sense of what
it means to your families. And it's tough. And so I acknowledge his
daughters. I've watched them. I've chuckled a few times at some of
their comments. (Laughter.) And --
PRESIDENT BUSH: Trying to put a leash on them. (Laughter.)
SENATOR KERRY: Well, I know, I've learned not to do that.
(Laughter.) And I have great respect and admiration for his wife. I
think she's a terrific person --
PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you.
SENATOR KERRY: -- and a great First Lady. But we do have
differences. I'm not going to talk about a difference of character; I
don't think that's my job or my business. But let me talk about
something that the President just sort of finished up with. Maybe
someone would call it a character trait; maybe somebody wouldn't.
But this issue of certainty. It's one thing to be certain, but you
can be certain and be wrong. It's another to be certain and be right,
or be certain and be moving in the right direction, or be certain about
a principle and then learn new facts and take those new facts and put
them to use in order to change and get your policy right.
What I worry about with the President is that he's not
acknowledging what's on the ground, he's not acknowledging the
realities of North Korea, he's not acknowledging the truth of the
science of stem cell research or of global warming and other issues.
And certainty sometimes can get you in trouble.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, I think -- listen, I fully agree that one
should shift tactics, and we will in Iraq. Our commanders have got all
the flexibility to do what is necessary to succeed. But what I won't
do is change my core values because of politics or because of
pressure. And it is -- one of the things I've learned in the White
House is that there's enormous pressure on the President, and you
cannot wilt under that pressure, otherwise the world won't be better
off.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
SENATOR KERRY: I have no intention of wilting. I've never wilted
in my life. And I've never wavered in my life. I know exactly what we
need to do in Iraq and my position has been consistent. Saddam Hussein
is a threat, he needed to be disarmed, we needed to go to the U.N., the
President needed the authority to use force in order to be able to get
him to do something because he never did it without the threat of
force, but we didn't need to rush to war without a plan to win the
peace.
MODERATOR: New question, two minutes, Senator Kerry. If you are
elected President, what will you take to that office thinking is the
single most serious threat to the national security of the United
States?
SENATOR KERRY: Nuclear proliferation. Nuclear proliferation.
There are some 600-plus tons of unsecured material still in the former
Soviet Union, in Russia. At the rate that the President is currently
securing that, it will take 13 years to get it.
I did a lot of work on this. I wrote a book about it several years
ago -- maybe six or seven years ago -- called, "The New War," which saw
the difficulties of this international criminal network. And back
then, we intercepted a suitcase in a Middle Eastern country with
nuclear materials in it. And the black market sale price was about
$250 million. Now, there are terrorists trying to get their hands on
that stuff today.
And this President, I regret to say, has secured less nuclear
material in the last two years since 9/11 than we did in the two years
preceding 9/11. We have to do this job. And to do the job you can't
cut the money for it. The President actually cut the money for it.
You have to put the money into it and the funding and the leadership.
And part of that leadership is sending the right message to places
like North Korea. Right now the President is spending hundreds of
millions of dollars to research bunker-busting nuclear weapons. The
United States is pursuing a new set of nuclear weapons. It doesn't
make sense. You talk about mixed messages. We're telling other
people, you can't have nuclear weapons, but we're pursuing a new
nuclear weapon that we might even contemplate using.
Not this President. I'm going to shut that program down and we're
going to make it clear to the world we're serious about containing
nuclear proliferation. And we're going to get the job of containing
all of that nuclear material in Russia done in four years. And we're
going to build the strongest international network to prevent nuclear
proliferation. This is the scale of what President Kennedy set out to
do with the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. It's our generation's
equivalent. And I intend to get it done.
MODERATOR: Ninety second, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Actually, we've increased funding for dealing with
nuclear proliferation about 35 percent since I've been the President.
Secondly, we've set up what's called the -- well, first of all, I
agree with my opponent that the biggest threat facing this country is
weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a terrorist network. And
that's why we've put proliferation as the -- one of the centerpieces of
a multi-pronged strategy to make the country safer.
My administration started what is called the Proliferation Security
Initiative -- over 60 nations involved with disrupting the
trans-shipment of information and/or weapons of mass destruction
materials. And we're -- been effective. We busted the A.Q. Khan
network. This was a proliferator out of Pakistan that was selling
secrets to places like North Korea and Libya. We convinced Libya to
disarm. It was an essential part of dealing with weapons of mass
destruction and proliferation.
I'll tell you another way to help protect America in the long run
-- in the long run is continue with missile defenses. And we've got a
robust research and development program that has been ongoing during my
administration. We'll be implementing a missile defense system
relatively quickly. And that is another way to help deal with the
threats that we face in the 21st century. My opponent is opposed to
the missile defenses.
MODERATOR: Just for this one-minute discussion here, is it just --
for whatever seconds it takes -- so it's correct to say that if
somebody is listening to this, that both of you agree -- if you're
reelected, Mr. President, and if you are elected -- the single most
serious threat you believe -- both of you believe is nuclear
proliferation?
PRESIDENT BUSH: In the hands of a terrorist enemy.
SENATOR KERRY: Weapons of mass destruction, nuclear
proliferation. But again, the test of the difference between us -- the
President has had four years to try to do something about it, and North
Korea has got more weapons. Iran is moving towards weapons. And at
his pace, it will take 13 years to secure those weapons in Russia. I'm
going to do it in four years, and I'm going to immediately set out to
have bilateral talks with North Korea.
MODERATOR: Your response to that.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Again, I can't tell you how big a mistake I think
that is, to have bilateral talks with North Korea. It's precisely what
Kim Jong-il wants. It will cause the six-party talks to evaporate. It
means that China no longer is involved in convincing, along with us,
for Kim Jong-il to get rid of his weapons. It's a big mistake to do
that.
We must have China's leverage on Kim Jong-il, besides ourselves.
And if you enter bilateral talks, they'll be happy to walk away from
the table. I don't think that will work.
MODERATOR: All right, Mr. President, this is -- this is the last
question, and two minutes. It's a new -- new subject, new question.
And it has to do with President Putin and Russia. Did you misjudge
him, or are you -- do you feel that what he is doing in the name of
anti-terrorism by changing some democratic processes is okay?
PRESIDENT BUSH: No, I don't think it's okay, and said so
publicly. I think that there needs to be checks and balances in a
democracy, and made that very clear -- that by consolidating power in a
central government, he's sending a signal to the Western world and the
United States that -- that perhaps he doesn't believe in checks and
balances. And I've told him that.
He's also a strong ally in the war on terror. He is -- listen,
they went through a horrible situation in Beslan where these terrorists
gunned down young school kids. But it's the nature of the enemy, by
the way. That's why we need to be firm and resolved in bringing them
to justice. It's precisely what Vladimir Putin understands, as well.
I've got a good relation with Vladimir, and it's important that we
do have a good relation because that enables me to better comment to
him and to better to discuss with him some of the decisions he makes.
I found that in this world that it's important to establish good
personal relationships with people so that when you have disagreements,
you're able to disagree in a way that is effective.
And so I've told him my opinion. I look forward to discussing it
more with him as time goes on. Russia is a country in transition.
Vladimir is going to have to make some hard choices, and I think it's
very important for the American President, as well as other Western
leaders, to remind him of the great benefits of democracy, that
democracy will best help the people realize their hopes and aspirations
and dreams. And I will continue working with him over the next four
years.
MODERATOR: Ninety seconds, Senator Kerry.
SENATOR KERRY: Well, let me just say quickly that I've had an
extraordinary experience of watching up close and personal that
transition in Russia, because I was there right after the
transformation, and I was probably one of the first senators -- along
with Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire, a former senator -- to go down
into the KGB underneath Treblinka [sic] Square and see reams of files
with names in them, and it sort of brought home the transition to
democracy that Russia was trying to make.
I regret what's happened in these past months, and I think it goes
beyond just the response to terror. Mr. Putin now controls all the
television stations. His political opposition is being put in jail.
And I think it's very important for the United States, obviously, to
have a working relationship that is good. This is a very important
country to us and we want a partnership. But we always have to stand
up for democracy. As George Will said the other day, freedom on the
march, not in Russia right now.
Now, I'd like to come back for a quick moment, if I can, to that
issue about China and the talks, because that's one of the most
critical issues here, North Korea. Just because the President says it
can't be done, that you'd lose China, doesn't mean it can't be done. I
mean, this is the President who said there were weapons of mass
destruction, said "mission accomplished," said we could fight the war
on the cheap, none of which were true. We can have bilateral talks
with Kim Jong-il and we can get those weapons at the same time as we
get China, because China has an interest in the outcome, too.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BUSH: You know my opinion on North Korea. I can't say
it any more plainly.
MODERATOR: Right. Well, but why do you use the word "truth"
again?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Pardon me?
MODERATOR: Talking about the truth of the matter. Use the word
"truth" again. Did that raise any hackles that you -- with you?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Oh, I'm a pretty calm guy. I mean, I don't take
it personally.
MODERATOR: All right. Yes.
PRESIDENT BUSH: But, you know, look, we looked at the same
intelligence. We came to the same conclusion, that Saddam Hussein was
a grave threat. And I don't hold it against him that he said "grave
threat." I'm not going to go around the country saying he didn't tell
the truth, when he looked at the same intelligence I did.
SENATOR KERRY: It was a threat. That's not the issue. The issue
is what you do about it. The President said he was going to build a
true coalition, exhaust the remedies of the U.N., and go to war as a
last resort. Those words really have to mean something. And,
unfortunately, he didn't go to war as a last resort. Now we have this
incredible mess in Iraq, $200 billion -- it's -- it's -- it's not what
the American people thought they were getting when they voted.
MODERATOR: All right, that brings us to closing statements. And,
again, and determined by a coin toss, Senator Kerry, you go first and
you have two minutes.
SENATOR KERRY: Thank you, Jim, very much. Thank you very much to
the University again. Thank you, Mr. President.
My fellow Americans, as I said at the very beginning of this
debate, both President Bush and I love this country very much. There is
no doubt, I think, about that. But we have a different sent of
convictions about how we make our country stronger here at home and
respected again in the world. I know that for many of you sitting at
home, parents of kids in Iraq, you want to know who is the person who
could be a Commander-in-Chief, who can get your kids home and get the
job done and win the peace? And for all the rest of the parents in
America who are wondering about their kids going to school or anywhere
else in the world, what kind of world they're going to grow up in.
Let me look you in the eye and say to you: I've defended this
country as a young man in war and I will defend it as President of the
United States. But I have a difference with this President. I believe
we're strongest when we reach out and lead the world and build strong
alliances. I have a plan for Iraq. I believe we can be successful.
I'm not talking about leaving. I'm talking about winning. And we need
a fresh start, a new credibility, a President who can bring allies to
our side.
I also have a plan to win the war on terror, funding homeland
security, strengthening our military, cutting off finances, reaching
out to the world -- again, building strong alliances. I believe
America's best days are ahead of us because I believe that the future
belongs to freedom, not to fear. That's the country that I'm going to
fight for, and I ask you to give me the opportunity to make you proud.
I ask you to give me the opportunity to lead this great nation so that
we can be stronger here at home, respected again in the world, and have
responsible leadership that we deserve.
Thank you and God bless America.
MODERATOR: Mr. President, two minutes.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you very much, tonight, Jim. Thank you,
Senator.
If America shows uncertainty or weakness in this decade, the world
will drift toward tragedy. That's not going to happen so long as I'm
your President. The next four years, we will continue to strengthen
our homeland defenses. We will strengthen our intelligence-gathering
services. We will reform our military. The military will be
all-volunteer army. We will continue to stay on the offense. We will
fight the terrorists around the world so we do not have to face them
here at home.
We'll continue to build our alliances. I'll never turn over
America's national security needs to leaders of other countries as we
continue to build those alliances. And we'll continue to spread
freedom. I believe in the transformational power of liberty, I believe
that a free Iraq is in this nation's interest. I believe a free
Afghanistan is in this nation's interest. I believe both a free
Afghanistan and a free Iraq will serve as a powerful example for
millions who plead in silence for liberty in the broader Middle East.
We've done a lot of hard work together over the last
three-and-a-half years. We've been challenged, and we've risen to
those challenges. We've climbed the mighty mountain. I see the valley
below and it's a valley of peace. By being steadfast and resolute and
strong, by keeping our word, by supporting our troops, we can achieve
the peace we all want.
I appreciate your listening tonight. I ask for your vote. And may
God continue to bless our great land.
MODERATOR: And that ends tonight's debate. A reminder, the second
presidential debate will be a week from tomorrow, October 8th, from
Washington University in St. Louis. Charles Gibson of ABC News will
moderate a town hall-type event. Then, on October 13th, from Arizona
State University in Tempe, Bob Schieffer of CBS News, will moderate an
exchange on domestic policy that will be similar in format to
tonight's. Also, this coming Tuesday, at Case Western Reserve
University in Cleveland, the Vice Presidential candidates, Vice
President Cheney and Senator Edwards, will debate with my PBS
colleague, Gwen Ifill, moderating.
For now, thank you Senator Kerry, President Bush. From Coral
Gables, Florida, I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.
(Applause.)
END 10:32 P.M. EDT
|