Good evening mister president saturday carry. First president goes to senator kennedy. You have two minutes. Do you believe you can do a better job than president bush and preventing another 9 11 terrorist attack on the United States . 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 for all of this debate. Youve been through the roughest weeks it anyone can imagine, our hearts go out to you and we admire your pluck and perseverance. I can make american safer than president bushes made say made us, and i believe president bush and i both love our country equally, but we just have a different set of evictions convictions on how you make america safe. I believe america is safest and strongest when we are leading the world and leading strong alliances. Ill never give a veto to any country over our security but i also know how to lead those alliances. This president as lieutenant shatters across the globe and were now 90 of the casualties in iraq, 90 of the costs, i think thats 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 be able to rebuild alliances, by reaching out to the muslim world, which the president as almost not done. Beginning to erratic isolate the radical muslims and not having them isolate the United States of america. I know i can do a better job in iraq, where i plan to have a summit with all of the allies, something this president has not yet achieved, not yet be able to do to bring to the table. We can do a better job of training the iraqi forces to train themselves and i know we can do a better job of preparing for elections. All of these and especially Homeland Security which will talk about a little bit later. Mister president , you have 92nd rebuttal. I do thank the university of miami and say our prayers are with the good people of the state who suffered a lot. September the 11th changed how america must look at the world. And since that day our nation has been on a multipronged strategy to keep our country strap safer. We pursued alqaeda wherever they try to hide. 75 of their known leaders of have been brought to justice, the restaurant nowhere after them. We have with upheld the doctrine of the terrorists who were equally guilty of the taliban were no longer in power. 10 Million People of registered to vote in afghanistan in the upcoming president ial election. In iraq, we saw a threat and realized that after september 11th we must take threat seriously before it fully materialized. Saddam hussein now sits in a prison cell. America in 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 cue calm network has been brought to justice. And as well we are pursuing a strategy of freedom around the world, because i understand free nations will reject terror, free nations will answer the hope and aspirations of the people, free nations will help us achieve the piece we all want. New question, mister president two minutes. Do you believe the election of senator carry on november the 2nd would increase the chances of being hit by another 9 11 terrorist attack . I dont believe its gonna happen. I believe im gonna win because the American People know i know how to lead. Ive shown the American People in know how to lead. I understand everyone in this country doesnt agree with all the decisions i make. Ive made some tough decisions. But people know where i stand. People out there in listening know what i believe. And thats how best it is to keep the beast. Peace. This nation of ours has done a solemn duty to defeat this ideology of hate and thats what they are, this is a group of killers will not only kill here but kill children in and russia but it to an attack and mercifully in iraq to open shaker. Will we have a duty to defeat this enemy. We have a duty to duffy to protect our grandchildren and children. The best way to defeat them instead never wavered, the strong use every asset at our disposal. Its to constantly stay on the offensive and at the same time spread liberty. And thats what the people are seeing now are happening in calf galveston, 10 million citizens have registered to vote, its a phenomenal statistic. That if given a chance to be free, they will show up at the poll. 41 of those 10 million are women. In iraq, theres no doubt about it its tough. Its hard work, its incredibly hard. You know why . Because an enemy realizes the stakes. The enemy understands a free iraq would be a major defeat in their ideology of hatred. Thats why theyre fighting so vociferously. They showed up in afghanistan when they were there and they try to beat us and they didnt and they showing up in iraq and you try to defeat, but if we lose our will, we lose but we say remain strong and resolute, we will defeat this enemy. 90 minute second response senator kerry. I believe in being sought strong and resolute and determined and i will hunt down and kill the terrorists wherever they are. But we also have to be smart. Smart means not diverting your attention from the real war on terror in afghanistan against some of and taking it off to iraq war the 9 11 Commission Confirms there was no connection to 9 11 itself and synonymous sane. Where the reason for going to war with weapons of mass destruction, not the removal of sat on her as a. This president is made im sorry to, say colossal error of judgment and judgment is when we look for in the president of the United States of america. Im proud that important military figures are supporting me in this race. Former chairman joint chiefs to have, just yesterday general eisenhowers son endorsed me, general admiral william kraus, general tony mckee ran the air force war so effectively for his father all believe i would make a stronger commander in chief. They believe it because i know i would not take the eye off of the goal. Osama bin laden. Unfortunately, he escaped in the mountains of tora bora. We had a surround, but we didnt use American Forces, the best train in the world to kill. And the president relied on afghan war lords and outsource that job to. Thats wrong. New question two minute senator kerry. Colossal misjudgements, what claw so misjudgements in your opinion as president bush made in this era . Well, where do you want me to begin . First of all, he made in this 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 inspections. In fact, he didnt at first want to do that. And it wasnt until former secretary of state jim baker, general skull croft and others push to publicly and said youve got to go to the un that the president finally changed his mind. His campaign has a word for that and went to the United Nations. Now, once there we couldve continued those inspections. We had saddened same drop. We also promised america that he will go to war as a last resort. Those words mean something to me as somebody whos been in combat. Last resort. Youve got to be able to look in the eyes of families and say to those families, i tried to do everything in my power to prevent the lost of your son and daughter. I dont believe the United States did that. We pushed our allies aside. And so today, we are 90 of the casualties 90 of the cost, 200 billion dollars. 200 billion dollars that could be news for health care, for schools, for construction, for prescription drugs for seniors, and its 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 75 of the worlds opium production. Worse 60 of the worlds of the afghanistans productive economy is opium, where the elections have been postponed three times. The president have moved his troops, he got ten times the amount of troops in out interacting he doesnt afghanistan, or a Samantha Nolan is. Does that mean asylum insane is ten times more important than Osama Bin Laden . I dont think so. 92nd response mister president. My opponent looked at the same intelligence that i did and declared in 2002 that satin saint was a great threat. He also said in december of 2003 that anyone doubts the world is safer without sometimes saying does not have judgment to be president. I agree with him. The world is better off without Saddam Hussein. I was hoping diplomacy would work and i understand the serious consequences of committing our troops in the hard way. Its a hardest decision a president will make. So i went to the United Nations, i dont need anybody to go there, i decided to go there myself. I went there hoping once and for all the free world would act in concert to get Saddam Hussein to listen to our demands. They passed resolution the said disclose, disarm or face serious consequences. I believe that when these International Body speaks, it must mean with what it says. So sane had no intention of disarming. Why . Surely he has 16 other resolutions and nothing took place. As a matter of fact, my opponent talks about the fact is that he was systematically deceiving inspectors. Thats kind of a precept ember tenth mentality, to hope that somehow resolutions and failed inspections would make this world more peaceful place. He was hoping we would turn away, but theres fortunately others beside myself the believe we ought to take action and we did. The world is safer without sinema saying. New question, mister president. Two minutes. What about senator perry print, the comparison and he drew between the priorities going off but after so a lot of bin laden as today messing. Jim, weve got capability to go after both. Fact this is a global effort. Were facing a group of folks who have such hatred in the heart still strike anywhere. With any means and thats why its essential that we have strong alliances and we do. Its why its essential that we make sure that we keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of people like alqaeda, which we are. But to say that theres only one focus in the world war on terror doesnt really understand the nature of the war on terror. Of course were afters bin laden, hes isolated. 75 of his people have been brought to justice. The mastermind of the september 11th attacks, shake mohammed is in prison. We are making progress. But the front on this war is more than just one place. The philippines, weve got help, were helping them there to bring the fillies to justice to their. And of course iraq is a central part of the war on terror. Thats wiser car way and his people are trying to fight us. There hope is that we grow weary and we leave. The biggest disaster that happens that we dont succeed in iraq. We will succeed and we got a plan to do so. The main reason will succeed is that the iraqis want to be free. President a lowry is a strong courageous leader, he believes in the freedom of the iraqi people. He doesnt want u. S. Leadership however to send mixed singles, 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, or spending reconstruction money, and our alliances strong. When iraq is free, america will be moress free strong. Iraq just talked about rock as the center of the war on terror. Iraq was not even hosted the war on terror before the president invaded it. The president made the judgment to divert forces from under to general tommy francs from afghanistan before the Congress Even approved, to prepare for a war in iraq. And he rushed to war in iraq without a plan to win the peace. Now that is not the judgment that the president of the United States should make you dont take america to war unless you have you dont send troops to war without the body armor i met kids in ohio places like that were. Someone got them for birthdays. I think thats wrong go visit some of those kids in the hospitals today who remained they dont have the armament. This president just i dont know if he sees whats really happened on there. But its 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 got weapons of mass destruction crossing the border every single day, and theyre blowing people up. And we dont have enough troops there. Can i respond to that . Lets do one of these oneminute extensions. You have 30 seconds. 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 its the wrong war at the wrong time at the wrong place. I dont see how you can lead this country to succeed in iraq if you say wrong war, wrong time, wrong place. What message does that send our troops . What message does that send to 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 ive just outlined. Thirty seconds, senator. Yes, we have to be steadfast and resolved, and i am. And i will succeed for those troops, now that were there. We have to succeed. We cant leave a failed iraq. But that doesnt mean it wasnt a mistake of judgment to go there and take the focus off of Osama Bin Laden. It was. Now, we can succeed. But i dont 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 whats necessary to make it so america isnt doing this alone. Well come back to iraq in a moment. But i want to come back to where i began, on Homeland Security. This is a twominute 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 . Jim, let me tell you exactly what ill do. And there are a long list of thing. First of all, what kind of mixed message does it send when you have 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 were shutting firehouses who are the firstresponders here in america. The president hasnt put one nickel, not one nickel into the effort to fix some of our tunnels and bridges and most exposed subway systems. Thats why they had to close down the subway in new york when the Republican Convention was there. We hadnt 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 onto aircraft, and their luggage is xrayed, but the cargo hold is not xrayed. 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 arent my values. I believe in protecting america first. And long before president bush and i get a tax cut and thats who gets it long before we do, im going to invest in Homeland Security and im going to make sure were not cutting cops programs in america and were 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 didnt want to do some of the things necessary to strengthen our Chemical Plant exposure. And theres an enormous undone job to protect the loose Nuclear Materials in the world that are able to get to terrorists. Thats 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. Im going to do it in four years. And were going to keep it out of the hands of terrorists. Ninetysecond response, mr. President. I dont think we want to get to how hes going to pay for all these promises. Its like a huge tax gap. Anyway, thats for another debate. My administration has tripled the amount of money were 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. Weve got 1,000 extra Border Patrol on the southern border; want 1,000 on the northern border. Were modernizing our borders. We spent 3. 1 billion for fire and police, 3. 1 billion. Were doing our duty to provide the funding. But the best way to protect this homeland is to stay on the offense. You know, we have to be right 100 percent of the time. And the enemy only has to be right once to hurt us. Theres a lot of good people working hard. And by the way, weve also changed the culture of the fbi to have counterterrorism as its number one priority. Were communicating better. Were going to reform our Intelligence Services to make sure that we get the best intelligence possible. The patriot act is vital is 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 protection is to stay on the offense. Yes, lets do a little yes, 30 seconds. The president just said the fbi had changed its culture. We just read on the front pages of americas 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 youre spending more money. The test is, are you doing Everything Possible to make america safe . We didnt need that tax cut. America needed to be safe. Of course were doing everything we can to protect america. I wake up every day thinking about how best to protect america. Thats my job. I work with director mueller of the fbi; comes in my office when im in washington every morning, talking about how to protect us. Theres a lot of really good people working hard to do so. Its hard work. But, again, i want to tell the American People, were 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. New question, mr. President. Two minutes. What criteria would you use to determine when to start bringing u. S. Troops home from iraq . 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 thats what were doing. Weve got 100,000 trained now, 125,000 by the end of this year, 200,000 by the end of next year. That is the best way. Well never succeed in iraq if the iraqi citizens do not want to take matters into 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 dont want to do so for the sake of bringing them home; i want to do so because weve achieved an objective is to see the iraqis perform and to see the iraqis step up and take responsibility. And so, the answer to your question is when our general is 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 their stability and that theyre on their way to, you know, a nation thats free; thats when. And i hope its as soon as possible. But i know putting artificial deadlines wont work. My opponent at one time said, well, get me elected, ill have them out of there in six months. You cant do that and expect to win the war on terror. My message to our troops is, thank you for what youre doing. Were standing with you strong. Well give you all the equipment you need. And well get you home as soon as the missions done, because this is a vital mission. A free iraq will be an ally in the war on terror, and thats essential. A free iraq will set a powerful example in the 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. Ninety seconds, senator kerry. Thank you, jim. My message to the troops is also thank you for what theyre doing, but its also help is on the way. I believe those troops deserve better than what they are getting today. You know, its 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. Youve got to help us over there. Now i believe theres 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 didnt 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. Thats exactly where we find ourselves today. Theres a sense of american occupation. The only building that was guarded when the troops when into baghdad was the oil ministry. We didnt guard the nuclear facilities. We didnt guard the foreign office, where you might have found information about weapons of mass destruction. We didnt guard the borders. Almost every step of the way, our troops have been left on these extraordinarily difficult missions. I know what its like to go out on one of those missions when you dont know whats around the corner. And i believe our troops need other allies helping. Im going to hold that summit. I will bring fresh credibility, a new start, and we will get the job done right. All right, go ahead. Yes, sir . I think its worthy for a followup. Sure, right. crosstalk lehrer we can do 30 seconds each here. All right. My opponent says help is on the way, but what kind of message does it say to our troops in harms way, wrong war, wrong place, wrong time . Not a message a commander in chief gives, or this is a great diversion. As well, help is on the way, but its certainly hard to tell it when he voted against the 87billion supplemental to provide equipment for our troops, and then said he actually did vote for it before he voted against it. Not what a commander in chief does when youre trying to lead troops. Senator kerry, 30 seconds. 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 somethings going wrong, you make it right. Thats what i learned in vietnam. When i came back from that war i saw that it was wrong. Some people dont like the fact that i stood up to say no, but i did. And thats what i did with that vote. And im going to lead those troops to victory. All right, new question. Two minutes, senator kerry. Speaking of vietnam, you spoke to congress in 1971, after you came back 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 . No, and they dont have to, providing we have the leadership that we put that im 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 intelligence. But i also laid out a very strict series of things we needed to do in order to proceed from a position of strength. Then 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 didnt do any of those things. They didnt do the planning. They left the planning of the state department in the state department desks. They avoided even the advice of their own general. General shinsheki, the army chief of staff, said youre 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. Thats what we have here. And 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. Theyve always had stakes in it. The arab countries 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 hasnt even held the kind of statesmanlike summits that pull people together and get them to invest in those states. In fact, hes done the opposite. He pushed them away. When the secretary general kofi annan offered the United Nations, he said, no, no, well go do this alone. To save for halliburton the spoils of the war, they actually issued a memorandum from the Defense Department saying, if you werent with us in the war, dont bother applying for any construction. Thats not a way to invite people. N ninety seconds. Thats 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 theyre now back in helping with elections. My opponent says we didnt have any allies in this war. Whats he say to tony blair . Whats he say to Alexander Kwasniewski of poland . You cant expect to build an 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 whats the message going to be please join us in iraq. Were a grand diversion. Join us for a war that is the 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. Theyre not going to follow somebody who says, this is the 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. Theyre not going to follow somebody who says this is the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time. Theyre 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; 14 billion pledged. And Prime Minister koizumi is going to call countries to account, to get them to contribute. And theres going to be an arab summit, of the neighborhood countries. And colin powell helped set up that summit. Forty seconds, senator. The United Nations, kofi annan offered help after baghdad fell. And we never picked him up on that and did what was necessary to transfer authority and to transfer reconstruction. It was always americanrun. Secondly, when we went in, there were three countries Great Britain, australia and the United States. Thats not a grand coalition. We can do better. Thirty seconds, mr. President. Well, actually, he forgot poland. And now theres 30 nations involved, standing side by side with our american troops. And i honor their sacrifices. And i dont appreciate it when candidate for president denigrates the contributions of these brave soldiers. You cannot lead the world if you do not honor the contributions of those who are with us. He called them coerced and the bribed. Thats not how you bring people together. Our coalition is strong. It will remain strong, so long as im the president. 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 . No, what i said was that, because we achieved such a rapid victory, more of the saddam loyalists were around. I mean, we thought wed whip more of them going in. But because tommy franks did such a great job in planning the operation, we moved rapidly, and a lot of the baathists and saddam loyalists laid down their arms and disappeared. I thought they would stay and fight, but they didnt. And now were fighting them now. And its 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 its necessary work. And im optimistic. See, i think you can be realistic and optimistic at the same time. Im optimistic well achieve i know we wont achieve if we send mixed signals. I know were not going to achieve our objective if we send mixed signals to our troops, our friends, the iraqi citizens. Weve got a plan in place. The plan says there will be elections in january, and there will be. The plan says well train iraqi soldiers so they can do the hard work, and we are. And its not only just america, but nato is now helping, jordans helping train police, uae is helping train police. Weve allocated 7 billion over the next months for reconstruction efforts. And were making progress there. And our alliance is strong. And as i just told you, theres going to be a summit of the arab nations. Japan will be hosting a summit. Were making progress. It is hard work. It is hard work to go from a tyranny to a democracy. Its hard work to go from a place where people get their hands cut off, or executed, to a place where people are free. But its necessary work. And a free iraq is going to make this world a more peaceful place. Ninety seconds, 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 with al qaida, he would still have done everything the same way. Those are his words. Now, i would not. So what im 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. Its what leadership is based on. The president says that im denigrating these troops. I have nothing but respect for the british, tony blair, and for what theyve been willing to do. But you cant 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 isnt anybody out of the hundreds, that we have a genuine coalition to get this job done. You cant tell me that on the day that we went into that war and it started it was principally the United States, the america and Great Britain and one or two others. Thats it. And today, we are 90 percent of the casualties and 90 percent of the costs. And meanwhile, north korea has got Nuclear Weapons. Talk about mixed messages. The president is the one that said, we cant allow countries to get Nuclear Weapons. They have. Ill change that. New question. Senator kerry, two minutes. You just youve 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. Well, ive never, ever used the harshest word, as you did just then. And i try not to. Ive been but ill nevertheless tell you that i think he has not been candid with the American People. And ill 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 didnt 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 Nations and go through that full process. He didnt. He cut if off, sort of arbitrarily. And we know that there were further diplomatic efforts under way. 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 didnt. He misled the American People when he said wed 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. Ive worked with those leaders the president talks about, ive 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 a 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 now 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 the others did that more effectively, and im going to try to follow in their footsteps. Ninety seconds, mr. President. 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 isnt going to determine how we defend ourselves. Osama bin laden doesnt get to decide. The American People decide. I decided the right action was in iraq. My opponent calls it a mistake. It wasnt a mistake. He said i misled on iraq. I dont think he was misleading when he called iraq a grave threat in the fall of 2002. I dont think he was misleading when he said that it was right to disarm iraq in the spring of 2003. I dont think he misled you when he said that, you know, anyone who doubted whether the world was better off without Saddam Hussein in power didnt have the judgment to be president. I dont 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 thats 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. Thirty seconds. Well do a 30 second here. I wasnt 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. Ive 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. Thirty seconds, mr. President. The only consistent about my opponents position is that hes 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. Its necessary we win. Were 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. New question, mr. President. Two minutes. Has the war in iraq been worth the cost of american lives, 1,052 as of today . You know, 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 harms way and then do the best i can to provide comfort for the loved ones who lost a son or a daughter or a husband or wife. You know, i think about missy johnson. Shes a fantastic lady i met in charlotte, north carolina. She and her son bryan, they came to see me. Her husband pj got killed. Hed been in afghanistan, went to iraq. You know, its 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 harms way. I told her after we prayed and teared up and laughed some that i thought her husbands sacrifice was noble and worthy. Because i understand the stakes of this war on terror. I understand that we must find al qaida 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. Thats what she told me her husband understood. So you say, was it worth it . Every life is precious. Thats what distinguishes us from the enemy. Everybody matters. But i think its worth it, jim. I think its worth it, because i think i know in the long term a free iraq, a free afghanistan, will set such a powerful in a part of the world thats desperate for freedom. It will help change the world; that we can look back and say we did our duty. Senator, 90 seconds. 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 thats 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. Thats 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. Ive 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. Theres only 25 percent of the people in there. They cant have an election right now. The president s not getting the job done. So the choice for america is, you can have a plan that ive 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. All right, sir, go ahead. Thirty seconds. Yes, i understand what it means to the commander in chief. And if i were to ever say, this is the wrong war at the wrong time at the 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. Its not a grand diversion. This is an essential that we get it right. And so, the plan he talks about simply wont work. Senator kerry, you have 30 seconds. You have 30 seconds, right. And then the president. 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. Its the wrong thing to do. But you own it. And then youve got to fix it and do something with it. Now thats what we have to do. Theres no inconsistency. Soldiers know over there that this isnt being done right yet. Im going to get it right for those soldiers, because its important to israel, its important to america, its important to the world, its important to the fight on terror. But i have a plan to do it. He doesnt. 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 major u. S. Military involvement in iraq . The time line that ive set out and again, i want to correct the president , because hes misled again this evening on what ive said. I didnt say i would bring troops out in six months. I said, if we do the things that ive 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 doesnt have longterm designs on it. As i understand it, were building some 14 military bases there now, and some people say theyve got a rather permanent concept to them. When you guard the oil ministry, but you dont guard the nuclear facilities, the message to a lot of people is maybe, wow, maybe theyre interested in our oil. Now, the problem is that they didnt 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 the fallujahs and other places, and send the wrong message to the terrorists. You have to close the borders. Youve got to show youre serious in that regard. But youve also got to show that you are 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 longterm designs on staying in iraq. And our goal in my administration would be to get all of the troops out of there with a 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 thats how were going to win the peace, by rapidly training the iraqis themselves. Even the administration has admitted they havent done the training, because they came back 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 havent done the job. We have to start to spend the money now. Will you guys give us permission to shift it over into training . Ninety seconds. There are 100,000 troops trained, police, guard, special units, Border Patrol. Theres going to be 125,000 trained by the end of this year. Yes, were getting the job done. Its hard work. Everybody knows its hard work, because theres a determined enemy thats trying to defeat us. Now, my opponent says hes going to try to change the dynamics on the ground. Well, Prime Minister allawi was here. He is the leader of that country. Hes a brave, brave man. When he came, after giving a speech to the congress, my opponent questioned his credibility. You cant change the dynamics on the ground if youve criticized the brave leader of iraq. One of his Campaign People alleged that Prime Minister allawi was like a puppet. Thats no way to treat somebody whos 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 25 Million People, the vast majority, long to have elections. I reject this notion and im suggesting my opponent isnt i reject the notion that some say that if youre muslim you cant free, you dont desire freedom. I disagree, strongly disagree with that. Thirty seconds. I couldnt agree more that the iraqis want to be free and that they could be free. But i think the president , again, still hasnt shown how hes 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. Thats allawis assessment. The National Intelligence assessment that was given to the president in july said, bestcase scenario, more of the same of what we see today; worstcase scenario, civil war. I can do better. Yes, let me. Yes, 30 seconds. The reason why Prime Minister allawi said theyre coming across the border is because he recognizes that this is a central part of the war on terror. Theyre fighting us because theyre 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 thats why it is essential we not leave. Thats why its essential we hold the line. Thats why its essential we win. And we will. Under my leadership were going to win this war in iraq. Mr. President , 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 . I would hope i never have to. I understand how hard it is to commit troops. Never wanted to commit troops. When i was running when we had the debate in 2000, never dreamt id 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 well ever have to use troops. But a president must always be willing to use troops. It must as a last resort. 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, if we would have said, let the inspectors work, or lets, you know, hope to talk him out. Maybe an 18th resolution would work, he would have been stronger and tougher, and the world would have been a lot worse off. Theres 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 would hope to never have to use force. But by speaking clearly and sending messages that we mean what we say, weve 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 that the world is better for it. So to answer your question, i would hope we never have to. I think by acting firmly and decisively, it will mean it is less likely we have to use force. Senator kerry, 90 seconds. 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 didnt attack us. Osama bin laden attacked us. Al qaida 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 didnt use the best trained troops in the world to go kill the worlds 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. Thats the enemy that attacked us. Thats the enemy that was allowed to walk out of those mountains. Thats 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. Twothirds of the country was a nofly zone when we started this war. We would have had sanctions. We would have had the u. N. 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, say, what do you need, what do you need now, how much more will it take to get you to join us . Wed be in a stronger place today. Thirty seconds. First of all, 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 stronger had we not dealt with him. He had the capability of making weapons, and he would have made weapons. Thirty seconds, senator. Thirtyfive to forty countries in the world had a greater capability of making weapons at the moment the president invaded than Saddam Hussein. And while hes been diverted, with 9 out of 10 active duty divisions of our army, either going to iraq, coming back from iraq, or getting ready to go, north koreas gotten Nuclear Weapons and the world is more dangerous. Iran is moving toward Nuclear Weapons and the world is more dangerous. Darfur has a genocide. The world is more dangerous. Id have made a better choice. New question. Two minutes, senator kerry. What is your position on the whole concept of preemptive war . 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 have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why youre doing what youre doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons. Here we have our own secretary of state who has 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 degaulle. 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 degaulle 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 weve 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. And iran and iraq are now more dangerous iran and north korea are now more dangerous. Now, whether preemption is ultimately what has to happen, i dont know yet. But ill tell you this as president , ill never take my eye off that ball. Ive been fighting for proliferation the entire time antiproliferation the entire time ive been in the congress. And weve watched this president actually turn away from some of the treaties that were on the table. You dont 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. Ninety seconds. Let me im 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. Let me tell you one thing i didnt sign, and i think it shows the difference of our opinion the difference of opinions. And that is, i wouldnt join the International Criminal court. Its a body based in the hague where unaccountable judges and prosecutors can pull our troops or diplomats up for trial. And i wouldnt join it. And i understand that in certain capitals around the world that that wasnt a popular move. But its 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 its not in our best interest makes no new question, mr. Sense. President. Do you believe that diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with north korea and iran . Take them in any order you would like. North korea, first, i do. Im interested in working with our nations and do a lot let me say i certainly of it. 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 nuclearweaponsfree peninsula, korean peninsula, was in his interest and our interest and the worlds interest. And so we began a new dialogue with north korea, one that included not only the United States, but now china. And chinas a got a lot of influence over north korea, 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, hes not only doing injustice to america, hed be doing injustice to china, as well. And i think this will work. Its not going to work if we open up a dialogue with kim jong il. He wants to unravel the sixparty talks, or the fivenation coalition thats 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 worked 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. Theres a special protocol recently been passed that allows for inspections. I hope we can do it. And weve got a good strategy. Senator kerry, 90 seconds. 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 curb 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 werent 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 dialog of working with the north koreans. The president reversed it 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 didnt talk at all to north korea. While they didnt 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. I want to make sure yes, sir but in this one minute, i want to make sure that we understand the people watching understand the differences between the two of you on this. You want to continue the multinational talks, correct . Right. And youre willing to do it. 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. And youre opposed to that. Right . The minute we have bilateral talks, the sixparty talks will unwind. Thats exactly what kim jong il wants. And by the way, the breach on the agreement was not through plutonium. The breach on the agreement is highly enriched uranium. Thats what we caught him doing. Thats where he was breaking the agreement. Secondly, he said my opponent said where he worked to put sanctions on iran weve already sanctioned iran. We cant sanction them any more. There are sanctions in place on iran. And finally, we were a party to the convention to working with germany, france and Great Britain to send their Foreign Ministers into iran. 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 its 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 . Well, ill 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 thats exactly what im 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 thats 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 were not saying send american troops in at this point is severalfold. 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. Theyve got to have the logistical capacity to go in and stop the killing. And thats going to require more than is on the table today. I also believe that it is one of the reasons we cant do it is were overextended. Ask the people in the armed forces today. Weve got guards and reserves who are doing double duties. Weve got a backdoor draft taking place in America Today people with stoploss programs where theyre told you cant 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. Thats 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 fighting the terrorists around the world. And if we do that, then we have the ability to be able to respond more rapidly. But ill tell you this, as president , if it took American Forces to some degree to coalesce the African Union, id be prepared to do it because we could never allow another rwanda. Its the moral responsibility for us and the world. Ninety seconds. 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 its genocide. And colin powell so stated. We have committed 200 million worth of aid. Were the leading donor in the world to help the suffering people there. We will commit more over time to help. We were 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 northsouth agreement that we would have hoped would have brought peace to the sudan. I agree with my opponent that we shouldnt be committing troops. 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. And fortunately the rainy season will be ending shortly, which will make it easier to get aid there and help the longsuffering people there. New question, president bush. 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 . Thats a loaded question. Well, first of all, i admire senator kerrys 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 admirer the fact that he served for 20 years in the senate. Although im not so sure i admire the record. I wont hold it against him that he went to yale. Theres nothing wrong with that. My concerns about the senator is that, in the course of this campaign, ive been listening very carefully to what he says, and he changes positions on the war in iraq. He changes positions on something as fundamental as what you believe in your with that. My concerns about the senator is that, in the course of this campaign, ive been listening very carefully to what he says, and he changes positions on the war in iraq. He 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 thats 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 in the world. Ninety second response, senator. Well, first of all, i appreciate enormously the personal comments the president just made. And i share them with him. I think only if youre doing this and hes 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 its tough. And so i acknowledge that his daughters ive watched them. Ive chuckled a few times at some of their comments. laughter and. Im trying to put a leash on them. laughter well, i know. Ive learned not to do that. laughter and i have Great Respect and admiration for his wife. I think shes a terrific person. Thank you. And a great first lady. But we do have differences. Im not going to talk about a difference of character. I dont think thats 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 wouldnt. But this issue of certainty. Its one thing to be certain, but you can be certain and be wrong. Its another to be certain and be right, or to 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 hes not acknowledging whats on the ground, hes not acknowledging the realities of north korea, hes not acknowledging the truth of the science of stemcell research or of Global Warming and other issues. And certainty sometimes can get you in trouble. Thirty seconds. 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 wont do is change my core values because of politics or because of pressure. And it is one of the things ive learned in the white house, is that theres enormous pressure on the president , and he cannot wilt under that pressure. Otherwise, the world wont be better off. Thirty seconds. I have no intention of wilting. Ive never wilted in my life. And ive 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 didnt need to rush to war without a plan to win the peace. 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 to the United States . Nuclear proliferation. Nuclear proliferation. Theres some 600plus tons of unsecured material still in the former soviet union and russia. At the rate that the president is currently securing it, itll take 13 years to get it. I did a lot of work on this. I wrote a book about it several years ago six, 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 cant 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 bunkerbusting Nuclear Weapons. The United States is pursuing a new set of Nuclear Weapons. It doesnt make sense. You talk about mixed messages. Were telling other people, you cant have Nuclear Weapons, but were pursuing a new Nuclear Weapon that we might even contemplate using. Not this president. Im going to shut that program down, and were going to make it clear to the world were serious about containing Nuclear Proliferation. And were going to get the job of containing all of that Nuclear Material in russia done in four years. And were 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. Its our generations equivalent. And i intend to get it done. N ninety seconds, mr. President. Actually, weve increased funding for dealing with Nuclear Proliferation about 35 percent since ive been the president. Secondly, weve set up whats 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 thats why proliferation is one of the centerpieces of a multiprong strategy to make the country safer. My administration started whats called the proliferation security initiative. Over 60 nations involved with disrupting the transshipment of information and or weapons of mass destruction materials. And weve 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. Its a central part of dealing with weapons of mass destruction and proliferation. Ill tell you another way to help protect america in the long run is to continue with missile defenses. And weve got a Robust Research and Development Program that has been ongoing during my administration. Well be implementing a missiledefense system relatively quickly. And that is another way to help deal with the threats that we face in the 21st century. My opponent opposed the missile defenses. Just for this oneminute discussion here, just for whatever seconds it takes so its correct to say, that if somebody is listening to this, that both of you agree, if youre reelected, mr. President , and if you are elected, the single most serious threat you believe, both of you believe, is Nuclear Proliferation . In the hands of a terrorist enemy. Weapons of mass destruction, Nuclear Proliferation. But again, the test or 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 toward weapons. And at his pace, it will take 13 years to secure those weapons in russia. Im going to do it in four years, and im going to immediately set out to have bilateral talks with north korea. Your response to that . Again, i cant tell you how big a mistake i think that is, to have bilateral talks with north korea. Its precisely what kim jong il wants. It will cause the sixparty talks to evaporate. It will mean that china no longer is involved in convincing, along with us, for kim jong il to get rid of his weapons. Its a big mistake to do that. We must have chinas leverage on kim jong il, besides ourselves. And if you enter bilateral talks, theyll be happy to walk away from the table. I dont think thatll work. All right. Mr. President , this is the last question. And two minutes. Its a 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 antiterrorism by changing some democratic processes is ok . No, i dont think its ok, 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 the central government, hes sending a signal to the western world and United States that perhaps he doesnt believe in checks and balances, and i told him that. I mean, hes 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. Thats the nature of the enemy, by the way. Thats why we need to be firm and resolve in bringing them to justice. Thats precisely what Vladimir Putin understands, as well. Ive got a good relation with vladimir. And its 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 its important to establish good personal relationships with people so that when you have disagreements, youre able to disagree in a way that is effective. And so ive 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 its 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. Ninety seconds, senator kerry. Well, let me just say quickly that ive 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, go down into the kgb underneath treblinka square and see reams of files with names in them. It sort of brought home the transition to democracy that russia was trying to make. I regret whats 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 its very important to the United States, obviously, to have a working relationship that is good. This is a very important country to us. 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, id like to come back for a quick moment, if i can, to that issue about china and the talks. Because thats one of the most Critical Issues here north korea. Just because the president says it cant be done, that youd lose china, doesnt mean it cant 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 could 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. N thirty seconds, mr. President. You know my opinion on north korea. I cant say it any more plainly. Well, but when he used the word truth again. Pardon me . Talking about the truth of the matter. He used the word truth again. Did that raise any hackles with you . Oh, im a pretty calm guy. I dont take it personally. Ok. All right. You know, we looked at the same intelligence and came to the same conclusion that Saddam Hussein was a grave threat. And i dont hold it against him that he said grave threat. Im not going to go around the country saying he didnt tell the truth, when he looked at the same intelligence i did. It was a threat. Thats 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 didnt go to war as a last resort. Now we have this incredible mess in iraq 200 billion. Its not what the American People thought they were getting when they voted. All right, that brings us to closing statements. And, again, as determined by a coin toss, senator kerry, you go first, and you have two minutes. Thank you, jim, very much. Thank you very much to the university, again. Thank you, mr. President. My fellow americans, as ive said at the very beginning of this debate, both president bush and i love this country very much. Theres no doubt, i think, about that. But we have a different set 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 whos the person who could be a commander in chief who could 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 the school or anywhere else in the world, what kind of world theyre going to grow up in, let me look you in the eye and say to you i defended this country as a young man at war, and i will defend it as president of the United States. But i have a difference with this president. I believe when were 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. Im not talking about leaving. Im 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 our finances, reaching out to the world, again building strong alliances. I believe americas best days are ahead of us because i believe that the future belongs to freedom, not to fear. Thats the country that im 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. Mr. President , two minutes. Thank you very much tonight, jim. Senator. If america shows uncertainty or weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. Thats not going to happen, so long as im your president. The next four years we will continue to strengthen our homeland defenses. We will strengthen our intelligencegathering services. We will reform our military. The military will be an allvolunteer 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. Well continue to build our alliances. Ill never turn over americas National Security needs to leaders of other countries, as we continue to build those alliances. And well continue to spread freedom. I believe in the transformational power of liberty. I believe that the free iraq is in this nations interests. I believe a free afghanistan is in this nations interest. And 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. Weve done a lot of hard Work Together over the last three and a half years. Weve been challenged, and weve risen to those challenges. Weve climbed the mighty mountain. I see the valley below, and its 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. And that ends tonights debate. A reminder, the second president ial debate will be a week from tomorrow, october 8th, from Washington University in st. Louis. Charles gibson of abc news will moderate a town halltype 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 tonights. Also, this coming tuesday, at Case Western Reserve University in cleveland, the Vice President ial 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, im jim lehrer. Thank you and good night. 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 11type terrorist attack on the United States