Edwards Opens Fire on Opponents Over Terrorism

First Posted: 09/07/07 06:02 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 01:15 PM ET

Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards aimed a broadside at his opponents for the Democratic nomination for president Friday, accusing some fellow Democrats of falling in line with President George W. Bush's existing policies.

Edwards' criticism came in a speech in New York outlining his proposed strategy for combating international terrorism, four days ahead of the sixth anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attacks.

"Some running for the Democratic nomination have even argued that the Bush-Cheney approach has made us safer," Edwards said. "It has not."

Spokespersons for the campaigns of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Edwards was speaking Friday at Pace University in Lower Manhattan, just blocks from the former World Trade Center site.

Edwards repeated his criticism that the "war on terrorism" is just a slogan, and assailed Republican presidential hopefuls Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain as men who had "responded to the shortcomings and backfires of the Administration's approach by essentially doubling down."

The centerpiece of Edwards' proposal would be a new global organization patterned on NATO.

"[The Counterterrorism and Intelligence Treaty Organization] will create connections between a wide range of nations on terrorism and intelligence, including countries on all continents," he said.

Speaking to reporters after his speech, Edwards said he wanted to "create a structure that broadens the number of countries that participate" in the fight against terrorist organizations like al-Qaida.

He also made it clear that he intended to ratchet up the pressure on countries that were not fighting al-Qaida sufficiently.

"Those nations who refuse to join will be called out before the world," he said during the speech.

Edwards singled out certain countries who he said were not sufficiently assisting the United States and allied nations in the fight against terrorists.

"As president I will condition future American aid on progress by Pakistan," he said. "If we have actionable intelligence about imminent terrorist activity and the Pakistan government refuses to act, we will."

He garnered steady applause from the audience when he insisted that Saudi Arabia be required "to do more to stop the flow of terrorists to Iraq."

One expert in counterterrorism strategy called Edwards' address "a good speech."

"This is the most specific proposal I've heard to get on top of something that we're not on top of," said Thomas Sanderson of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

But Sanderson added that it would be difficult for Edwards to advance his proposal because of concerns over sharing intelligence with countries not trusted by the US intelligence community.

"It's difficult to make it effective for the same reason we've always preferred bilateral relationships for sharing intelligence and counterintelligence threats, because of concerns over the custody of sensitive intelligence," Sanderson said. "We've had lots of multilateral efforts in the past, but the successful model is one that's small."

Another specialist agreed with Sanderson on the difficulty of advancing a proposal like this one.

"Treaties are a long, slow and uncertain road -- he needs to address how he will handle international terrorist challenges from day one as president -- probably years before such a treaty could come into force," said Vikram Singh, an expert on military and security issues at the Center for a New American Security in Washington.

"The devil is in the details with something like this," Singh said. " I think he'll get taken apart by the administration if they choose to comment."

--Michael Roston is a Politics Reporter at The Huffington Post.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST

 
 
  • Comments
  • 68
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
06:18 PM on 09/09/2007
Senator Obama had the audacity to speak the truth but Clinton has the temerity of a coy and ineffective insider. I am glad Senator Edwards has also recognize the truth however unspeakable it may be.
12:20 AM on 09/09/2007
Edwards says he wants to create an organization patterned after NATO to fight terrorism. Let me see, we already have the UN and NATO so what good is another organization going to do?

The Counterterrorism and Intelligence Treaty Organization does make a good acronym though. It would either be CIATO or CITO. that is about all it would do.

The article makes a big deal about Clinton and Obama not responding to this. Why should they. Candidates trailing badly in the polls don't get to dictate the agenda to the frontrunners.

Edwards does not garner enough support to threaten Clinton or Obama but, unfortunately he has enough support to keep alternatives to Clinton and Obama from emerging. It is almost like he is blocking for Clinton and Obama.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lafrance
09:08 PM on 09/08/2007
Nice to see that in some very small way, someone in the media is acknowledging what the foreign policy people have been saying. Obama is right.
Problem is is that it is too little and too late and because someone else said it.
I really like Edwards and think he is great. it is just a pity that the press accepts him agreeing with Obama after they lambasted him for a month and twisted everything he said without so much as a correction.
Now if it was hillary who said it......Banner headlines proclaiming her brilliance.
And the press wonders why the people don't like or trust them and they are losing viewer and readers like crazy.
05:20 PM on 09/08/2007
After the 2004 defeat, I believe Edwards decided it is better to stand for something than to just go with the polls. The odd thing is that he stands a better chance of becoming president than others who have always acted that way? Why is it that those who are always reasonable and think critically, like Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, etc. are always perceived as unelectable crackpots, even though they are always right?
05:48 PM on 09/08/2007
Because the main media hubs are in New York, the MSM prefer to spend more time covering presidential candidates that are more likely to $upport their corporate M$M agenda; always con$sider the $ource when reading from the trough (or gutter) of the M$M.

John Edwards - THE Peoples President in 2008!
02:17 AM on 09/09/2007
No, candidates that have more of a chance of winning get more coverage.
02:41 PM on 09/08/2007
Edwards' Concrete Health Care & Terrorism Plans vs. The Pie-In-The-Sky Plans from The Rest Of The Democratic Pack!

A concrete plan from Democrats on terrorism; what a concrete concept!

While Obama and Hillary are touting abstract pie-in-the-sky, John Edwards is competently expounding upon his concrete plans; his speech on his concrete plan to tackle the terrorist issue, is strong and is obviously getting very positive attention on all the true progressive blogs.

Lastly, lets cut through the fog of the MSM on Edwards proposed universal health care plan.

This is America, we can make your own choices, but if we are going to have government pay the bill, then we need to help government SAVE as much money as possible so that government can afford to do good things like, raise the minimum wage to a REAL living wage.

By having to be 'responsible' for preventive health doctor visits, it will help overt serious health maladies & government costs; health care is expensive as well all know!

- Case in point, breast cancer. Many women wisely get medical breast exams that help in preventing breast cancer; that's called, 'preventive health care.' These wise women were not sick; they did not have cancer, but STILL went to the doctor for a 'preventive health care' exam. If they had some health problems, because they had 'preventive health care' exams, regularly, they caught the problem early and were successfully treated; this equates to better life expectancy & lower health care costs. So, 'preventive health care' in universal health care coverage is THE best and most fiscally responsible choice for all, right?; it's healthier for the individual and provides fiscal responsibility to help government provide a REAL living wage for working families & the underprivileged. Like we are trying to conserve when it comes to the environment, we need to conserve when it comes to our future Democratic governmental fiscal budget. - Get it ?

I hope so!

:)

John Edwards - T-H-E PEOPLES President in 2008!
02:44 PM on 09/08/2007
we can make 'our' own choices.

Why Huff Post took down the delete button for people to correct grammar and spelling mistakes is beyond EVERYONES comprehension.

LOL
12:29 AM on 09/09/2007
I agree, I thawt it was a good feeture to alow editin'
02:11 AM on 09/09/2007
You are still trying to do damage control on Edwards advocating mandatory physicals. Must be hard to keep up with your candidate.
12:45 PM on 09/08/2007
This is exactly why the so called experts are short sighted, and become a part of the problem and not a part of the solution.

Terrorism, in fact, will be an on going fight well into the next century and across the globe. To say that governments should not come together to form a new paradigm on this issue because it's too hard and there is not enough trust is ludicrous.

Yesterday was not soon enough to change this paradigm.

John Edwards shows remarkable insight and leadership qualities in bringing this issue to the table and with a clear workable solution.
11:59 AM on 09/08/2007
Edwards has the best view on violence from religious Extremists of any politician.
I just wish he had not said he would force people to the doctors twice a year as past of his health care plan.
01:10 PM on 09/08/2007
You misunderstand the whole concept, in-order to keep costs down and a person's health up, it is wise to go to the Doctor before a person has a health care crisis.

That is what happen to far too many people now, they don't go to the Doctor until they are in crisis, at that juncture it becomes more costly, and the prognosis is not, for the most part, as good, because of the damage already done.

If someone does not want to be a part of the program, don't, provide your own health care, and go to your Doctor when it's too late.
07:43 AM on 09/08/2007
typical Dem leader: Let's hand over the security of the country to an international body
11:32 PM on 09/07/2007
John Edwards is not a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Nor is he a member of the Bilderberg Group.

Current CFR membership does include:

Bill Clinton;
Hillary Clinton;
Barack Obama;
Jimmy Carter;
George Soros;
and many Republicans.

Here is a partial list of the 'E' entries in the CFR membership list:

1062. EDLEY CHRISTOPHER JR,1988,,
1063. EDSON GARY R,CFR '92,,
1064. EDWARDS HOWARD L,CFR '92,,
1065. EDWARDS ROBERT H,CFR '92,,
1066. EHRLICH THOMAS,1990,,
1067. EIBS CHRISTINE A,CFR '92,,

Note that there is not an entry for John Edwards.

As for your Bilderberg conspiracy, Edwards was, supposedly, invited to speak before the Bilderberg Group in 2004. He, supposedly, attended a meeting and provided a defense of John Kerry's character against an attack made by Ralph Reed. Supposedly, Bilderberg members present, including democratic leadership, were impressed with Edwards' defense of Kerry. Information on this meeting is unverified.

Do not be fooled by the hype of conspiracy theories. Google this entry Metal: Annunaki. 168,000 entries. Are the reptoids going to take over? Better pass out the tinfoil party hats. Now go and be a good pest somewhere else.
11:50 PM on 09/07/2007
I consider it a plus that a candidate is tied to the NWO and Hedge Funds. the systematic looting of the global economy through financial instruments is surely preferable to the history of nationality.

now, if they could just get their heads together and figure out that 0% tax on salaries and wages and a flat tax on capital gains is the way of the future, with a consumer-subsidy policy of free-market socialism ...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stretchumall
"With Liberty and Justice for All"
10:39 PM on 09/07/2007
The only person that i am aware of who came close to answering the questions of why we (the U.S.) are being attacked and how to solve the problem is Ron Paul. All the other candidates want to continue the GWOT as if it can't be defeated. Yes some want to end the war in Iraq but they also want to continue fighting either somewhere else or some in some other fasion that requires us to give up even more rights.

Has any other candidate addressed these questions?

Why has the MSM not asked these Q's.

Oh! Thats right, they hate us for our freedom.

Fix The Fucking Problem!

Assholes, the whole lot.
If brains were dynamite they would not have enough to blow their nose, (or so they want us to believe).



Got Rope?
08:03 PM on 09/07/2007
MetalCanuck: You made your point. Must you make it twice????
08:48 PM on 09/07/2007
Yes because you and others are NOT LISTENING! This guy is for THE FN CFR!! Its so sickening how you guys talk about the main stream candidates like they are legit! This is sickening. Look at what the Dems are doing, they are enabling this war to go on and the spying..all the crap. WAKE THE F UP!

Type in "CFR Candidates" in You tube...don't be lazy and just ignore this, do it. I am serious. I am very concerned for OUR future because we are involved too. What you do effects us. RON PAUL, DENNIS KUCINICH, MIKE GRAVEL are the ONLY ones who are not bought and paid for.

Is everyone so brainwashed that they cannot see reality anymore? I do not care who you vote for out of the ones I said above but just vote for one of them because they are the only serious Candidates in the game. All this talk of Hitlary, Edwards, Obama and all that crap is a bunch of nonsense. They will not do anything the treasonous CFR doesn't want them to do. Do you need to go through another term of suffering under a useless president who could care less for the needs of America?
11:34 PM on 09/07/2007
John Edwards is not a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Nor is he a member of the Bilderberg Group.

Current CFR membership does include:

Bill Clinton;
Hillary Clinton;
Barack Obama;
Jimmy Carter;
George Soros;
and many Republicans.

Here is a partial list of the 'E' entries in the CFR membership list:

1062. EDLEY CHRISTOPHER JR,1988,,
1063. EDSON GARY R,CFR '92,,
1064. EDWARDS HOWARD L,CFR '92,,
1065. EDWARDS ROBERT H,CFR '92,,
1066. EHRLICH THOMAS,1990,,
1067. EIBS CHRISTINE A,CFR '92,,

Note that there is not an entry for John Edwards.

As for your Bilderberg conspiracy, Edwards was, supposedly, invited to speak before the Bilderberg Group in 2004. He, supposedly, attended a meeting and provided a defense of John Kerry's character against an attack made by Ralph Reed. Supposedly, Bilderberg members present, including democratic leadership, were impressed with Edwards' defense of Kerry. Information on this meeting is unverified.

Do not be fooled by the hype of conspiracy theories. Google this entry Metal: Annunaki. 168,000 entries. Are the reptoids going to take over? Better pass out the tinfoil party hats. Now go and be a good pest somewhere else.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:58 PM on 09/07/2007
Wow! Maybe if this speech were given by Obama, Huffpo would have given it more air time.
03:52 PM on 09/09/2007
Well...Edwards agrees with Obama in terms of actionable intel on Al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan...I'm waiting for the media and the pundits to call Edwards "naive"...I mean...that's all we heard after Obama's speech.
07:35 PM on 09/07/2007
in my opinion senator joe biden has articulated what should be done with iraq the best...i believe he would make a great president!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8651004057780609789&q=joe+biden+on+charlie+rose&total=51&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:46 AM on 09/10/2007
I agree
07:32 PM on 09/07/2007
Obama and Kucinich, to their credit, opposed the war before it started. At least Edwards says "I was wrong," not "the Bush administration has mismanaged the war,etc.," which seems to be the line taken by people like HRC and Biden-although Biden's son is in the National Guard, and could be sent to Iraq, which clears Biden of any charge of being a chicken-hawk or hypocrite in the matter.
The Clintons are another matter-they opposed Vietnam, when it was Bill's behind on the line. Yet he had the gall to say that if Israel was under attack, he would fight in the trenches! Bill was certainly a bellicose commander in chief-bombing mighty Serbia, dangerous aspirin factories, and invading the superpower of Haiti. And his secretary of state, Mad-Madeleine Albright, when asked about the Bush I-Clinton sanctions on Iraq [which were responsible for 500,000 dead Iraqis, mostly women and children] said that "they were worth it."
08:03 PM on 09/07/2007
wrong..

Obama made only one weak watered down statement criticizing Iraq..

Obama has not stood up against Iraq until it was popular to do so..

if not Gore.. then Edwards..

but never Hillary Bush and never pretender Obama..
03:50 PM on 09/09/2007
frost...that's bullshit. You are either intent on lying, or are ignorant. Obama was opposed to the war BEFORE it started, and made a very public speech in Chicago opposed to the war. He was advised NOT to make this speech, because at the time, Americans were in favor of the war, and it was seen as a risk to his political plans to speak out against the war. For you to say Obama made "one weak watered down statement..." is false, as is your claim that "Obama has not stood up against Iraq until it was popular to do so."
Stop telling lies...it does nothing for you.