In 2000, Democrats led on terrorism

Shortly before 2 AM the other day, as I finished up drinks with a new progressive friend (and co-producer of the killer video “America's Party” that won the 2004 DNC convention award) I was mentioning how far ahead the Demcrats were of the Republicans in 2000 regarding terrorism.  Specifically, Al Gore's 2000 platform addressed it (and Osama Bin Laden  by name) directly, with many of the recommendations that have since become the cornerstones of American strategy, but some of which still languish.

In light of the national debate on the incursions into constitutional liberties that the Bush administration has put in place under cover of the “war on terror”, I thought I'd excerpt the terrorism section of the 2000 Democratic Party platform here for posterity, to contrast (a) the clear awareness by Democrats of the danger of terrorism which was ignored by the Republicans (note that the Democrats even predicted the Republicans would ignore it!), (b) the forward thinking about the issue, (c) the specific strategies of how to go about it, as well as (d) incorporating full consideration of and need for preservation of constitutional rights in spite of the danger posed (emphasis below is mine):

Technorati Tags: Al Gore, civil_rights, Constitution, National security, Osama bin Laden, Safeguarding America, Terrorism

Battling Terrorism.  Whether terrorism is sponsored by a foreign nation or inspired by a single fanatic individual, such as Osama Bin Laden, Forward Engagement requires trying to disrupt terrorist networks, even before they are ready to attack. We must improve coordination internationally and domestically to share intelligence and develop operational plans. We must continue the comprehensive approach that has resulted in the development of a national counter- terrorism strategy involving all arms and levels of our government. We must continue to target terrorist finances, break up support cells, and disrupt training. And we must close avenues of cyber-attack by improving the security of the Internet and the computers upon which our digital economy exists.

As President, Al Gore will tolerate no attack against American interests at home or abroad: terrorists must know that if they attack America, we will never forget. We will scour the world to hunt them down and bring them to justice.

While fighting terrorism, we will protect the civil liberties of all Americans. Our justice system must guarantee fairness with procedures that protect the rights of the accused, even under the unusual circumstances of the investigation of threats to our national security. We must avoid stereotyping, for it defeats the highest purposes of our country if citizens feel automatically suspect by virtue of their ethnic origin. The purpose of terrorism is not only to intimidate, but also to divide and fracture, and we cannot permit that to happen.

What did Al Gore and the Democrats mean by Forward Engagement?  Here's the context:

Al Gore and the Democratic Party know that we must be able to meet any military challenge from a position of dominance. But Al Gore and the Democratic Party also recognize that there is a new security agenda – threats that affect the entire world and transcend political borders.

During the past century, we have learned that if we wish to avoid war, we must be strong enough to deter aggression, but also farsighted enough to invest in peace. Now it is time to apply this lesson to the new global challenges we face – to shape a new strategy of Forward Engagement to guide our conduct around the world.

Forward Engagement means addressing problems early in their development before they become crises, addressing them as close to the source of the problem as possible, and having the forces and resources to deal with these threats as soon after their emergence as possible.

While we must always stand prepared to use our military power when all other options fail, Forward Engagement also means addressing societal and political problems before they evolve into threats to our national security and values – before armed conflict becomes the only way to achieve our goals. And Forward Engagement means drawing on all three main sources of American power – military strength, a vibrant, growing economy, and a free and democratic political system – to advance our objectives around the world.

The Democratic Party believes that America’s peace and security depend on our unflagging leadership and engagement in global affairs—and that Forward Engagement is the strategy that must guide us. We must maintain America’s economic and military strength. We must also form partnerships to help solve global problems and take advantage of new global opportunities. That means we must deepen our key alliances, develop more constructive relationships with former enemies, and bring together diverse coalitions of nations to deal with new problems. America has a responsibility to lead – and should lead from within the international community.

At a time when new conditions require new thinking, the Republican Party offers little more than outdated positions and a narrow worldview that lets international problems fester.

And fester they did until the boil burst on 9/11/2001, when George W. Bush was so embarassed by sitting in a class reading My Pet Goat with no idea what to do (if a police officer was there and got a 911 call, he would have packed up and left to do his job!), and so scared that he might be attacked again (so he's never been outside his bubble of supporters since), that he has projected his fear and shame onto us all in the classic bully mode to hide his own insecurities and shame that he was doing nothing and it happened on his watch.