Democrats and National Defense. Should we be afraid?

GG: Thanks for joining us today.

JMD: It’s my pleasure.

GG: Given your backround with the CIA and other critical areas within government, what do you view as the top 3 national security risks that we, as ordinary Americans, ought to be concerned about. What keeps you up at night?

JMD: In order of importance, those would be terror attacks, the Iraq War, part of the greater war against terrorism, and Iran.

GG: I have often refered to this new war as a "new world war." Would you say that is an accurate characterization?

JMD: I’m not sure I could say that– it would depend on the interpretation. It’s definitely a global war in which we find hot pockets all around the world involving al Qaida and al Qaida-inspired organizations.

GG: Tell us about Iraq.

JMD: As far as Iraq goes, it is important that we get it right. It is a volatile area within the most volatile region of the woorld– the Middle East. As Americans, we have a responsibility to both the people of Iraq and to our own troops that have died fighting there. If we could get Democracy to take hold in in the heart of the MidEast, it would certainly help to make the whole world safer in the future.

GG: Do you think that the method of government we see presently– the somewhat autonomous local tribal type system– can be described as "democracy"?

JMD: Every country, especially ones never having had the opportunity to live under anything other than brutal dictatorships like Saddam’s, will start out with something that won’t look much like America. What we are seeing in Iraq is a home-grown, Iraqi style of Democracy. What works for them, if successful, will make the citizens of Iraq, and thus the world, able to live in a better, more peaceful way.

GG: Is it your opinion that the present course as charted by the Bush Administration is the proper approach?

JMD: I do. Especially when compared with what we saw in the Nineties from the Democrats led by the Clinton Administration in response to the first WTC bombing, Khobar Towers, other attacks on our troops, and of course the attack on the USS Cole, which was virtually nothing. The Bush Administration did what we needed to do, which was to respond by taking the fight to the terrorists, and engage our allies in those efforts as well.

GG: But when it comes to our allies, wouldn’t you say that that’s the one area where the Bush Administration is weak?

JMD: Not at all. When you consider the relationship with Merkel of Germany, Sarkozi of France, and the long-time support of Blair from Britain, you will find that we have strong ties with our traditional allies– a credit to the work of this Administration.

GG: So it’s been an evolving process?

JMD: September 11 changed US policy forever. Things can never go back to the way they were before that day. Tough decisions were made, which were basically supported by our allies. Decisions to protect Americans. While we may have differences in how to accomplish things, our allies are still critical partners for us in a number of foreign policy areas.

GG: Is it your view that the present crop of Republican hopefuls will, more or less, stay the course?

JMD: I believe they will. I also believe that the Democrats, despite what they claim to their party base will also stay on a similar course…

GG: Really!?

JMD: I do. There’s a reason Hillary Clinton has voted as she did on both the Iranian resolution and on Iraq. She had to– it’s a general election strategy. I don’t forsee us getting out of Iraq anytime soon. Barack Obama, should he be the nominee, is  going to have a tough time in the general election when the Republican candidate and the media focus on his promise to be out of Iraq during his term in office.

GG: Let’s get back to Hillary. You say that, based on her Senate votes, Hillary knows that we have to finish the job in Iraq. But, on her website, it notes that she will direct the Joint Chiefs and her National Security Council to

draw up a clear, viable plan to bring our troops home starting with the first 60 days of her Administration.

GG: (cont’d.) Additionally, she will

focus American aid efforts during our redeployment on stabilizing Iraq, not propping up the Iraqi government. She would direct aid to the entities — whether governmental or non-governmental — most likely to get it into the hands of the Iraqi people. She would also support the appointment of a high level U.N. representative — similar to those appointed in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Kosovo — to help broker peace among the parties in Iraq.

GG:(cont’d.) And of course, this will be coupled with "intensive diplomatic efforts." How does any of that square with your claim that she will act to the contrary. It doesn’t add up.

JMD: No, it doesn’t. She’s doing her very best to suggest to Democratic voters that she’ll have us out of Iraq quickly. However, as always, the devil is in the details. All of this leads back to one of her biggest problems– the fact that voters don’t find her trustworthy. The truth is, her votes and her rhetoric don’t match up, and this is an example of why she has trouble in this area.

GG: You don’t put much stock in what’s up on her website?

JMD: Not really. I expect that if she’s the nominee, she’ll move to the middle again during the general campaign.

GG: Do you think if one of the Democrats gets elected, they’ll finish what’s in motion?

JMD: They’ll probably have to, although it will be very hard for Obama to come up with a responsible policy that has us out of Iraq in the next 4 years.

GG: Er, do you think that if he becomes president, he might actually do the irresponsible thing, you know, to save face?

JMD: I have no idea… Which is exactly why we need to elect a Republican– One who is willing to stand up for a tougher course that isn’t necessarily politically expedient or as politically popular, but is the right thing to do.

GG: Oh Boy. Do you think American will get it right in the upcoming election?

JMD: I have faith that the American people will weigh the candidates based on their positions on the issues most important to the US– those will be national security issues in addition to economic matters.

GG: I hope you’re right. Where should an interested person go to learn more about these matters? Who should they listen to?

JMD: Read anything by Charles Krauthammer. He gets things right.

GG: Any parting thoughts?

JMD: As I look over the Republican field of candidates, for the most part, you have to wonder why any Republican shouldn’t be thrilled with the field from which they must choose a nominee. There are several good people to get excited about. I really believe this is why it has taken people so long to make up the
ir minds. You’re going for McCain, right?

GG: Yes I am.

JMD: All right. Let’s say he wins the nomination. Picture that first debate with Barack Obama on national security… If you want a preview of what such a mismatch might be like, lookup the Cheney/ Edwards debate from the ’04 election cycle. Cheney totally cleaned his clock, really embarassing Edwards. It will be the same thing again. Obama’s a great guy, but he’s not ready to run the country. Not with the kinds of dangers we’re facing out in the world…

GG: Thanks for speaking with us today. 

JMD: I appreciate the opportunity.