http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspxFrom NBC's Chuck Todd and Mark MurrayLast night, NBC's Brian Williams asked the eight Democratic candidates to raise their hand if they believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror. A review of the tape today shows that Biden, Edwards, Gravel,en-USCommunityServer 2.0 (Build: 60608.1)http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172506Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:46:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172506Russell in MarylandSuch a childish, nonsensical question. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172524Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:58:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172524Ken BalbariIs it too much to ask for NBC/MSNBC to post an actual complete transcript of this debate? All I see are on this site are internet polls and alot of commentary from mostly Washington based pundits trying to spin things to suit their own agenda. I would think a transcript would be available by now. Please give us a link to one and let us decide for ourselves what is important and what to think about it. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172541Fri, 27 Apr 2007 19:07:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172541PeepsRussell - for once, I agree with you.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172544Fri, 27 Apr 2007 19:09:28 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172544Steve Turner Cedar Falls IowaUntil Al-Qaeda sets up operations in Antarctica, the Arctic, and the Australian Outback, the answer to Mr. Williams question would have to be...no. (Oh yeah, and Pitcairn Island.)http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172597Fri, 27 Apr 2007 19:33:37 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172597Dale, DenverRussell: Why is that question "childish, nonsensical"?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172604Fri, 27 Apr 2007 19:35:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172604Mike Weston, Silicon Valley, CAI think the key word is war, not global. Terror is an issue that should be taken seriously, but war is not the right way to fight it. I'm disappointed in Obama and Richardson for saying yes, though an off the cuff answer doesn't tell the whole story.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172647Fri, 27 Apr 2007 19:52:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172647Flat-earther, GeorgiaAlso, Area 51. That is where the Feds produce morons and then send them to all States.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172673Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:05:04 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172673Mark ThiemePeeps and Russell: Russell, you said out loud what a lot of people are thinking. There were more than a few childish, pointless, questions: gun ownership, top three allies, worst mistake... apparently left out was the one about who was my firstest bestest friend and three reasons why.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172681Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:10:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172681OliviaLOL about Flat-Earther's remark. Dubya was probably produced there, too....http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172694Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:17:42 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172694Dave Homer, Madison, Ct.It's not a war on terror. It ia a war against Islamic fundamentalism.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172699Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:22:51 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172699J. D. Edwards, Rio Rancho, NMPerhaps Biden, Edwards, Kucinich and Gravel were waiting to hear "Simon says." There is no debate where speakers are asked to raise their hands in response to a question. What is so painfully clear as the dust settles from this "beauty contest" is that the format, the questions and the unreasonable time constraints hurt all the participants. Perhaps MSNBC will have the courage to sponsor a real, free-flowing debate next time.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172713Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:28:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172713John B, Des Moines, IAIt isn't really even a war. You can't wage war on Terrorism because it's an idea, not a nation. Like the War on Drugs. What do you do, bomb the capital of Drugs, shut down the airports and seaports of drugs, fire artillery shells at drugs? Preventing terrorist attacks is primarily and most effectively a matter of police work. Invading foreign countries and killing innocent people while searching for the bad guys just makes more people who hate us and therefore more terrorists. Our soldiers are doing what they can as well as they can but they've been given an unwinnable task. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172766Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:59:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172766Scott in South TexasIt's not really a war. Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) and Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom)were both invasions to remove existing governments (neither of which were good or acceptable governments) so that both could be replaced with governments acceptable to bush and them. Both invasions have resulted in lengthy, if not permanent, occupations. The removal of the Taliban, whose government had ended a civil war amongst various warlords, has since reignited such civil war. The "president" we installed (Karzai, who was formerly a consultant for Unocal), is no more than the mayor of Kabul. Our first choice for the new head of the Iraqi government, Chalabi, didn't work out. Neither did our second choice, Alawi (a former CIA controlled agent). Now our Iraqi occupation forces are in the middle of a civil war. While it was perhaps intended that both of these occupations would end someday, US military presence, permanent military bases, and permanent US puppet governments were and are intended to last forever. This is required by neoconservative, "we're the only superpower and there can't be any others" ideology. We need Afghanistan for gas pipelines to and from the Caspian Sea region, and we need Iraq for its huge oil reserves and it's proximity to Israel. Terrorism is asymmetrical warfare, which our military was neither trained nor equipped to fight. Only recently has our military begun formulating a doctrine with which to "fight" terrorism. To make a short story long, therefore, the "War on Terror" is nothing more than a political slogan necessary to to justify and facilitate both imperialistic hegemony abroad, and a dismantling of our constitutional republic at home. It's really quite simple.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172867Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:47:06 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172867JWilson, Atlanta, GAI think so Olivia, he definitely wasn't produced in Texas, thank God.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#172980Fri, 27 Apr 2007 23:15:28 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:172980Russell in MarylandDale, we don't need to discuss why it was childish and nonsensical we just need to ask everyone here to raise their hands if they agree. Now do you understand.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173109Sat, 28 Apr 2007 01:42:23 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173109James Oceanside Ca This debate looked like the Starwars lounge, Chia Pet Head Biden (or bad combed over hair piece) and Hillary who looked like she was on speed for three weeks big rings around her eyes and those pearls looked like some just put her head on a body and her voice is like the syrienes on the rocks that turn sailors to stone, Breck Girl posing to the camera to look tough although is a phony transexual pussie trapped in a mans body, then little Nepolean Dodd nobody would follow that dwarf, and then there was junior Dumbo with big ears and looked like a deer in my headlights that wanted to surrender before a war started, ah yes the only normal looking one the Gov of NM, he is just a nice guy in the mits of a jungle of vicous rabid demoncrats! What a nighmare, I would terrified id any of these creatures where in power they are no human, they have to be part of a bad cartoon. No human could stand to watch these creatures for another 10 months!! http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173174Sat, 28 Apr 2007 03:13:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173174CynicalGeek, GeorgiaClinton, Dodd, Obama, and Richardson should stay then. Get rid of the rest of the lot, though I hate to see Biden not raise his hand. He wants to send 2500 U.S. troops into Darfur, Sudan where they would get slaughtered and the whole world would be opposed (especially China.) The rest of the countries of the world need to send their troops when the time arrives. America will be in Iraq and Afghanistan for months and years and anyone who doesn't believe it the "global war on terror" in a hand-raising question needs to go ahead and quit. It doesn't matter what you call it, you have to go with it for a few more months to see where we are. We can help Darfur, continue the global war on terror, and still elect a good president. We just have to work together.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173237Sat, 28 Apr 2007 04:22:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173237rudey, USAFunny how people want to see transcripts. Must be some truth to the general belief that no one watches MSNBC.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173408Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:12:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173408Leonard in Central Texas“Brian Williams asked the eight Democratic candidates to raise their hand if they believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror. A review of the tape today shows that Biden, Edwards, Gravel, and Kucinich did not raise their hands.” I am proud of these 4 potential US presidential candidates. In fact I would be happy to vote for either Edwards (my choice) or Biden to be president of the United States.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173413Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:34:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173413Leonard in Central TexasDave, I don’t think it’s even a war against Islamic fundamentalism. It is just whoever wants to fight us in Afganistan or Iraq. That’s the reason the Islamic fundamentalists are so please with Bush providing such a good training ground for terrorist. It is sort of like the old comic strips where the boxing announcer stands in the middle of the boxing ring challenging everyone to meet the champion in the ring? Just remember Bush is having all this fun playing with the lives of our soldiers and spending lots and lots of money that our children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren will have to pay. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173420Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:47:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173420WDRussellDave Homer, I am not sure what kind of a point you are trying to make, but I do agree in principle. Right wing terrorists like Luis Posada Carriles, can live out their lives in luxary and safety, protected by the US government.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173421Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:48:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173421Bob, Houston, TexasOh, come on. We've had a war on drugs, war on poverty, war on cancer, war on illiteracy. I don't recall any liberal politicians objecting to that. This is a real war, different than wars in the past, but with real enemies using real weapons and killing real Americans.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173429Sat, 28 Apr 2007 13:17:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173429Still Crazy After All These Years"When I am king you will be first against the wall with your opinion which is of no consequence at all"-Paranoid Android- Radioheadhttp://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173485Sat, 28 Apr 2007 15:24:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173485Arden, NCThis is a valid question and it is important to give this great thought. However, I find it disingenuous to use this forum as a means to bash the president with petty and inane remarks as made by Olivia & JWilson. If you have something constructive to add to the commentary then do so without personal insults.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173499Sat, 28 Apr 2007 15:45:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173499Leonard in Central Texas“Brian Williams asked the eight Democratic candidates to raise their hand if they believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror. A review of the tape today shows that Biden, Edwards, Gravel, and Kucinich did not raise their hands.” I am proud of these 4 potential US presidential candidates. In fact I would be happy to vote for either Edwards (my choice) or Biden to be president of the United States.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173501Sat, 28 Apr 2007 15:46:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173501Leonard in Central Texas“Brian Williams asked the eight Democratic candidates to raise their hand if they believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror. A review of the tape today shows that Biden, Edwards, Gravel, and Kucinich did not raise their hands.” I am proud of these 4 potential US presidential candidates. In fact I would be happy to vote for either Edwards (my choice) or Biden to be president of the United States.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173533Sat, 28 Apr 2007 16:37:05 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173533Susan in NCTranscript: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18352397/http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173733Sat, 28 Apr 2007 23:21:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173733Jason, Beaufort, North CarolinaScott in South Texas, Man you really hit the nail on the head! War on terror? … Bob, Houston, Texas wrote: "We've had a war on drugs, war on poverty, war on cancer (and a) war on illiteracy" and though his point was of a different focus, my point revolves around the FACT that we haven't won ANY of those “wars”.. Isn't it funny that we "fight" for peace? We're having a War for peace... My god, Penn and Teller or George Carlin should enter this debate. War on terror?... How the (expletive) are we supposed to "win" this War on terror when our "enemy" is an ephemeral ideal, state of being or idea? Our present military “enemy” is one that defines itself by their version of all three. How do you fight an idea with military action? It didn’t work for the Romans against Christianity or Soviet Russians against Capitalism. Why should it work for us? Military action against a “thought structure” is untenable. We need more and the Bush administration refuses to consider anything else. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#173950Sun, 29 Apr 2007 06:02:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:173950Jan B. Tucson I watched it and like to gag. An ugly format – not a debate, nonsensical questions where an answer "It depends on what 'it' means" is semantically vague and contextually difficult; define a ‘war’ define ‘on terror’. I have always believed that this administration uses sound-byte phrases which are semantically front-loaded to get an emotional buy-in of a philosophical or moral concept; that they have no interest in engaging in that debate. In reality the Al Queda religious fanatics that attacked America did so basically because our government had profaned his religious landscape. This conflict is NOT a war on terror or on terrorists; AND it sure as Hell didn’t need the US Military electronic, high-tech ‘Dog and Pony show’ to invade Iraq. IMHO the response to the 9-11 attack by Muslim, fanatically conservative rightwing-nuts should have been to use the global shock and outrage to combine national police forces, coordinated by Interpol and the UN structure to hunt down the Al Queda command and control structure including OBL, all his senior management team, all humint and couriers, and as many of communications and financial cells and leaders as developed by this world-wide investigative effort by Interpol and the UN. The use of US military, almost in its’ entirety to the ‘imminent failure point’ demonstrates this administration’s total clueless ignorance and disdain of Diplomacy as a foreign policy tool is yet another reason why both Bush and Cheney - -SHOULD BE IMPEACHED FOR High Crimes [for sure] and misdemeanors [would appointing more clueless incompetents like ‘Brownie’’, Bremer, Scully, Crawford, Gonzo, Harriet, Bolton, all recess based appointments qualify as misdemeanors?] and afterwards indicted for many, many multiple counts of the more common ‘white collar’ crimes, theft, money laundering, embezzlement, selling his office for personal gain, conspiracy to violate civil rights, slander, etc, etc plus the more serious ones and after conviction, seek placement in a Federal penitentiary in Texas. ‘They’ went off topic – I can too. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#174044Sun, 29 Apr 2007 10:46:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:174044jerry/coprus christi texasI'm sure if you asked the saudi's the same question this morning, you would get a different answer. I'm sure if you had asked the four mules about the war on drugs and if it does matter, you would have gotten the same answer, specially from Dennis and Gravel, who seemed to be smoking too much of the same thing. I liked the fact that out of 1200 people or so polled on the debate by USA Today, only 1/3 said they watched the debates. That tells me something right there about the message from the demcoratic party.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#174127Sun, 29 Apr 2007 14:03:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:174127John StoutSure it's "a childish, nonsensical question" until we get hit again! Then all you nay-sayers will be standing up and saluting the flag, declaring your patriotism and asking "why something wasn't done to stop it?" This personifies the attitude of Democrats...they never have believed that there is such a thing as terrorism, just some misunderstood people whom we drove to drastic actions. For those that put their hand up; they only did it to ride the fence for more votes and they know they can go back and re-qualify their answer later to mean something else. There was absolutely nothing wrong with that question and that is the types of questions the Democrats should be asked. The Democrats are nothing short of scary and the terrorist are waiting to see them take over power the Executive Branch in this country. That’s why the insurgents are attacking so hard in Iraq right now, because they believe their efforts are working to get rid of us and change our government - which they know they can’t beat right now without these kinds of tactics! I actually hope in some respects that all you cowardly Democrats get what you want, because I will be you of the first in line protesting, screaming and yelling and sticking in your faces that “WE TOLD YOU SO”, when we get attacked again and again and again! Barac’s answer to terrorism I heard was that we need “better first responders”; so what, he would wait for an attack and then respond? Good candidate for President! Other than that if it wasn't for the media coverage the next day I didn't even know there was a debate! Too funny! http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#174815Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:54:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:174815Dave M., Miamisburg, OHI think it's a valid question and I think both nouns in the phrase are suspect: "war" and "terror" both. Terror is a tactic. It's not a nation, an entity, or even a loosely associated group of people with goals and objectives. It's silly to think that you can wage war on a "tactic". War is misused here as well. We shouldn't be allowed to call it a war unless we can verbalize against whom we are fighting. For instance, if the war were against "Islamic fundamentalists who are actively plotting to do the USA harm", we'll that I could get behind because it's specific and gives everyone a clear idea of what we're expending resources on. However, "war on terror" is nonsense. It's too fuzzy and open to interpretation. It falls into the category of "meaning whatever I say it means" - which is pretty much how Bush has pitched it to the American people all these years. Waging war in such an ill-defined way makes it very easy to keep the war going forever. Afterall, if the gneral public buys into a war that has no clear goals, no clear enemy, it's pretty easy for them to accept no clear results. I agree the format of the debate and the way the questions were put forth did seem childish and contrived. However, I think whoever the next President is, he or she will have to wrestle with this whole notion of "war on terror" and hopefully act to redefine it so that the American people can be more in tune with what it is our military is trying to accomplish.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#174820Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:59:23 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:174820Dave M., Miamisburg, OHArden in NC stated, "However, I find it disingenuous to use this forum as a means to bash the president". You need to understand that it's always O.K. to bash this President. He's not newly elected with no record to stand on. He is not in a situation where you should feel the need to back off, give him some time, give him the benefit of the doubt. He's more than earned his harsh criticisms and bashing. Don't worry. No one will accuse you of disrespecting the office of U.S. President just because you harshly criticize his bone-headed policies and his inability to grasp issues. I know it's hard, because it reflects badly on us as a nation. Afterall, we were collectively stupid enough to elect him, not once, but twice. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#175455Mon, 30 Apr 2007 19:38:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:175455Lee in MV" I didn't even know there was a debate! Too funny! " What's funny is how the uniformed unload their opinions as facts.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#186259Wed, 09 May 2007 15:31:56 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:186259Chris Rowan, Brownsville, TXWhen are you Bush-hating surrender monkeys going to realize that George Bush is not on the 2008 presidential ticket? Some of your more inane comments: "LOL about Flat-Earther's remark. Dubya was probably produced there, too.... (implying that GW is an idiot)" "Just remember Bush is having all this fun playing with the lives of our soldiers ... (Bush is a heartless buffoon)" "...this administration’s total clueless ignorance..." "...his bone-headed policies and his inability to grasp issues." All this venom directed at a man who is, by all accounts, a decent and religious man who was smart enough to graduate from a prestigious university, get elected Governor of Texas twice, and then go on to become President of the U.S. twice. If GW is as stupid as you lefties claim, what does that say about YOUR level of intelligence? After all, he outsmarted the lot of you, didn't he? I'd be willing to bet money that the lefties posting here would identify themselves as secular progressives meaning, of course, that they do not believe in God and consider religion to be a bane of society. I'm reminded of a phrase coined by someone whose name escapes me, but it goes "Those who do not believe in God do not believe in nothing; they believe in anything." This explains why the lefties here are quick to believe in wacked out conspiracy theories. Thus, "In reality the Al Queda religious fanatics that attacked America did so basically because our government had profaned his religious landscape." So it's OUR fault that a group of Islamo-nazis flew two planes into the Twin Towers and murdered several thousand of our fellow citizens. It's OUR fault. And, of course, the never-ending mantra that "Bush lied, people died" and Bush should be impeached, and Bush is the enemy (not Al Quaeda), and so on. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/04/27/172454.aspx#194564Thu, 17 May 2007 19:25:04 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:194564mark sulak el centro cai sure hope whom ever wins the repub/pres. brings in all the canidates that are running against each other and they all get a seat except paul (L) TX. dee dee dee.most sound like they still want to kick ass cool.get all democrats out of office.waterboard everyone.....