DES MOINES, Iowa--Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis lectured Tennessee Sen. Albert Gore Jr. '69 to "get your facts straight," but six Democratic presidential hopefuls generally were in harmony yesterday in supporting sweeping arms control agreements and an end to military aid to Nicaraguan rebels.

The sharp exchange between Gore and Dukakis came during a two-hour debate before an arms control group that mainly featured sharp attacks on President Reagan and gentle jabs among the six Democrats who said they were struggling "for the direction of the Democratic Party."

Gore and Dukakis began their feud at a Democratic debate at the Iowa State Fair last month, with Gore demanding more specifics about Dukakis' economic policies. Yesterday, Gore criticized Dukakis for advocating the withdrawal of American troops from South Korea.

"I never made that proposal," Dukakis retorted. "I never suggested that."

Gore later branded that proposal as "wildly unrealistic," and Dukakis continued to insist after the debate that he never made such a proposal, insisting he only wanted to push for more democratic freedoms in South Korea.

"I didn't spend 16 months of my life in Korea so a bunch of Korean generals could deny human and labor rights to the people of Korea," Dukakis argued.

"I hate to interrupt this dialogue between Al and Mike here," interjected Illinois Sen. Paul Simon, as he struggled to make a point during an argument between the other two rivals.

After the debate, Gore said he was working tocarve out a moderate image that Democrats need ifthey're to regain the White House in 1988.

"We have to have a candidate who can win," Goresaid. "The American people know that some of thoseideas that were thrown around this afternoon arejust wildly unrealistic."

The exchange came as the Democrats called forarms control agreements far beyond the oneexpected to be signed this fall, although theproposed treaty to eliminate medium range nuclearmissiles from Europe received grudging support.

All six Democratic candidates pushed for deepcuts in funding for Nicaraguan rebels. Only Gorewas willing to back any funding for the Contrarebels, and would limit that to humanitarianassistance.

"I would go beyond the agenda of deep missilecuts," said former Arizona Gov. Bruce Babbitt,hitting the administration for "an atmosphere ofsuspicion and paranoia."

"It's not the technology that's the problem,it's the willpower," Babbitt said.

"I want this nation to be tough and strong andinvolved," said Dukakis. "But I want this nationto be tough and strong and involved for the rightreasons."

"There are important signs the world is comingto its collective senses," Dukakis said. "We're[the U.S.] beginning to understand we can'toperate like a lonesome cowboy anymore."

"I'm excited about the prospects of signing anarms control agreement, but not too much so," saidRev. Jesse Jackson, who said the agreementexpected to be signed this fall was "a short stepfor mankind, and a giant step for Ronald Reagan."

"They [the Reagan Administration] have gonefarther than anyone thought they would," Goresaid, attempting to take credit for joining acoalition of conservative southern Democrats whopushed the Reagan Administration into arms talks.

"Aren't you a little bit surprised that thisadministration is on the verge of a significantagreement?" Gore asked. He said many voters think"The Democratic Party is against every singleweapons system that is proposed.

"We have got to maintain deterrence," Goresaid. "Our party must be strong on nationaldefense."

While all six had sharp criticism for theReagan administration, Gore and Missouri Rep.Richard Gephardt worried that Democrats havesuffered in past elections from being seen as theparty that opposes all weapons systems.

"We Democrats ought to say we are strong ondefense," Gephardt said, arguing that Democratsshould use a version of Reagan's 1980 questionwhen he asked voters if they were better off thanfour years before.

"Are we safer than we were two trillion dollarsago?" Gephardt asked. "I think it's time to indictthis administration."

The candidates also split on testing of weaponssystems, with Gore complaining that Democrats werebeing subjected to yet another "litmus test" thatpushes candidates to the left, and damages theparty's general election hopes.

"This contest is partly a struggle for thefuture of the Democratic Party," Gore argued."Foreign policy is too important for a litmustest."

The six were close to unanimous over aid to theContras, with all of them saying they were opposedto sending the Contras military assistance.

"We ought to be sending down physicians andteachers and Peace Corps workers," Simon argued.

Yesterday's debate was before an arms controlgroup called STAR-PAC, or Stop the Arms RacePolitical Action Committee.

Colorado Rep. Patricia Schroeder is scheduledto announce her presidential candidacy intentionstoday. She was invited to yesterday's debate andinitially accepted, but pulled out last week.

While being reluctant to send aid to CentralAmerica, the candidates generally favored a U.S.presence in the Persian Gulf, although they werecritical of administration policy.

Dukakis called for a United Nationspeacekeeping force, if needed, to halt the warbetween Iran and Iraq.

"I think America has a vital interest topreserve in the Persian Gulf," Babbitt said. "Wemust assert that interest."

Though there were occasional sharp exchanges,the tenor of the clash was relaxed, with thecandidates stripping to shirt sleeves because ofthe heat from television lights, and occasionallyjoking with each other during the time alloted forthem to question one another