Gen. Wesley Clark: Iraq war based on 'misjudgment'

[wyldwolf]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/08/14/cnna.clark/

I'm thinking in terms of what's right for the United States. And one of the principles that we operate on in this country is that leaders are held accountable. The simple truth is that we went into Iraq on the basis of some intuition, some fear, and some exaggerated rhetoric and some very, very scanty evidence.

We found a situation that wasn't at all what was predicted. We're in there now, we're committed, we need to do our best. But that's a classic presidential-level misjudgment. And I think the voters have to be aware of that. And they have to appreciate it.

And if democracy means something, then that will be reflected in the ballot box.

[DagmarK]

1. Okay Clark Supporters........

Doesn't this sound like a pass for Bush?

a presidential misjudgment? Like the intentions were honorable but woops we were wrong!?!

No more CLARK FOR PRES threads.....I beg of you!!!

[pinerow]

6. How do you figure he gave bush a pass...seems to me

that he stated that iraq war was 'presidential misjudgement

[MODemocrat]

18. Why didn't he just call it a ball-faced lie?

This wasn't a mis-judgment, and there is absolutely no need for the General to polish it.

[Julien Sorel]

7. I think you need remedial reading lessons.

That was a perfect electoral attack. It criticized, without seeming mean and nasty. As a result, Clark comes across as a statesman, not like a rabid partisan out to score points at any cost.

I suppose if he'd have launched into a Kucinichian hysterical diatribe, that would have made him 'presidential' material to you -- but it would have alienated the far greater number of sane voters out there. If Clark keeps making statements like these, he'll keep my support, and get the support of people who can discern between measured and forceful criticism, and a 'pass for Bush.'

If the 'Clark for Pres' threads hurt your ittle wittle sensibilities so much, simply stop clicking on them. Or is that beyond your abilities?


By the way, I'm sorry for the nastiness of this post, but your own post demonstrates that this is the only sort of criticism you can understand.

[TheBlob]

12. Very well said

Alas, there will always be those who do not understand political "strategery."

[pinerow]

13. I will not argue with the witless, as they are unarmed.

nt


:evil grin:

[OBrien]

17. BRAVO!

very well said indeed!

[Zuni]

21. I agree

Clark is being tactful--anyone who votes for him will be of the moderate stripe anyway, so he shouldn't be alienating them.
One does not need to sound like a speaker at an ANSWER rally to critize Bush.

[Miramar]

23. I agree with what you said in support of Clark

But, must you in the next sentence call Kucinich's speech 'hysterical diatribe'? People are tired and fed up with perceived wishy-washyness on the part of Democrat contenders. Kucinich sticks up for what he believes, and rightly so. He forthrightly addresses the issues. Finally, a liberal Democrat! What a breath of fresh air.

[MoonRiver]

25. I agree with your post 99%. But, I would change your statement from

"sane" voters to brainwashed voters. Every sane American is fighting tooth and nail to elect (almost) ANYBODY BUT BUSH.

However, Wesley Clark isn't anybody, he is an incredible presence, who the bushistas have no ability to stop from taking back what they illegally seized. That's why I want him to be the Democratic nominee.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

26. Nice One, BB

:thumbsup:

DTH

[delete_bush]

30. You nailed it, Clark is indeed a “statesman” …

Calling * a liar will not wash with the majority of merikuns out there, the ones that are needed to vote this misadministration out of town. Lying involves intent to deceive and there is an intuitive sense with at least some people that * is too stupid to form even the most simple of thought patterns.

Clark is smart and is being honest by taking the high road. In dealing with Iraq * had several options. Containment was working to the extent that we knew what to expect from Saddam, we were certainly safer before the war than we are now. Eventually Saddam would have fallen, especially with a little help.

When you engage in war there are too many variables due to the uncertainty of future events that even if * had planned better (or at all) this little war would still have been a fiasco.

This is Clark’s point, * had choices and made the wrong ones, costing blood, treasure and uncertainty. As the wheels continue to fall off this little excursion more voters are going to realize that Commander Bunnypants got himself into an unmanageable situation and is in WAY over his head.

Who better than Clark to clean up the mess left by these zoo people (no offense meant to real animals of course).

[Brotherjohn]

10. I agree with pinerow and billybunter.

Here we have a general saying the Iraq War was "classic" presidential misjudgement, and then saying that the people should be aware of this and that this should be reflected at the ballot box.

He is saying (in a measured, diplomatic way) that Bush screwed up, BIG TIME, and should be voted out over it. It is a VERY strong statement, but he is saying it in a reasoned tone so that it at once agrees with most anti-war folks, and can also win over a good number of the "undecided", middle-of-the-road folks who may have supported the war.

[Larkspur]

2. Clark is setting himself up for Sec of State

He could be the 21st century's Gen. Marshall of Marshall Plan fame to any Dem Prez nominee trying to devise a plan to rebuild Iraq.

[Bozola]

3. Wes, it wasn't "misjudgement".

It was malfeasance. They judged that it would be acceptable to break national and international laws. There was no "misjudgement" here; this is what they intended.

[chiburb]

4. This Topic Already Beaten To Death...

Here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=175570&mesg_id=175570

And this is from an interview last night, hardly LBN.

[RememberJohn]

8. You set the standards for what LBN is here?

Honestly, what is it with some of you that you must be thread nazis?

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=us&q=Wesley+Clark

Look at the first listing. The interview was last night but the news item is 4 hours old.

[chiburb]

14. Nazi? That seems another violation...

Per LBN rules:
2. NO news that is more than 12 hours old.

It doesn't say it's ok to post old news as long as there is a new headline on Google. Maybe when the Sunday papers rehash the week's news we can post another thread in LBN? All CNN did was post a transcript of last night's interview, and Google picked that up.

As for "thread nazis"...

[wyldwolf]

15. So I guess we need to all understand this....

If you hear of an event that doesn't make the news until sometime later, it doesn't qualify as late breaking.

By that reasoning we should all be going through the LBN threads and, if we see one that we knew about more than 12 hours ago, we should alert the poster that it isn't LBN. Because you already knew about it.

Because, obviously, it is all about our personal knowledge.

If ONE person here knew of a story more the 12 hours old that gets posted in LBN, we should whine about it not being LBN - no matter if the media is just now reporting it.

[lanlady]

5. I hope Clark runs

I want him on the ballot. He'd be Dubya's worst nightmare.

[w13rd0]

9. Dubya's worst nightmare...

...is to be held accountable and responsible for his actions, and the actions of his administration. THAT is his worst nightmare.

[TheBlob]

11. Which won't happen until the Bush regime is out of power

And IMO the best chance of that happening is through Wesley Clark.

[Pepperbelly]

19. Dead wrong!

His very worst nightmare would be to receive justice rather than mercy.

[0007]

16. Yes! and Clark could debate junior in full uniform

junior would be allow of course to wear his flight suit.

[bvar22]

20. bush* not a LIAR....

....he is just TOTALLY INCOMPETENT....at least that is how I read Clark's statement.

[Zuni]

22. Clark's is a very measured, tactful critiscm

One need not launch themselves into hysterics when bashing Bush.
Sometimes a restrained critiscm will win win over the more moderate, middle of the road types.
Sounding like Ramsey Clark will only preach to the choir.

[MoonRiver]

24. "if democracy means something..."!!!!

That is the bottom line. And, it's why Clark must, as a recent "Draft Wesley Clark" add implores, serve his country one more time to restore the dream our founding fathers forged into reality. Otherwise, the Bush Pax Americana scumbags will shred our sacred Constitution until it is unrecognizable when compared with the original document.

[Skittles]

27. NO WESLEY

not "misjudgement". LIES. F***ING LIES.

[Gloria]

28. When I watched the interview, it didn't seem like he was giving Bush a

pass at all!

He rattled off a list of errors and said they were calling the leadership into question.
When Brown asked him if he was "politicizing" things, Clark said no, but it was important to democracy to know why these things happened....He was basically saying that accountability was at issue here and that was not politicizing.

Contrary to the impression of giving Bush a "pass," I thought Clark slammed pretty hard!

[Upfront]

29. At least

he went after Bush. However, we don't want another pussy footer, and I hope he is not. Dean calls em like he sees em and is not pussy footing around the issues.

[w4rma]

31. Whether he runs or not, he definitely is out there fighting for democracy.

I think Gov. Dean is the best presidential candidate (I haven't even read of any campaign run as well as Dean's is being run) for 2004. I also think that Gen. Clark would do well in, at the very least, many cabinet-level jobs: defense, FBI, CIA, state.

I'm going to have to hear more from him for me to decide whether he would do well in a more partisan position, such as vice president. IMHO, there are many good choices for a Democratic vice president, currently.

I'm very impressed with what I see of Gen. Clark.