General Clark supported the Iraq invasion?????

[Cascadian]

Just on Mike Malloy's show now!


He brought up some stuff about the fact that Wesley Clark actually was in favor of the Iraq invasion. He also regarded Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney as pals and people he could work with.

Uh... Clark supporters. What do you have to say now? This was just on Mike Malloy's show. Tonight!

[Cascadian]

1. n/t

[buff2]

2. Eeeeeek!

That's not good. x(

[unfrigginreal]

3. He's an asshole!

I tried to make a point on his show...he cut me off in mid-stream. Fuck this asshole!

[newsguyatl]

6. i heard you

but i must say you were wrong in saying that clark is against the war... malloy was absolutely right and you kept insisting otherwise...


sorry man, i'm with malloy on this one

[unfrigginreal]

10. You think that Clark was for the war?

You need some lessons kemosabe!

[CMT]

4. he "probably" would have voted for the resolution

just like he "probably" voted for Nixon and I believe he did confirm voting for Reagan. He had his conversion with Clinton in '92.

[Cascadian]

5. Clark has stated he was on the same level as Lieberman

in regards to the backing of the Iraqi resolution. He also wants to put more troops in??? Sorry. That just did it for me! I won't support him now.


John

[Trajan]

17. In all fairness ....

Judging by the tenor of your previous posts dripping with disdain for Clark, ... one would hardly have imagined you supporting him in any way .....

You are NOT a Clark supporter .. case CLOSED ! ...

But: .. again ... in all fairness: ... Kerry, Liebermann and EVERY other Democrat who voted for the IWR were sold a bill of goods by this lying PNAC administration .... They jiggered the Intelligence Estimate by cajoling and threatening the CIA/DIA authors .... They used the OSP to develop alternative scenarios (based on some 'solid' Straussian fantasy development ... ) ... and forced them to accept the views of the OSP ....

"WHO do you believe ? ... ME ?, or your lying eyes ???? ..... "

Given that fact: ... I think ALL Democrats who voted FOR IWR were hoodwinked, like Enron hoodwinked the citizens of California, who are STILL stuck with the fraudulently priced energy contracts .....

The country was ENRONIZED by the Bush administration regarding the FACTS about Iraq and the push to war .....

We cannot fault men who are intentionally deceived by those in the position of trust .....

I believe, given what was passed off as 'fact' by the WH, .... that Clark WOULD have agreed to sign off on the IWR .....

The proper question would be "Mr Clark ? .. given what you NOW know of the evidence used to make the case for war in Iraq, would you have voted for the IWR as it was written ? .... " ....

BTW: ... you wouldnt ACTUALLY vote for Clark .... right ? ....

[Kahuna]

7. Malloy's source = "Counterpunch." I turned it off

after he said that.

[eablair3]

11. It was the Wash Post; -- Clark PRO-WAR, WANTS MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ

that's a rather large misrepresentation to say it was Counterpunch, no matter how good Counterpunch is.

I was listening to Malloy, and his source was the Washington Post. It's supposedly a front page story for tomorrow.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32450-2003Sep18.html

Clark aligns himself with Lieberman and Kerry on the war:

"Clark said his views on the war resemble those of Democratic Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) and John F. Kerry (Mass.), both of whom voted for the war but now question President Bush's stewardship of the Iraqi occupation.

...

Clark's statement on the war resolution put him at odds with former Vermont governor Howard Dean, whose stock has soared among Democratic activists in recent months on the strength of his antiwar position."

Clark says he's in favor of more troops being put into Iraq:

"Clark said he wants more troops in Iraq, but was unsure who best can provide them -- the United States, Iraqis or other countries."



btw, Counterpunch is a GREAT site. But, it wasn't the source for Malloy's comments.

[KittyWampus]

12. First, You Forgot The REST Of Clark's Quote

"That having been said, I was against the war as it emerged becasue there was no reason to start it when we did. We could have waited."

Gee, if we'd WAITED the UN inspectors might have given Saddam a pass....

Second, it is unquestionable that Iraq requires more troops from SOMEWHERE to provide security for the citizens. We fucked things up royally and our forces, as they are configured now, are NOT SUFFICIENT.

That anyone would suggest that the US simply pull out its troops and leave the Iraqis in chaos, without arranging some sort of transition, is INHUMAN.

[eablair3]

16. doesn't matter - he admitted he is just like Lieberman and Kerry

he's put himself in lock step with Kerry and Lieberman. That's exactly what both of them say now.

Clark is the hand-picked DLC candidate with the backing of Bill Clinton, the greatest Repub president in recent times.

Where does Wesley stand on NAFTA, WTO, labor, Telecommunications mergers, etc? I'd bet he be exactly like Clinton, his hero.

[Jim Sagle]

13. Counterpunch is a notorius CIA-controlled phony left pub.

It specializes in ripping Democrats, all Democrats.

[Flying_Pig]

14. That is a lie.

They specialize in ripping radical Likudniks and hyper-militant Zionists, so of course, you wouldn't like them. CounterPunch is a great site, with some of the best, and most honest writers in the business. and if anyone reading this cares to check it our for themselves, and make their own decisions, the address is: www.counterpunch.org

[OneBlueSky]

8. read it in his own words, folks . . .

apparently all is not as it appears . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=11938

[Cascadian]

9. That did it for me!

I will not support Clark now. I had a strange feeling about him and this just confirmed it. I think some people are being led blindly. I really do. Just like Republicans who nominated George W. Bush in 2000!

John

[Nashyra]

15. I'm glad that here say does it for you

Anyone who is supporting clark or was actually considering him is still there and they are the same ones who are willing to work for the candidate who eventually wins wether it is Clark or not. All the absolute "that does it I won't support Clark" or I "thought" about him now forget it because I've read blah blah blah blah. Either you are serious about ABB or it is ok with you that * gets a second term, Clark and his handlers will make mistakes but the overall man is a 1000 times the man * is. This place is begining to remind me of the Nader folks last election. When we get the * out of office we can work on principles, easier to do do with a Dem or centrist or moderate in the WH instead of *

[mbartko]

18. Clark is not anti-war

How is it possible for someone to spend 33 years of one's life as a professional officer who has not only participated in, but also orchestrated wars? It's not possible. You can't work for R.J. Reynolds and be anti-smoking. You can't shoot up people at abortion clinics and say you're pro-life. To quote my favorite They Might Be Giants lyric: You can't shake the devil's hand and say you're only kidding.

I think many of us who are anti-war are so desperate to have a viable anti-war candidate that we are seeing them where they don't exist. Clark seems to me to be exactly who the neocons and the bipartisan, virtual "War Party", if you will, want us to vote for.