The more I see of Clark, the more he worries me...

[TLM]

I started out liking this guy... somewhat. I think he would be a good VP. But I think that like many I was caught up in the whole image of this 4-star general that’s on our side for a change. Yet now, the more I see of him, the less and less I am comfortable with him.

First off this stuff about him being a republican and voting republican until just a few years ago concerns me. So far everything I’ve seen from Clark and his supporters has painted him as this great liberal progressive hope. I got the impression this guy was supposed to be a dyed in the wool democrat, an old school progressive and yet now I find out he was a f-ing repuke just a few years ago? So what, he underwent some massively profound ideological conversion?

I recalled someone posting a quote from Clark that was very complementary of the PNAC crew, that they were his friends and he’d work with them again. If someone could repost that, with a link, I’d appreciate it. I went looking for it and while I could not find that quote I did find some information about Clark’s actions in Yugoslavia.

What’s with the war crimes accusations? Is this true? Did he really order the brits to attack the Russian forces and have them flat refuse the order? Did he really order the bombing of a hospital filled with civilians because there were some soldiers hiding there?


From The Guardian, Tuesday August 3, 1999:

No sooner are we told by Britain's top generals that the Russians played a crucial role in ending the west's war against Yugoslavia than we learn that if Nato's supreme commander, the American General Wesley Clark, had had his way, British paratroopers would have stormed Pristina airport threatening to unleash the most frightening crisis with Moscow since the end of the cold war.

"I'm not going to start the third world war for you," General Sir Mike Jackson, commander of the international K-For peacekeeping force, is reported to have told Gen Clark when he refused to accept an order to send assault troops to prevent Russian troops from taking over the airfield of Kosovo's provincial capital.



Then I find this info that Clark is part of a group called CSIS with guys like Henry Kissinger and James Woolsey. :wtf:

Also a senior adviser at CSIS - (Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1800 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Fax [phone] ]
2000 CSIS budget, $16 million,
CSIS Affiliates: The International Councillors, a group of international business leaders chaired by Henry Kissinger, meets semiannually to discuss the implications of the changing economic and strategic environment. The Advisory Board is composed of both public- and private-sector policymakers, including several members of Congress. Zbigniew Brzezinski and Carla Hills cochair the board. The Washington Roundtable meets three to four times a year with members of Congress, executive branch officials, and other Washington experts to discuss pressing policy issues of the day. The Houston and Dallas Roundtables bring together local business leaders and CSIS experts to discuss current international political and economic trends.
CSIS Board, Counselors, and Advisers Board of Trustees Chairman Sam Nunn Senior Partner, King and Spalding Vice Chairman David M. Abshire President, Center for the Study of the Presidency, and Cofounder of CSIS Chairman, Executive Committee Anne Armstrong* Former U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain Members George L. Argyros Carla A. Hills Betty Beene Ray L. Hunt Reginald K. Brack Henry A. Kissinger William E. Brock Donald B. Marron Harold Brown Felix G. Rohatyn Zbigniew Brzezinski Charles A. Sanders William S. Cohen James R. Schlesinger J. Michael Cook William A. Schreyer* Ralph Cossa Brent Scowcroft Douglas N. Daft Murray Weidenbaum Robert A. Day Dolores D. Wharton Richard Fairbanks Frederick B. Whittemore Michael P. Galvin* R. James Woolsey Joseph T. Gorman Amos A. Jordan, (Emeritus) John J. Hamre* Leonard H. Marks, (Emeritus) Robert S. Strauss, (Emeritus) *Member of the Executive Committee Counselors William E. Brock Henry A. Kissinger Harold Brown Sam Nunn Zbigniew Brzezinski James R. Schlesinger William S. Cohen Brent Scowcroft Richard Fairbanks Senior Advisers J. Carter Beese Amos A. Jordan Bradley D. Belt John Kornblum James M. Bodner Robert H. Kupperman Stanton H. Burnett Laurence Martin Richard R. Burt Thomas F. (Mack) McLarty Wesley K. Clark Walter Slocombe William K. Clark, Jr. Robert Tyrer Arnaud de Borchgrave Anthony Zinni Diana Lady Dougan Luis E. Giusti Fred C. Iklé (Distinguished Scholar in Residence)




http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GOW309A.html



With all the shit that has been, quite justly, directed at Bush over his killing of civilians in Iraq… how can we throw our support behind a guy who did a lot of the same kind of shit. If even a tenth of this shit about Clark’s actions in Yugoslavia is true, this man should be in a prison cell, not the white house.

[meegbear]

1. From a dean supporter ...

this post really means a lot.

[Blue_Chill]

5. lol

I would also like to point out that the recent polls that show Clark defeating Bush head to head also show that Bush only breaks 50% against ONE dem.....Dean. Against every other Dem Bush gets less then 50% support.

[JaneQPublic]

15. That poll had a margin of error of +/- 4 points

The CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll you're referring to included only 877 respondents. That's a relatively small sample. Most national polls these days include at least 1,000 people, if not 1,200.

So within the margin of error, add 4 points to Dean's score matched up against Smirk, and you get 50. Take away 4 points from Clark's matchup score and you get 45.

Check it out:
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

[TLM]

6. Hey I was real excited about a Dean/Clark ticket...

even a Clark/Dean ticket.


But now this guy is really starting to worry me.

Doesn't any of this stuff bother you? This stuff mixed with how coy and vauge Clark is being, it is making me very uneasy about him.

[Tinoire]

10. Oh I will VOUCH for that

you and I even got into it about Clark so I will do you the favor here of vouching that you were really gung-ho and excited about Clark. I hope that instead of attacking you, people will address your concerns.

I believe that sfecap has the links you're looking for.

I have been extremely uneasy about Clark from the start. CSIS is just icing on the cake. His associations with Acxiom, Jackson Stephens, and the Markle Foundation are also worrisome to me.

Good luck getting answers... I don't have much time to post now or I'd help you out.

[PurityOfEssence]

21. Hey, and Clark'll VOUCHER for it

Just thought that needed to be said...

The only thing I see that Clark has going for him is the "he can beat Bush" factor, and there are many of the others who can do that too.

The desperation and salvation frenzy surrounding this man is even more irritating than the smugness.

[Tinoire]

11. dupe - deleted

[Julien Sorel]

12. I think after the 50th or 60th time you see it,

it becomes more tiresome than 'worrisome.' I'd have imagined you felt the same way by now.

[TLM]

19. I do not want to replace one power hungry war monger...

with another power hungry war monger, just because he has a D by his name.

[newsguyatl]

17. what a mature response

and look who it's from... again...


:eyes:


what a smart guy

[StephNW4Clark]

2. If you want the answers

...go to www.clarksphere.com and there's reams of research to contradict this.

Incidentally, Clark (as well as Clinton, Albright, Blair, Chirac, NATO head Javier Solana, German Chancellor Schroeder) were submitted to the international tribunal of Hague for an investigation into NATO's conduct during the Kosovo war and were cleared of any charges.

[TLM]

9. You sure.... I get a page not found error for that link.

"Incidentally, Clark (as well as Clinton, Albright, Blair, Chirac, NATO head Javier Solana, German Chancellor Schroeder) were submitted to the international tribunal of Hague for an investigation into NATO's conduct during the Kosovo war and were cleared of any charges."


So he didn't use DU weapons, or kill civilians, or bomb civilian centers? I'd point out that Bush also has not been found guilty of war crimes... doesn;t mean he didn't commit them.

[TexasEditor]

3. Profanity is lazy...

It's lazy to say "shit" over and over, try thinking for a moment. Profanity is also unnecessary to get your point across, which seems to be that Clark is a war criminal. So, what are the Serbs, who murdered how many innocent souls?

My dad has voted Republican all his life (he's 84) and plans to vote Democrat in the next presidential election, he absolutely opposes Bush, his administration and their policies.

Is that alright with you, if he switches parties this late in life?

[TLM]

7. Sure it is alright for him to switch....

But I wouldn't vote for your Dad if he were to run for the dem nomination.

Generals who switch sides for power worry me.


As for my use of the term shit... nice attempt to make this about me instead of about Clark, but I'm not interested in playing that game with you.

[leftwingnut]

8. yeah sure it's ok for your dad...

...but not for somebody who wants to become the democratic presidential nominee! no it's not ok.

[htuttle]

4. Listen up here

I haven't chimed on on any candidates one way or the other yet.

I'm about as leftist as you'll find on DU. I live in Madison, and am considered a 'leftist' even here.

I have my qualms about Clark. I have my qualms about Kerry. I have my qualms about Dean. In fact, the only candidates I actually 'trust' are supposed to be 'un-electable' (and to be honest, I'm not even sure the candidates I trust would be good presidents).

But let me put it this way: I'm fully prepared to vote for a candidate in the general election, and then turn right around and start protesting against them once they are elected.

Maybe that seems a bit odd, but such is the situation we find ourselves in. I'm voting 'D', even if it's Lieberman. If I find I don't agree with the next president, I'll be out there raising hell against them, but at least it won't be Bush.

Deal with getting rid of Bush first and foremost. Even if the NeoCons end up slipping a 'shill' in as a Democrat, the re-organization and change of administrations will at least delay their dark plans.

Or as I remarked to my still-Republican-but-now-Bush-hating brother: Lets get our country back, and then we can argue about welfare and taxes all you want. He agreed.

[bearfartinthewoods]

13. well that's fine for you but not what i want

we are NOT IN TROUBLE in this election.

we don't need a hail mary pass here.

we can make a choice of several candidates that can beat bush.

we don't need daddy Clark with his shinny uniform.

[SaintLouisBlues]

16. Yeah, it'll be a real cakewalk, this election

I hope you are correct, but recent polls not withstanding, there's a long way to go, and lots of Repuke dirty tricks between now and election day.

I remember the Duke being ahead in the polls before he was destroyed by Poppy in 1988

I believe Clark peels off enough of the white guy vote to make it a rout, and we must have a rout so as not to have a repeat of the last "election".

[scarletwoman]

14. Hear, hear! I'm with you.

"I'm fully prepared to vote for a candidate in the general election, and then turn right around and start protesting against them once they are elected." EXACTLY!!!!

I don't much give a damn WHO gets the nomination, for the most part I avoid the candidate love fest/flame fest threads like the plague. For me, Kucinich (and possibly Mosley-Braun and Sharpton) is the only one who actually addresses the ROOT causes of all that's wrong in this country, but I already know that there are too many political lemmings arrayed against him, content to make their self-fulfilling prophecy about his "unelectability" the reality.

I'm under no illusion that getting a Dem in the White House is going to automatically lead to any fundamental change in the "System" -- it won't. We'll still have the battle against the corporate plutocracy to fight, we'll merely have the most outrageous rightwing radicals out of immediate power -- which IS worth something, of course.

So I'll pull the lever for whomever the Dems nominate, knowing full well that it means very little in the Big Picture of how the Overclass controls and manipulates our world. Then I'll get ready to head back out to the streets...

sw

[jonnyblitz]

18. his supporters worry me more than he does. n/t

[UTUSN]

20. Nuggets from Somebody Who Knows CLARK Personally (not me)

My local radio wingnut talkshow host frequently hosts a retired military dude who teaches at a local university and who knows/worked-under CLARK. Shortly after CLARK announced, this dude was de-briefed of his CLARK knowledge as follows:

1) The dude was surprised CLARK took the Dem label as opposed to the Repuke label.

2) The dude said CLARK in person is "much more confident and self-assured" in person as opposed to how he comes across on t.v.

3) The dude said CLARK has NO "CLINTON problems" (penis problems), that he, wife, and son have these JUST STERLING, EXEMPLARY existences of pure accomplishment.