Joe Conason: Clark Prepares For New Combat

[wyldwolf]

For a man disparaged by Republicans as a "weak" candidate, Wesley Clark provoked hysteria on the right when he finally announced that he would run for President. Conspiracy theories cropped up like noxious weeds, along with gutter attacks on this decorated general’s personality, integrity and even his sanity.

While conservatives often proclaim their reverence for the nation’s uniform, the right’s respect for veterans who have devoted life and career to country now seems rather selective. They didn’t hesitate for one moment to denigrate a man who gave 34 years to the United States Army, simply for daring to declare himself a Democrat and a candidate for the Presidency.

http://www2.observer.com/observer/pages/conason.asp

[jonnyblitz]

1. The right's respect for veterans IS selective!!

HOW TRUE THAT IS. I have been on the receiving end of their selective "love for veterans" at anti-war events. Tell them that you "were a troop" when they screech "support our troops" and you better brace yourself for the bile hurled your way...

[Pepperbelly]

4. I think that I recall you ...

saying that you were Navy enlisted. Me, too! Tail end of Viet Nam, 7th Fleet.

Thes guys make my dick hurt.

[jonnyblitz]

7. I have much respect

For vets who served in that war. I just recently read an interesting book about Vietnam vets and their involvment in the anti-war movement back then. I had no idea the degree and extent of it. The name of the book is "The New Winter Soldiers: Gi and Veteran Dissen During the Vietnam Era (Perspectives in the Sixties) by Richard B. Moser." My brief war experience (Desert Storm, USS Missouri)I am most certain was a cake walk in comparison. :hi:

Anyways check this book out if you havent read it:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0813522420/qid=1064758168/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/104-1389818-0191105?v=glance&s=books

sorry to get a bit off topic.

[jumptheshadow]

2. Conason is often right on target

And he and Wesley Clark were two of the all too few voices of sanity during the buildup to the war. I particularly liked his citation of Clark in October of last year:

>>Still, there can be little doubt about Mr. Clark’s basic approach to security policy, or his deep differences with the President. He has outlined their disagreement many times. In dealing with Saddam, he wrote in a prescient essay for CNN last October, the United States must act "multilaterally, with friends and allies, with every possible effort to avoid the appearance of yet another Christian and Jewish stab at an Islamic country, with force as a last resort, and with a post-conflict plan in place to assure that the consequences of our action do not supercharge the al-Qaeda recruiting machine. It’s not just about winning a war—it’s also about winning the peace."<<

This does not sound like a man who is a neocon's wet dream.

[BJ]

3. Clark will make an excellent Sec. of State or Defence

(-snip-)
"As for his nascent campaign, there are plenty of pertinent complaints. He dithered for months before deciding to run, but didn’t develop any platform on domestic issues during those prolonged deliberations. He has expressed progressive opinions on affirmative action and health care—but is unprepared to speak about capital punishment and gun control, let alone the budget and the economy."
(-snip-)
Link

O', I know, he has an economic plan, yady-yady-yadda. I cursorily compared Clark's economic plan with that of John Kerry and really don't see that much difference. Thus far, I'm afraid I'm at a loss to understand the General's sudden popularity. In that respect, to me at least, he is much like Dean.

[Pepperbelly]

5. A slight correction ...

He would be a great SECDEF or SECSTATE IF he doesn't win the Presidency. :D

[bfusco]

6. This is one more example

of the hypocrisy of the right. The far right stands for their ideological and extreme agenda and how to advance it. All their so called principles are hollow and they fall by the way side when something goes against it. The list can go on and on from claiming that celebrates have no right to express an opinion against a Republican President's war and then back a Republican actor for governor. Claiming it's unpatriotic to criticize Bush's war when they were all out criticizing Clinton's actions in Kosovo. Crying foul when a senator leaves the Republican Party while ignoring the fact that they have welcomed turn coats such as Shelby into their ranks. Claiming the character high ground against Clinton's short comings when it becomes obvious they are just as guilty as philandering and then go and nominate a dry drunk/drunk driver who evaded service in Vietnam and was AWOL along with his VP who had 2 DUI's.

Clark was one of a handful of military perspectives that should have been listened to; along with individuals such as Tony Zinni, Brent Scowcroft, Eric Shinseki who gave very sobering perspectives of what going into Iraq would involve.