Clarck is not a warranty of better relationship with Europe and else.

[BonjourUSA]

In a French paper, he said the USA must be dominating. "To renounce our military empire doesn't mean abdicating our leadership over the world".

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lastliberalintexas]

2. I agree

Personally, while I would still vote for Clark if he were the nominee (at this point anyway), I think that our nomination and/or election of a military commander sends the opposite signal to the rest of the world of what we *should* be sending. It tells the rest of the world that we will continue to think we are supreme, that our opinions matter more than yours, and that we actually ARE a militaristic nation and that it wasn't JUST the Shrub administration you had to be worried about, but that you must also worry about our people. It also tells the rest of the world that we are mired down in thinking about 9/11 and that we will continue to let fear of the past rather than hope for the future guide us. I can only hope that doesn't happen.

Thanks for the international/Euro take on things Bonjour. Of course, you will be called a Clark basher by those who can't stand any criticism of their guy, and I'm sorry for that. Again, merci.

[patdem]

5. I think the rest of the world is more sophosticated than faux news watcher

I think if Clark is the president the rest of the world understands the domestic side of politics and if Clark then engages the rest of the world it will be proven that the voters used a smart agenda to get bush* out!!!

[xultar]

6. Criticism is fine but mis quoting is DEAD WRONG...the US is

a leader in the world and we shouldn't give that up, as is France, Germany and other countries. We should continue to be a leader and show examples for what it is to be a humanitarian society, sending food to countries without, sending medications to countries without, Leaders help those who are less fortunate.

I think you don't understand what LEADERSHIP means. If you want the US to send a message that we aren't leaders you'd be making a mistake, you'd also be sending the world the wrong message that we've got ours now you get yours.

It is sad that you don't understand such a simple concept.

[lastliberalintexas]

12. I said no such thing

And Bonjour did not misquote Clark. Did you see the word "dominating" in quotes in his/her post? If so, please point it out to me.

And I did not say that we should not continue to act in a leadership role, particularly in humanitarian areas. What I said is that a military commander being elected president may send the wrong message to the rest of the world, since many already tend to view us as rather militaristic.

Furthermore, most of Clark's supporters (if not his official campaign) have made his campaign about American's fear of terrorism and the idea that we need to "beat" Shrub on this issue. We should be making the election about more than this fear. It should be about our ideas, hopes and dreams for the future and how we can help in making the world a better place. That said, I think that Clark would be better than what we have now, which is why I am willing to vote for him.

But I also think Bonjour's post may have been in response to a certain *French* Clark supporter (who shall go unnamed ;-) ) who says with great certainty that we MUST nominate/elect Clark if we want to mend relations with the rest of the world. That other poster tends to speak in terms of absolute certainty about how the rest of the world can ONLY be won back over by Clark. Just my guess anyway.

(and in my opinion, you are a better credit to your candidate than that other unnamed poster is, xultar- your posts are almost always very thoughtful and analytical, rather than emotional rants)

And on edit- I'm not saying that I agree Clark thinks we should dominate the rest of the world. I am agreeing that Clark is not our "warranty" to better relations.

[xultar]

16. I agree, Clark isn't a warranty...but who is? n/t

Thanks for the kind words about my posts. I will say though it has been so difficult lately to keep my composure. I feel like there are so many kids posting trying to start things on purpose. I hate that because this is the first time I am planning on working for a campaign. From what I see here, I dont' think I'll wanna work. I'll just vote and that is it!

[KittyWampus]

47. Except Clark Is A Skilled Diplomat & On Familiar Terms

with European leaders, speaks exensively about rebuilding ties with our allies.

Most Europeans are intelligent enough not to equate Clark with the bellicose behavior that the US has exhibited in since B

Clark is also a proven leader, something that TRANSCENDS military, and that is most likely reason most support him.

That he can squelch any attempt of Rove to play the Military or Commander in Chief role is a big PLUS but not the only reason by a long shot.

There was a thread here not long ago about how many Clark supporters really cared about Clark's military background in an of itself.

His Service is a wonderful arrow to sling against Bush. And it is an arrow which Dean doesn't have.

[Code_Name_D]

50. If the above example is a sample of Clarks deplomacy

Than his praise is grosly unwarnted, and Clark is no where near the diplamat that he is made out to be by his supporters.

[FrenchieCat]

19. Did you get a link yet???

I haven't seen one. I read French...and would not post what something said without linking.....does DU allow that?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Spazito]

4. I disagree!

Clark has shown that he works within the international organizations, United Nations and NATO, he has spoken about the EU defense organization working with NATO. There is no question in my mind that Clark is very much a supporter of the US being part of a multinational effort, both in military and humanitarian terms.

Go to this CSPAN site, watch the videos, you will see he has been speaking in multilateral terms for years.

http://www.cspan.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=wesley+clark&image1.x=0&image1.y=0

[xultar]

7. Don't bother...anyone that gets Domination from Leadership isn't

going to understand anything at the CSpan link.

[Meritaten1]

8. Cite your source so we can read the full article

The information you provided does not list the source, the context or the the date of the alleged statement. You sound like a Republican to me.

Besides, could any future Democratic President have worse relationships with Europe than the present officeholder? So I don't think your premise is accurate either.

[BonjourUSA]

13. For francophone

"Renoncer à un empire militaire ne signifie pas pour autant abdiquer notre rôle dirigeant dans le monde".

"le droit de nous défendre inclut le droit intréque de procéder à des attaques préventives".

But :

"La prééminence de l'Amérique dans le monde nous confère des responsabilités en tant que pays dominant : dominer c'est donner l'exemple."

This paper is a copy of "The Washington Monthly".

[lastliberalintexas]

18. Wow- do you have a link for that Bonjour?

What you've got in quotes there IS a pretty bad statement, one that I haven't heard Clark make in the American press. I'd be curious to see when and where the statement was supposedly made, where the magazine got the quote and whether it was translated or delivered in French originally. I'm not doubting you Bonjour, just the media in general!

[KittyWampus]

45. Poster Said SPECIFICALLY "Washington Weekly"

so it is a translation of Clark's comment into French.

[bicentennial_baby]

9. Source? Link?

Can you back this claim up with some proof?

[meow mix]

10. bull

so thier gonna go "oh hes a general, hes bad"
haha
thats just dumb.

maybe some will base thier opinions on his actual performance. ya think?

[tjdee]

11. That's what Americans want to hear.

And that's who's voting in the election.

Clark DID NOT say that Americans must act like assholes, isolate themselves, and refuse to cooperate.

That comment was specifically directed to the people who he hopes to have vote for him.

[Zero Division]

14. Must be a mistranslation or misunderstanding.

I wouldn't be so hard on BonjourUSA, fellow Clarkies. I haven't seen him post much in a while, and so I wouldn't be so quick to judge him as another DUer caught up in blind hatred of Clark. He may just be very new to hearing and reading things about Clark. That said, I can understand the hostile reaction to what he said because of the few noisy anti-Clarkies who constantly post vicious smears against Clark and those of us who support him.

Indeed, Clark has never suggested that we should dominate, as in "bend other countries to the US's will". That would go completely against the numerous times he's scolded the Bush admin. for destroying our international relationships and called for repair of those relationships and a renewed spirit of cooperation.

Of course, I have no doubt that the anti-Clarkies will find some quotes somewhere that can be grossly distorted and taken out of context in order to make it look like Clark has suggested such a thing.

[Jerseycoa]

15. I think this is a valid topic to discuss

But you might show context in order for it to be taken seriously. Clark is a multinationalist in word and deed. European governments have shown their respect for him by granting him honorary Knighthoods, British and Dutch, and he was named a commander of the French Legion of Honor.

[meow mix]

20. exactly

and those facts dont match up at all with the crappy flamebait material from an obscure source.

[FrenchieCat]

17. Can we get a link....

on the French paper...since I am french, I can at least read it, Non?

I don't like a thread starting without a link....and yet saying what something says!

[BonjourUSA]

21. "Nouvel Obs" de cette semaine

J'ai chercher le lien. Mais il s'agit d'une copie du "Wachington Monthly", donc le Nouvel Obs ne peut pas le porter sur son site. Chercher sur le site du WM.

Par ailleurs, à part ces quelques phrases, le reste de son papier est absolument positif.

[BonjourUSA]

23. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0311.clark.html

You're right, The translation can be approximate.

[Spazito]

27. Thanks for the link BonjourUSA, it was very helpful

I think the subtitle says it all, imo

"U.S. soldiers are great warriors, but unwilling imperial guards. If we want to secure our interests, we must draw on other sources of power."

I would only add this link to a Clark speech entitled:

General Wesley K. Clark Remarks on Restoring America's Alliances

Council on Foreign Relations
New York, NY
November 20, 2003

http://clark04.com/speeches/012/

[FrenchieCat]

29. Mais, tu parle de quoi?

What are you talking about? You are taking selected phrases out of a 4 page article and coming up with your conclusion that Countries don't want Clark? Say What?

That's not what I read in the British, German, French and even Russian Press! What are you doing exactly?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0311.clark.html
Risky business

But in 2001, recently come to power in a disputed election, the Bush administration acted unambiguously to impose a more unilateralist stamp on U.S. foreign policy. The United States withdrew from international efforts to address global warming, the Kyoto Treaty. The administration made clear that it would proceed with national missile defense regardless of the U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty; the South Korea-North Korea dialogue was essentially rejected; and a new proposal to focus the United Nations on tightening sanctions against Iraq was dropped.

Even before 9/11, it was clear that U.S. foreign policy had changed tack, but responding to those grim events, the Bush administration definitively abandoned its "more humble foreign policy." Overnight the U.S. stance in the world became not only unilateralist but moralistic, intensely patriotic, and ....

the whole article is the exact reverse of what you are saying....by doing good will other things than using the military, Clark is saying that what is called a virtual empire...where you don't have to use violence to beget cooperation......If you can do good, you should.

[lastliberalintexas]

30. I think it's the translation

While the differences in the french quotes you posted and the English article link you provided are very subtle, they are differences nonetheless.

It's interesting to see the French quotes- I wonder whether that indicates how he is potrayed in Europe? Is he or any of the Dems seen as a good alternative to Shrub, or are they potrayed as just more of the same? Again, thanks for the French/Euro perspective on things!

[Kellanved]

48. they all are

Especially Clark and Dean get coverage in the European media. I'd say most Europeans are ABB, but we have nothing to say in the matter.

[Cocoa]

22. maybe it was leadership around the world

I would like to hear the European perspective on Clark, but I doubt his goal is as simplistic as dominance over the world. From what I've heard from him, he would understand that wouldn't work, adn he seems to be interested in what works above everything else.

[Jerseycoa]

25. A quote from 2001-2002

I think these give a sense of his global viewpoint:

The early successes have reinforced the conviction that the continuing war against terrorism is best waged outside the structures of international institutions-that US leadership must be "unfettered." This is a fundamental misjudgment. The longer this war goes on, the more our success will depend on the willing cooperation and active participation of our allies. We are far more likely to gain the support we need by working through international institutions than outside of them.

Source: Washington Monthly, "An Army of One?" by Wesley Clark Sep 1, 2002

The solution to terrorism is not going to be found in bullets. It's not going to be found in precision ordnance or targeted strikes. It's really going to be found in changing the conditions. It's going to be found in establishing a global safety net that starts with security and goes to economic development and political development and the kinds of modernization which let others enjoy the fruits of modernization that we as Americans enjoy.

Our best protection is not going to build a wall around America. It's not going to be to create a missile-defense impenetrable shield. It's going to be, instead, to create a community of common values and shared responsibilities and shared interests in which nations and people get along. That really is ultimately the only protection.

Source: Speech at Temple University, "America's Global Strategy" Oct 17, 2001

Wesley Clark on War & Peace

[Cocoa]

31. that last one is impressive

a month after Sept. 11, not a lot of people were talking like that, or the ones that were were probably dismissed as dangerous pacifists.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. Is Clark Supposed To Say He Wants America To Relinquish It's Military

Superiority?


That would be a real electoral politics winner.....

I can just see a candidate saying , "Geez, America doesn't need to be the number one military power anymore..."

He might get 30% of the vote and that's generous...

[phylla]

26. Just had lunch with General Clark, I asked

him about the War Crimes trial and whether it was a right wing comspiracy to keep his testamony sealed from public view. He said that because Slobodan Milosevic is representing himself, it was better that it was not publicized for security reasons and because having the Supreme Allied Commander questioned by him would give Milosevic the opportunity to grandstand and create problems...particularly since Clark was the victorious general and Milosevic was defeated.
So the story is that General Clark is fully on board with the 48 hour delay.
But what a great explanation he gave! He is inspirational, truly he is.

Oh,and this is my first post.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

33. Welcome to DU

:hi:

That's so cool that you just had lunch with Wes Clark.

[in_cog_ni_to]

37. Welcome to DU!

:hi: Lucky you! Having lunch with the General! Awesome. THAT is a question I have wanted anwered ever since I heard his testimony was made private. Thanks for asking it and reporting his answer.

Again, Welcome to DU! :hi:

[phylla]

38. Thank you, I have been totally adicted to DU

for quite a while.

The General today was just amazing..and I wanted to know the answer to the War Crimes question too.

I was sort of hoping that he would agree that the trial was sealed to keep him from looking like the true internation statesman that he is.

Oh Well....<sigh>

[BootinUp]

41. Green

with envy ;-)

Seriously, thanks for that story and Welcome to DU.

[BonjourUSA]

28. To the moderator

Delete my "Original message"

The original article in Washington Monthly is very much better than the French translation !!!!

Excuse me !!!

[Jerseycoa]

35. Don't worry

You don't have to delete. Just edit the topic title and it's all fine.

[Jerseycoa]

32. Definitely not "dominating"

BonjourUSA,

Here is Wes Clark's real position on foreign policy:

The guiding principle of our foreign policy will be to lead, not to bully.
This Administration has been all bully and no pulpit.

Simply put, this Administration is wrecking NATO -- and thereby doing incalculable damage to our security and well being. They have alienated our friends, dismissed their concerns, rejected their advice, and left America an isolated nation. I served in NATO twice, last as Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. I know its value, see its promise, and if elected, I won't let it be destroyed.

General Eisenhower once said leadership is "persuading the other fellow to want to do what you want him to do." When America led the world for the last half century, others followed -- not because we compelled them, but because we convinced them. America needs a President who can lead.

As President, that's what I will do. I will rebuild our relationships abroad and the alliances which maintain them. And I will strengthen them, so that we can solve problems together, so that the use of military force is our last resort not our first, and if America must act with force we can call on the military, financial, and moral resources of others.

Ten Pledges


I hope this helps clarify what you read.

[mikehiggins]

34. Good grief! One sentence?

If that is a translation of the article found at http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0311.clark.html
then it is really a good example of "Dean Diving" (the term used to describe all those folks who are so desperately trying to dig up something to hit Howard Dean with).

Read the article and then see if you agree that his point or conclusion is that the USA must be dominating.

My question is when did he get the chance to write this thing? Get back to the campaign trail, dammit! You don't even have the nomination yet.

Sheesh.

[Jerseycoa]

36. Adapted

From Winning Modern Wars.

[BootinUp]

43. Yea I noticed that too

What does that mean?

Like constructing something from different parts of the book? I haven't read the whole article yet. Probably finish it later.

[Zero Division]

39. I'm glad you understand now, Bonjour. Others: remember to read the

previous messages in the thread before you post.

Here's another quote from that article ( http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0311.clark.html ) you posted, Bonjour:

"An interdependent world will no longer accept discriminatory dominance by one nation over others. Instead, a more collaborative, collegiate American strategy will prevail, a strategy based on the great American virtues of tolerance, freedom, and fairness that made this country a beacon of hope in the world."

The interdependence of our world seems to be a fact that the Neo-Cons refuse to acknowledge. Like many Conservatives they seem to be stuck in a mode of thinking where the only kinds of relationships that exist are independence and dependence.

[arewethereyet]

40. wow BonjourUSA isnt it interesting

how people feel the need to tell you what you read with your own eyes ?

Forgive the Clark bretherin for this. They have become so accostomed to ignoring these Clarkisms that they assume that everyone should be able to do so as well.

Thanks for the illuminating insight !

[Zero Division]

42. Did you read all of the previous messages on this thread?

Did even notice that Bonjour implied by his desire to delete the original message the he eventually agreed that the article demonstrates that Clark suggested the exact oppositeof "dominating the world"?

Did you read the article yourself to see how obvious it is that Clark isn't suggesting anything like "dominating the world"?

Perhaps you have become too accustomed to believing anything negative about Clark without even looking at his statments in context or bothering to read what other Clark supporters have said in defense.

I agree that's it was not appropriate for some of the Clark supporters to immediately assume that Bonjour was just another anti-Clarkie, but it's posts like yours that help contribute to such a knee-jerk reaction.

[arewethereyet]

44. it was consistant with his actions if not his words

I tend to look at that. Seems a better indicator.

[Zero Division]

46. No it's not. What are you talking about?

What actions could possibly suggest that Clark wants the US to "dominate the world"?

[BonjourUSA]

49. Two readings of the Clarck's paper are possible.

I just read this paper again in its english version. My opinion is better than the first time. I understand your reaction but understand mine too.

Clarck takes a softer stand on the "American domination" but nowhere he says this preeminence must be changed in a partnership. And the last sentence : "America's primacy in the world--our great power, our vast range of opportunities, the virtual empire we have helped create--has given us a responsibility for leadership and to lead by example", can be read with an American eye :"We are powerful but good" and with an foreign eye "They are powerful AND arrogant AND masterful" even if for certain American (you for example) that can be with the best feelings.