Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is Saddam's capture a deathblow to Clarks anti-war campaign?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:27 PM
Original message
Is Saddam's capture a deathblow to Clarks anti-war campaign?
If Clark had his way, Saddam would still be in power. And as we all know, Saddam's capture erases the lies and justification for going to war, or any negative effects the war will have. How does Clark counter this? Isn't it a blow to his credibility? How can Clark claim to be strong on defense if he was against the war, and inevitable capture of the Saddam of Mass Destruction?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
slinkerwink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. and clark said the "world is a better and safer place without saddam"
did he forget Osama bin laden and Al Qaeda which still operates in Iraq?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
webkev Donating Member (267 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. and dean said..
Edited on Sun Dec-14-03 02:34 PM by webkev
This is a great day for the Iraqi people, the US, and the international community.


wasn't he against the war?


Clark will tell the american people that this war was never meant to be fought. wars should not cost 100's of billions of dollars. And Clark saved 1 and a half million people for under 4 billion dollars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #3
43. Dean against the war? Hadn't you heard about Biden Lugar???
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virtualobserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #43
52. yes, according to John Kerry
Dean supported a resolution that would have removed Saddam from power.

Therefore we should see a big boost for Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Dean forgot OBL also so whaddya think about that? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tameszu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
42. Can you not distinguish between the words "safe" and "safer"?
It's not that hard--basic logic, really.

Dean and Clark both criticized Bush for not capturing BOTH Osama and Saddam. Presumably both would agree that the world is safer and better for having captured Saddam, although obviously not safe.

Definitely call me for LSAT help! (If you keep this up, you'll need it)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Does this logic only apply to Dean?
Clark was against the war, correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
webkev Donating Member (267 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. yes he was..
but would have voted on a resolution to give shrub authorisation after rummy said he knew where 33% of iraq's weapon stocks are..

no WMD, therefore Clark is mighty pissed about abuse of our troups
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. Don't be a jerk. Holy Joe was talking about Dean he attacked Clark
yesterday.
WTF are you doing? So if Holy Joe doesn't include
Edwards
Braun
Kucinich
Clark
Gep
Kerry
Sharpton

You're gonna drag'em in. WHY DON'T U GO WORK FOR HOLY JOE?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Why are there so many "Dean is doomed!" threads...
yet, Clark, who is anti-war, get's a pass?

I don't believe the logic, just pointing out that the arguement is bullshit. chill out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wndycty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. Well at least someone is finally admitting
Edited on Sun Dec-14-03 03:04 PM by wndycty
Clark was anti-war. LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carpe diem Donating Member (769 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
29. that's a good point...
...Dean went out of his was to characterize himself as the only one who came out from the start against the war, even to the point of being dishonest about some of the other candidates positions, esp. General Clark's. I wonder if now he's going to want some company out there on the anti-war limb he's positioned himself on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. You took Liebermans shortsided statement and used it against
another candidate. You would have done better if you just started a this is a DOOM against the Clark Campaign thread. There are death and destruction threads against Clark as well today.

Don't be so sensitive. It appears that you guys can DISH but you can't TAKE. Toughen up sweetie pie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lastliberalintexas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Umm, no
kbf was, I think, responding to this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=905055

Neither of which is conducive to real debate- but I don't think that's what many supporters of other candidates are looking for today. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #28
36. But the logic doesn't hold. Just continue to be proud that DEAN
was anti-war.

Clark was never branded by the far left as anti-war so the logic doesn't work. If they were going to respond or try to make a point they could have done a better job or found a better source for a point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lastliberalintexas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #36
45. I never said that Clark
was anti-war, so I'm not so sure why you're directing that at me. In fact, while I would vote for him in Nov, one of the problems I have with Clark is his CNN cheerleading of this administration's War for Oil.

I was just pointing out to you that kbf's post was probably a direct response to some jerk supporter of another candidate who couldn't pass up the opportunity to bash one of our candidates. And I don't recall seeing your name on that thread as chiding *that* poster for his thread. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #15
41. If you are really asking, here's your answer:
Dean brought his back films to his nam exam then went skiing,
Dean has no foreign policy experience, and Dean wants to raise
everyone's taxes.

Clark got shot in Vietnam, Clark has tons of FP XP (and success),
Clark only wants to raise taxes on the rich (those making over
200K/yr).

Yes, Dean was anti-Iraq war...and yes Clark was anti-Iraq war but
Clark makes up for it on background, achievements, putting his life
on the line. Dean has none of that. Sorry, but it's reality.

Why bring a knife to a gun fight? (and yes, Dean is the knife).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #41
48. Doesn't it just show Clark's hypocracy?
Clark brought a criminal to justice, but the spin will be "If Clark had his way, this evil, EEEEEEEEEVIL man would still be in power!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyBrandt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #2
44. It's just easier to smear Dean on this
Like it or not, this is going to be a show-biz election where perception and reality don't often meet.

The word "General" will help deflect a lot of this. Dean will be more easily limned by the likes of Lieberman, Bush, et al.

Dean and Clark have similar positions. It's just that it's easier for Clark to withstand the mudslinging on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleDannySlowhorse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. I don't think this changes anything for any of the candidates
Clark included. There are no WMD's, the attacks on our troops won't stop, and we still haven't found bin Laden. If anything, this will emphasize the fact that Saddam Hussein was a distraction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shindig Donating Member (187 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #4
59. I agree!
An "obsession" is the word Clark has used to describe the whole Sadaam fiasco.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
5. WTF are you guys CRAZY?
The day is not about OBL it is about Saddam, Dean didn't mention OBL in his statement so does that mean that Dean doesn't care about OBL?

Clark counters this by saying what he always said. Saddy was never a threat. National security is still critical.
Saddy wasn't a terrorist, against us the threat still exists.
Clark is attacking GWB because he isn't attacking the terrorists...OBL.

WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shindig Donating Member (187 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
61. right!
As soon as the media is forced to begin reporting the next round of major casualties, we return to the question of why this particular dictator's capture was worth this much continuing cost to us in blood and treasure.

But timing is everything. It seems like sour grapes if any of the candidates say that today. Soon, they will again talk about these things. And we all right to keep asking the same questions we have been asking since the fake phoney lead-up to and war on iraq began.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stargleamer Donating Member (636 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. Is Saddam's capture a deathblow for the Dean Campaign?
The same arguments you make could be against Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Really?
That never occured to me after wading through dozens of doomsday predictions for Dean's campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lastliberalintexas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. Tisk tisk...
You know you aren't supposed to wage a battle of wits with unarmed individuals. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #6
16. Puhleez, don't go there, they will think you're attacking Dean and start
attacking you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
7. Of course not. It helps Clark.
It hurts Dean, at least in the short run.

"The national security issue will be Bush's trump card in the general election. The Dems need a credible voice on national security." That will be the conventional wisdom for the next few weeks.

Dean is the point man of the patrol on the anti-war issue. He's hit. The Saddam capture also douses Gore's endorsement substantially.

Clark anticipated this moment from the beginning (as we all did). We should be thankful this did not happen in October, 2004. Rove ain't happy. The underlying big picture in Iraq is unstable. That is why Bush played it so carefully. He knows he is sitting on a house of cards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemCam Donating Member (911 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #7
35. Thought so at first...but now
I think Wes Clark has just framed the issue in exactly the right way...once again.

Now the issue becomes...How does the United States deal with the trial of Saddam Hussein?

Do we use the law that is in place to deal with dictators who commit crimes against humanity? and thereby strengthen those institutions?

Or do we take the law into our own hands and try him in secrecy?

Wes Clark's statements focused immediately like a laser on what is now the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarkTwain Donating Member (902 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
11. Cute. Real Cute....
.... the premise of this thread has about as much grounding in reality as calling the Department of Defense to ask for a copy of Doctor Dean's military records.

Filed under light powder conditions. Beginner's Trail only.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. I bet they didn't want to play this card so soon. But reality bites
The war still isn't going so well and they needed a propaganda victory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
13. Let me get this straight...Holy Joe takes a swipe at Dean so Dean
supporters use it to Swipe at Clark and the other candidates...

I just wanna get that straight. I don't want there to be any mistakes about where you guys are coming from. I wouldn't wanna think all that ABB bullshit you were spewing after the Gore "nomination of Dean" was just applicable when DEAN WAS RIDIN HIGH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Dean supporters?
I'm just one guy.

If this hurts Dean because he was anti-war, doesn't it hurt Clark as well.. since he was, you know, anti-war?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. OH come on don't be so simplistic, you're embarrassing yourself n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Clark is my second choice, I'm not bashing him.
Don't be so sensative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #18
38. It won't because
Clark said he opposed the war because we lacked international support, Saddam was not a threat, and because we didn't do the proper post-war planning. His anti-war stance was fairly well-defined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carpe diem Donating Member (769 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
14. Clark can counter this...
...by saying that "only two people vying for the White House can claim to have taken down a dictator and liberated a people from oppression and slaughter and that is me and George Bush, however, in my war, no American soldiers were lost and the war was over in 2-3 mos at a small fraction of the financial cost to the U.S. No other Democrat can go head to head with George Bush on national security the way I can." When Bush is running his ads next year bragging about capturing Saddam, Clark can run his about taking down Slobodan Milosivec and neutralize Bush on his greatest area of strength.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomUser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. Oh that is lovely!
And welcome to DU :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarkTwain Donating Member (902 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
33. Beautiful point.
Right on the money in so many ways specific to the General and the bona fides he brings to the poltical battle. Unlike the presumptive, at least at this point, nominee whose own military credibility is, hmmmmm, somewhat lacking shall we say?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
34. So true, and winning in the Balkans ...
... got us Milosevic, saved perhaps 1.5 million people in imminent danger, cost no American lives, and only about $2B (about 1/100th the cost of Bush's mess so far).

Good post, and welcome do DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demobrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
19. Saddam's capture means nothing to any campaign.
The only thing that matters is what happens now. If the Iraquis throw down their guns and embrace the occuption, it helps Bush. If Bush declares the war over and begins bringing the troops home tomorrow, it helps Bush. If things continue as they are, nothing changes. So we'll just have to wait and see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. Agreed!!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #19
51. Another U.S. Soldier Died Today
Hussein was directing nothing from his hole. No communications equipment was found and no one put up a fight. In fact, the southern Shiites might now be encouraged to join the insurgents, as they won't have as much fear of Saddam returning, should they drive the U.S. out. I don't think there is a head to cut anymore by the U.S. concerning the resistance, making it harder to put down.

You are right. If the fighting dies down, if the Iraqis comply with every demand of the U.S. for a new style of government and society in Iraq, and if the bodybags stop arriving, Bush looks a whole lot better. But if the killing continues until November, Saddam's capture makes very little difference.

One wild card in the whole thing might concern the trial of Saddam Hussein. If he is publicly tried, and if he decides to tell all about his association with Reagan, Rumsfeld, Bush Sr. et al., it could blow up in Bush's face. However, I would expect from this administration a secret trial and the execution of Hussein perhaps just a few weeks from election day. The Bush Administration knows that Saddam is now a political tool for them to use, but may not yet know how to use him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demobrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #51
57. Saddam's trial could provide a very handy
distraction over the next year from the reality over there. Sort of like the untimate OJ, and that's what I expect. But the truth remains that we went in there for the oil and to establish a base in the region, and that hasn't changed. We'll just have to see if the Saddam show manages to hide the truth. I don't think it will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
26. Clark Hasn't Been Running An "Anti-War Campaign"
Who the HELL knows where you got that impression...

Dean's really the only one who made it his trademark to wear his SUPPOSED oppostion to the Iraq War Resolution on his sleeve.

I say supuposed because he can only CLAIM to have been against voting for it.

He is also the only candidate who has made attacking other candidates about their reaction to the IWR a centerpiece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. Neither has Dean.
But that doesn't stop people from thinking that.

Clark was against the war. Anything that can be used against Dean on this issue can be used against Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. Dean Has Made His NONVOTE On The IWR As His Trademark
HE has attacked every candidate on their positions regarding the IWR.

Dean made the decision to do this... it's his own freaking karma.

And Dean's supporters cheered him EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #37
49. Dean was right, and it was a major issue
But that's not all his campaign is.

Everyone predicted his support would go away after the statue crumbled. It didn't happen then, and it won't happen this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #37
56. What karma? I(n fact, what vote?
You're too funny, CS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #30
39. Actually, killbot, dear
Cryingshame is right. Clark wasn't against the war. That's pretty clear from his record. He only decided to give that impression once it was so clear that it was so attractive to primary voters and that Dean's posn ion the war was a winning one.

But you knew that.

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #39
53. Actually, Clark Made Quite A Few Consistent Statements About Iraq
before entering the race and Dean made quite a few inconsistent & inaccurate statements...

but never let Reality get in your way Eloriel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #39
58. Oh?
You mean that Clark really didn't mean what he said in that Salon article in March, 2003:

when he blamed the Bush Administration for not pursuing sanctions more aggressively, particularly Powell's idea of "smart sanctions";

when he said that in all likelihood there would be no beneficial democratic domino effect for the region from a change of government;

when he called the potential occupation of Iraq a "colonial presence";

when he stated the following: "...The most likely outcome is a stuttering instability in the region, intensified repression by some states, marginal moderation in others, and for the region more uncertainty..."

While it's true that in that same article in March, 2003 in Salon, Clark DID say that he knew the people in the Bush administration and that he thought they were basically good people, and he wished them well and wished for success in the actions they were taking, ...he was also blasting their impending ACTIONS concerning the war. A lot of people are hypnotized by these flattering statements Clark made about people he knew during a time when he was in the military and not running for partisan political office. However, they are being dishonest in failing to note the underlying criticism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shindig Donating Member (187 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #39
62. wrong!
What is pretty clear from the "record" is that he was against this war. The quote from his conversation with the reporter cannot be thought of as his record on the issue, while leaving out everything else on, including his testimony before Congress on the matter. If you include everything, not convenient for you i know, you see that he's on "record" as being against the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #26
32. Dean was labled as the Anti War candidate, every one here called
Clark a warmonger.

Everyone here has been so excited that Dean was the Anti-War candidate and Dean himself has attacked everyone on the IWR. Dean has painted his ass into a corner. It's no biggie. It is a non issue. The Dean supporters are making it out to be bigger than it is. You should take your candidate's lead and be happy that he's caught say bring the troops home and let it go.

Yet you are lashing out like a drowning victim. IT looks SAD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unfrigginreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
31. Have you checked with Mary on that?
Are you sure he was an anti-war candidate, today?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tameszu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #31
46. Very constructive </sarcasm>--but are you sure you want to compare
Clark's statements on the war with Dr. Dean's?

Biden-Lugar, anyone?

Go see Will Pitt for a synopsis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
40. According to the pundits it hurts them both... however Dean handled the
Edited on Sun Dec-14-03 03:01 PM by mzmolly
capture with much more grace... (again according to the pundits) I think it will help Dean in the end however ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
47. Listen to yourselves.
This is atrocious. The war was wrong and Dean and Clark both knew it. Sadaam was no threat; Bush lies took us there. He is the enemy of our world, not fellow Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
50. Obsess much? Third anti-Clark thread. Glad you admit Clark is anti-war.
Iraq is still a mess. Still a sideshow to the rar on terrorism. Clark still has a plan for Iraq and a plan to get Osama. Try to fixate on someone else, OK. I'm starting to understand your avatar choice here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virtualobserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. no one questions that Clark is anti-war
I think that the point was that the attack on Dean (from Lieberman) also applies to Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #50
55. I agree with you
and Clark is my second choice.

I'm not bashing him, it's a reponse to another thread with a similar title.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arewethereyet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-14-03 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
60. much worse for Kucinich than Clark but, its not helpful
Note Dennis' rapid about face on the 'leave now' stance he's been pushing.

It does hightlight that there is no need to get a REAL military man in there to 'get things done'.

Death knell ? Probably not, but it will facilitate his current fizzling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC