Clark WARNED us about Bush's plans for IRAN in the '03 debates!

[FrenchieCat]

Clark also criticized his Washington-based rivals for failing to take action against Mr. Bush's foreign policy. He said North Korea and Iran are accelerating their nuclear weapons development in reaction to the administration's "pre-emptive doctrine" and the Democrats in Congress are doing nothing to stop it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/09/politics/main577411.shtml

He also clearly stated it in his book.....about the 5 state US War plan I mean (PNAC).

just like he warned what would happen if we went to Iraq....

Wes Clark presciently stated would be the result of an Iraq Invasion back in September of 2002, and which Paul Wellstone felt compeled to include in his own statement against the Iraq War (giving Clark full attribution--of course!).

"But as General Wes Clark, former Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe has recently noted, a premature go-it-alone invasion of Iraq "would super-charge recruiting for Al Qaida."
http://www.wellstone.org/news/news_detail.aspx?itemID=2...

The Corporate Media finally admitted such in 2005!

War Helps Recruit Terrorists, Hill Told
Intelligence Officials Talk Of Growing Insurgency
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A28876-2005Feb...

Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground
War Created Haven, CIA Advisers Report
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7460-200...

CIA: Iraq Could Be Terror Hotbed
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/15/iraq/main6672...
-----

I only happen to post this because I was just reading an old post of mine, and realized that if we want to know what's gonna happen, listening to Wes Clark a few years early gives us a glimpse into the future pretty well....

Here's the original DU post for your reading pleasure:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1879608

[Lerkfish]

1. well, I predicted it too, and I'm not a candidate. No offense to Clark, it

common sense and reading the tea leaves that spell out "unchecked hegemony".

its MORE amazing that more people DIDN"T see it.

[FrenchieCat]

2. Did you say it during a Debate to a national Audience?

Just asking?

Cause that's what I'm talking about IRAN (not IRAQ)....

And I'm talking about the political folks who have a podium to actually state the truth as to what's what and be heard.....

[Why Syzygy]

4. No you aren't.

You're pushing a Clark agenda. Don't play coy.

WE KNEW IT! It does not take a genius to figure it out. That is not a strike in the positive column. A dimwit could figure this out. And that's what we have. They are just now going, d'oy, didn't see that. Well. That might be because they were out having dinner and sex and just didn't give a damn. Or someone was paying them to look the other way. Don't give me this Clark knew all along bs.

[FrenchieCat]

9. How am I being Coy? Please explain.....

And what did you know? Quote other leading Democrats and what they were saying about Iran back in 2003. Go ahead, make my day!

[Why Syzygy]

13. Do I look like a poodle?

Am I going to jump through your hoops? Nope. Don't think so. You go ahead and look it up. Support your position. I have mine.

[FrenchieCat]

14. Why are you even responding in this thread.....

thus far you look like you don't have a clue!

Find those quotes from other leading Democrats on IRAN predating October 2003 which discuss Bush's policies making Iran a more dangerous country.....

If you do, you won't look like a such a noodle!

[Why Syzygy]

18. 2nd answer

Because I intend to oppose Clark just as much as I oppose Bush. There will be no secret.
I'm sorry that there is the Clark contingency. I will oppose it. That's my duty and I'm sticking to it.

[FrenchieCat]

20. Here's your duty for ya!

At least you are letting us know who has the Agenda round here! :crazy:

[high density]

65. Yes, wouldn't it be horrible for a real liberal like Clark to be Prez?

:eyes: :crazy:

[Why Syzygy]

15. I really don't see how that is relevant.

I could go researching to satitisfy your desire. But I won't.

As far as I know, EVERYONE (at least here at DU) was saying look at Korea, look at Iran, look at China. They pose much greater threats than Ira*q. That was my impression. That's what I saw at the time and I don't need links to verify. If you weren't there, then there is no way to explain to you that people already knew that. It was swept under the rug, just ask George, so no one would pay attention and he could go ahead and have his way. IF Clark knew at that time why the hell didn't he oppose this? Why was he on tv with cnn and presidential debates and just act stupid? Why didn't he do something? Why did he not say, this is immoral. This is wrong. This won't help our security. Why did he not do anything? He's a GENERAL.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lerkfish]

6. no need to get huffy about it. my point was that it should not have been

that hard for anyone to figure out. I'm not dissing Clark, I'm dissing anyone who DIDN"T see it, whether they were standing at a podium or not.

[Why Syzygy]

7. well I agree with YOU

my reply was to the other post. Like it makes it so special to be at a podium?

I saw Clark in Iowa. He was in some cafe acting like a total idiot. He did not have one answer to any question anyone asked him. It just raises my hackles when progressives, if that is what they are, come out en masse to defend this man. He takes stage directions. That is it. Haven't we had enough of that?

And I am dissing Clark. At every opportunity.

edit: oh now I calmed down and see that you weren't replying to me. But enjoy!

[FrenchieCat]

10. Stick to the facts....please....

Saying that "everyone knew" doesn't really say much unless there are some links that everyone knew and quotes on what they said about it.

[Lerkfish]

17. whatever.

:eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

21. How so NOT profound.....

and so not worth a reply to.....

[Lerkfish]

43. considering you can't even be bothered to quote me correctly

I gave you the answer you deserved.

[Why Syzygy]

67. They aren't paying attention

never have. That is why I am so unimpressed with their choice. ho hum .. latty dah .. can't be bothered .. okay. that tells me a lot

[Tom Rinaldo]

68. Knock knock.

I made an effort below to put all hostility aside, and I appreciated your tone in that exchange. But here you are making a sweeping negative statement (written after that) saying "They aren't paying attention". And based on your perception of whoever "they" is you are unimpressed by Clark? I want to say this politely because I prefer we left this exchange on a better note, but you couldn't even pay enough attention to your own source material to get it right that Clark was an Independent before becoming a Democrat. You couldn't be bothered enough with accuracy to know what you were so emphatically talking about: "latty dah, got my facts mixed up...". I didn't see you apologize for making a false statement about Clark, you only conceded the point when it was obvious that your earlier comment was wrong. I could say, "ok, that tells me a lot". But must we go there?

I can look past my complaint with you not having paid enough attention to the basis for your false claim. Honest mistakes can happen. I can move on and hope for positive exchanges in the future, but not if you insist on making wholesale insults of Clark supporters. We aren't the ones who got our facts wrong on this thread.

[Why Syzygy]

71. I want to put hostility aside

forever. But please realize that when you down someone, they are going to have emotions about that.

That is what we are facing in Ira*q. We are over there bossing them around and acting like we have some kind of control. Which we don't.

Do you honestly think you can come on a message board and use the same tactics?

I'm pretty sure that at one time - 4 years ago - that I saw a Republican sticker on Clark. If that was a mistake, what do I deserve? Capital punishment?

I can promise you I will make wholesale complaints. I agreed to give him another look and I will, but I'm pretty sure I will see the same thing. I don't like him. Even if he came and gave me a big hug and smiled at me, I'm pretty sure I would not like him. I think it might be wise, if ya'll are serious about electing him, to consider other people's concerns. And a bat isn't going to get you very far. If you beat people up then just forget it. We are not going to stand in line for that any more. We had that with Kerry. We are sick and freaking tired of the beatings. Try something else.

But I'm in a bad mood generally, so that could be reflected in these comments. I'm 100% human and do go astray. Whatever. I'm sure we'll be friends later. Right now, I don't think so.

[Why Syzygy]

3. Didn't a lot of people say the same thing?

That's what I remember. No one but the neo-cons said Ira*q had anything to do with anything.
Oh yeah and the American public. They bought it. Somewhat.

Clark was not the genius on this issue. I'm just a numnut and I got it from the beginning. Should I be prez?

[FrenchieCat]

8. So why don't you provide quotes from other leading Democrats on

Iran and the Bush's administration's plan pre-dating October 2003? that would make me a believer that Clark wasn't speaking when everyone else was sitting. I'll be waiting....K?

Read this for further insight....
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2003_09_28.php (see week of 10/2/03 for the article and the discussion that I find interesting on the subjects of PNAC, Iraq and Iran.....

By the way, what's wrong with a pro Clark agenda anyways? I mean I see quite a few threads promoting other Democrats.....here at Democratic Underground. Isn't that a good thing? I mean 2008 is for a while now....so do you really mind all that much?

[Why Syzygy]

11. well yes I do mind

It makes me depressed. And I try to avoid depression.

No thanks. I'm not doing any current research. I already did and made up my mind. I don't see any new evidence that he is different now from when I first researched. This is not a gut reaction. And I am not alone. He turns a lot of people's blood cold. Spooky even.

Clark is not a Demorcrat. We are very few and far between these days. He isn't it.
If you can't see that then nothing I say can sway your mind. I know that from experience.

You just don't get it.

[FrenchieCat]

12. You don't get that your opinion is just that....and unless you can back

up your statements....then you get no respect from those reading this.

It is very easy to say....Yeah, Me, I knew...and so did everyone else....

But when you can't take the time to "find those who knew and said so" to back your shit up....then you lose credibility here at DU.

[Why Syzygy]

22. okay sometimes I hesitate

do you not remember that CLARK was NOT a Democrat in 2003? He swiftly changed his affiliation right before the 2004 election. He wasn't a Democrat. He was registered as a Repulican. But you know, you guys who idolize him just don't even look at facts. There is no way to get you to look at facts. I've seen this already. So. Foreget it. Choose Clark. I sure as hell won't.

[CJCRANE]

25. He was registered as an Independant AFAIK..nt

[Why Syzygy]

31. nope .n/t

[xkenx]

30. Clark was never registered as a Republican

I have seen his Arkansas voter registration. It was always independent until he registered as a Democrat in the early 2000s. People have posted it online before in response to gratuitous smears such as yours. Clark has stated that he (along with a huge majority of the country, including Kerry's cmapaign manager) voted for Reagan because, as a military officer, he perceived Reagan to be stronger on national security at the time. Clark also voted for Clinton, then Gore. Once he was out of the military and became interested in the political arena, he looked around and realized that his place was in the Democratic Party. As he says, it was really a "no-brainer" for someone who is pro choice, environment, labor, education, healthcare for all, affirmative action, and reduced defense spending. So votesomemore, you are certainly entitled to not support Clark, but all I have seen on this thread is a Clark-bashing by you, without the facts to back you up. By all means, post away, but try not to make yourself look ridiculous in the process.

[Why Syzygy]

33. sorry

ya'll are wrong. His voter's registration was online and he was registered as a Republican, until after he declared his run for the DEMOCRATIC nomination. If you care to look it up, go ahead. I've already seen it.

[FrenchieCat]

37. you mean this one?

btw, the "D" under party stands for D-e-m-o-c-r-a-t-i-c party.....(spelling to assist the DU Big Bird sector)

[xkenx]

38. IF YOU CAN FIND THAT AND POST IT, I WILL PUBLICLY APOLOGIZE HERE.

Why are you fabricating this stuff? What is your hidden agenda against Wes Clark?

[Why Syzygy]

44. it seems he was registered as an independent

so I offer that concession. But he was not a Democrat.

I did a lot of research on him in 2004. I liked Howard Dean but was seriously interested in what would be best for our country, so I looked into all of them. I found Wes lacking. As did other people who used to hang out here but don't any more. I don't have a hidden agenda. It is right here! Upfront for people to see. It just so dismays me to see our own party kind of thinking that he is a solution. Please understand. I'm not trying to be cruel. I just think that it would be a big mistake to make him our leader. I want to go with Gore. Or someone like that.

The pro-Wes contigent on DU is so strong. I feel I must fight back. I don't want that. It would just be a mistake. imnsho . and that's why we are here. to express opinions. Some get kind of nasty about it. And then I really don't like their candidate.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[Dinger]

52. I'm With You Frenchie

Some people . . .

[Texas_Kat]

62. Nope, SAME people .....

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[Why Syzygy]

66. you care so much you checked my profile

which clearly states I'm a Ms? You talk to me in genderless language and think I will pay attention? Gee. Why don't Democrats get anywhere. Could it be lack of personal contact.
Even though I take time to investigate whom I'm speaking to, you address me as Mr/Ms.
Isn't that intersting.

This is the point. Liberals expect to be treated as a one on one. You may be from a different generation. But where I come from, we pay attention. Don't insult me.

[high density]

69. self delete

nevermind, not worth the space on the server.

[BootinUp]

70. I showed up because I'm a Democrat

As to a progressive agenda, I don't know what that is. Seems to me that whats more important is a Democratic party agenda.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

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

[Texas_Kat]

60. Actually he was a "Democrat" in 1992

When he voted in the Texas Democratic Primary.

How do I know?... straight from the County Clerk in Bell County, Texas (where he was stationed during the time).

Since Texas has no formal "party" registration, whichever primary you vote in identifies your 'party". In addition, most primaries in the South are 'open' primaries. So he was a "Democrat" in 1992. The same way all Democrats in Texas are "democrats".

Arkansas had the same system until very recently.

For someone with such a weak grasp of the FACTS, you are remarkably opinionated.

[Why Syzygy]

23. so are you the spokesperson for DU?

I really really doubt that. Let people decide for themselves what is respect worthy.
Did someone die and make you DU god?

[Jai4WKC08]

24. Reminds me of the fundie Christians

If you don't agree with me on everything, you're not a Democrat.

Tell me something. If even a "dimwit" could figure it out, why did not ONE leader within the Democratic party (I won't call 'em Democrats, since only you and a select few are worthy of that title) said anything about it? Are they all stupider than dirt? Or all completely gutless? Which is it, hmmm?

[Why Syzygy]

28. It's hard to say

I don't know. I held my breath as Joe Biden gave Senate floor speeches. I am upset about the war.
I'm staying upset. No one will ever convince me that I don't need to be upset. I didn't like it from the beginning and of course I still don't. No "Democrat" tried to stop it, except Dennis Kucinich. The OP thinks I'm raging mad, and I almost am. I hate this. I don't understand why other people just go along. I would say they are gutless. And now it is tearing out a lot of other people's guts.

[Jai4WKC08]

32. Even DK didn't foresee the conflict with Iran

So he's either dumber than dirt or gutless too.

By the way, Clark was NEVER registered as a Republican. Never.
He was an independent, as are over 90% of Arkansas voters. And used to be, most military officers.

[Why Syzygy]

35. okay. well I saw the document online.

sorry you missed that.

[Why Syzygy]

36. Here's your link

Wesley Clark: Still Not a Democrat
Turns out the Presidential candidate hasn't yet changed his party affiliation as a registered independent in Arkansas

It may come as a surprise to some of his supporters, but Democratic Presidential candidate Wesley K. Clark still hasn't joined the Democratic Party. According to the Pulaski County (Ark.) Voter Registrar's office, the former four-star general remains a registered independent. Even though he has been a declared candidate for the Dem nomination for two weeks now, he has yet to officially change his party affiliation. Advertisement

A Clark campaign spokesman at first told BusinessWeek that the former general had in fact updated his voter registration to reflect his newfound status as a Democrat. But a call to the Pulaski County Voter Registrar indicated otherwise. When asked to explain the discrepancy, campaign consultant Mark Fabiani says Clark hadn't yet had time to register as a Democrat.

He adds that the fledgling White House seeker plans to make his Democratic status official as soon as he gets a breather. "This has been a whirlwind two weeks," says Fabiani. "There are a lot of things we have to do, and that's one of them."

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2003/nf2003101_0874_db038.htm

[CJCRANE]

39. Um, but you've just disproved your own allegation..?..nt

[Why Syzygy]

45. true n/t

[FrenchieCat]

16. Are you confusing IRAN with IRAQ?

just asking?

Ball of confusion has got you down?

[Jai4WKC08]

29. I think you got it

Reading those posts, confusing Iran and Iraq is the only thing that makes them half-way understandable. Of course, the poster is not about to admit the error. Fundies never do.

As for "dissing Clark. At every opportunity," well, that's just sick.

[FrenchieCat]

34. Well I did CAPITALIZE IRA"N" in my OP so that those who don't really read

could at least save themselves some embarassment!

Guess next time I'll have to see if I can use a bigger font so that even the Big Bird Contigency can figure out what is being discussed before jumping in with a belly flop!

Ira"N"

:shrug:

[Dhalgren]

5. Wes Clark is very astute, very knowledgeable. A good man...

[CJCRANE]

26. You're doing good FC, keep it up! Don't listen to the naysayers..nt

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. Yup, it's pretty clear who came onto this tread looking for a fight. n/t

[Why Syzygy]

40. Yes I will fight for the honor of my country

Will you? Or turn it over to a GENERAL? Like we need more military?

[CJCRANE]

42. Who started the last war of choice?

Not the Generals.

But the civilian chickenhawks, that's who.

[Tom Rinaldo]

46. OK I see your point. It's OK if a million Rwandans die as long as

no American soldier kills any of them. I gather the word "General" equates with imperialist murderer in your vocabulary and as soon as you see it that person is your enemy. Life is simple in a black and white world. Well fortunately for you civilians like Dick Cheney are calling the shots in this government.

[FrenchieCat]

48. Not only that....but in poster's world

Iran and Iraq are interchangable!

[Why Syzygy]

49. I never said that

And it makes it very difficult for me to see your point of view when you pull those strings.

That's what I've been trying to say on this thread. There has been no meaningful dialog. People just think they can jerk strings and someone else is going to dance. Let's not do that. Please tell me we don't do that.

But he did do some stuff in Kosovov and the murder college that I'm not very happy about.
Let him explain that. Or not. I wish he would just go get on television (which I never watch) and leave politics to others.

Nice other attempt to make me look stupid. Why is that necessary to Clark supporters? Is that the best defense you can come up with? That is junior high. Hello!

[Tom Rinaldo]

54. No you didn't say that. You said opposing a General was fighting for

the honor of our country. That was a pretty stark statement to make, there was nothing subtle about it. Well Clark was the General who drew up plans for the United States military to send forces into Rwanda to stop the Genocide there, but civilians refused to use them. I think that was a stain on the honor of our nation. A knee jerk anti-military statement is easy to throw out there, how many of us really think War is a wonderful thing? But hundreds of thousands in Rwanda waited in vain for U.N. forces, including American troops, to save their lives from thugs with machetes.

We got off on a bad foot here when you were sloppy enough to insist that a lie about Clark was true. Conceding that you were wrong is fine as far as that goes but entering a Clark thread to post a falsehood about Clark is not a good way to start a dialog. Stating that you are on a mission against Clark is not exactly an invitation to a friendly conversation either.

[Why Syzygy]

57. I am on a mission against Clark

I don't know any other way to put it. I have suffered from those who tore down my candidate, Howard Dean. So I don't exactly have sympathy for you on that one. I have read plenty of Wes love fest threads and never said a thing. I did this time.

If what you say about Rwanda is true, then I think he deserves another metal. But not the presidency. There is no way I'm anti-military. My son is a Captain in the Air Force. I'm not crazy about the idea, but that's the reality. I thought he had a good employer at least in George Bush. Now I find he has a miserable employer.

I will open my mind to the possibility of Wes. I don't want to, but I will. I can do that. But I sure as hell don't like people putting me down because I have an opinion.

[Tom Rinaldo]

59. I have been on record numerous times backing Howard Dean

I've frequently defended Dean from attacks on him both from Republicans and other Democrats. I really like Howard Dean also. I try not to engage in attacks on any Democrats right now, and I am not looking for threads to jump into and fight that are started by those who like Kerry, Edwards, Warner, or even Clinton for that matter. I always have good things to say about Feingold.

I hated those candidate wars also and hope we can avoid them. I accept and appreciate the sentiments that you expressed in your last sentence. I hope the next time we meet on a thread we start off on better footing, I won't hold any grudges and I will try to be clear that I don't think people should be put down for an opinion, but we are all responsible for how and where we express them.

[Why Syzygy]

61. It just scares me.

on 9/11 I so wanted Bill Clinton to come on and tell us everything was okay.
Instead we had bimbo running and hiding all over the place. Who knows what he was up to.
People say, get over the past. Well. That is easy to say, more difficult to accomplish.

So when I think about a presidential candidate I want someone who is like daddy.
He'll take care of things. I'm sick of this juvenile ner'do'well.

It puts a strain on all of us. That's one thing I keep in mind as I surf DU. We are under a lot of stress. And we need to agree on how to get out of it. Do you agree with that concept?


oh ps.. I don't think we are going to be able to avoid the candidate wars. It seems they are already here. I don't like them either.

another ps. Du is the only place I'm really allowed to express my political opinions. Other lists have no politics rules and god forbid you mention it to the family.

[Tom Rinaldo]

63. Well I agree that the state of the world puts a lot of stress on us all

And we sure agree that Bush is an absolute incompetent driven by misguided ideology, to say the least. The world is a scary place now, and the United States is at risk, more so from within than from external threats. We do need better leadership, that part is certain, and virtually any Democrat of any standing that I can think of can provide better leadership than Bush has.

What we need to agree on for now I think is that we have to help the Democratic Party regain control of Congress in 2006. That is a critical step in stopping the madness. Most of our leading Democrats, not just Clark, are out there in the country working to support other Democrats, but please recognize that Clark is fighting for the Democratic Party right now, and we do have to pull together to retake Congress.

[Why Syzygy]

64. I said I would take another look.

If he is fighting for our side then he deserves a lot of credit. Because it has been so long since ANYONE stood up for us. I'm sure we will take Congress. Those sorry sobs cannot have it anymore. The balance swings. I have to believe that. If not, then hello Hitlerville. And I just will not believe at this point that we would go down that road. I don't want to be wrong this time.

Thanks for your encouraging message.

[Moderator]

72. Locking

This thread is turning into a flamewar.