Wes Clark Is Steamed!!! Huffington Post Wes at swearing in of Palosi

[capi888]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/dc-notes-wes-clark-is-_b_37837.html

D.C. Notes: Wes Clark is Steamed, Jane Harman Isn't, and Terry McAuliffe is High on Hillary (Big Shock There, Huh?


At the packed-to-the-rafters brunch preceding Nancy Pelosi's formal swearing in, Melinda and I ran into Wes Clark (and I mean that literally; like I said, it was packed). Clark was really angry about what he'd read in this column by UPI Editor at Large Arnaud de Borchgrave. In the piece, which Clark quickly forwarded to my BlackBerry from his Trio, de Borchgrave details Bibi Netanyahu leading the charge to lobby the Bush administration to take out Iran's nuclear facilities, and paints U.S. air strikes against Iran in 2007/08 as all-but-a-done deal.

Read the whole article!!!

[FrenchieCat]

1. Whew....that ain't good. It seems like all that we hoped for.....

withdrawing not surging in Iraq......and talking, not bombing Iran is going in the opposite direction...which reminds me why I so dislike this President and all that he has done to date!

For a minute, I thought you were saying that Wes was swearing at Pelosi. I was going... :wtf:

I know why he is steamed....cause he knows exactly how the Middle East is going to react to that story, and it ain't good! :(

[capi888]

3. Dern Frenchie..

I tried to edit, and couldn't edit..waaaaa....I spelled Pelosi's name wront too...I guess I was in a hurry to get the news out...as it was just posted at Huffington ...so sorry!!!

[FrenchieCat]

5. You should still be able to edit..... (don't you get like 20 minutes or something ?)

did you hit the "edit" button at the bottom of your post?

[capi888]

22. Yes I did....but it wouldn't let me correct it...

I had already edited it once...when I went back...it didn't let me.

[Canuckistanian]

75. You're forgiven. Thanks for the heads-up!

Now don't let it happen again!

:D

[capi888]

79. Ok I won't

Thank You Canuckistanian...:dunce:

[kimmerspixelated]

2. well, good!

Maybe HE can lead the charge to stop the insanity!

[FrenchieCat]

4. Did you read the column that angered Wes so?

I pray Democratic presidential candidates will NOT support this shit.....and I hope that it becomes an issue of the Bush Administration vs. everyone else!

Writing in Ynet News (online Yedioth Ahronoth), Tira said, "We need to turn the Iranian issue to a bipartisan one and unrelated to the Iraq failure. Hillary Clinton and other potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party (must) publicly support immediate action by Bush again Iran."

As for target Iran, Tira voiced widespread belief in Israel that the Jewish state must coordinate strikes with the U.S. -- "and prepare for the Iranian response." Fearless forecast: It will be formidable.
http://www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20070102-125318-7565r

[capi888]

6. Thanks Frenchie for posting the article...WES read...

I was in shock...you are so good at this...Thank You!! This is really scary, and if Wes is angry thats saying something!!!

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. Any Democrat who supports an escalation of the Iraq war, will lose

in the primaries.

[FrenchieCat]

13. This goes beyond the Iraq War.....

[Tom Rinaldo]

68. That would be appropriate, but of very little solice

We have to do beter than punishing Democrats who are compliicit in allowing wars to start. We have to stop the war from starting. It's already too late by the time we are punishing a Presidential candidate.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

121. Agreed. Sy Hersch has been writing and talking about the

likely strike on Iran, in hopes of the awareness stopping it.

Is Wes going to throw his hat in the ring, do you think?

[JNelson6563]

38. Thanks for posting, I cannot see

any Dems (or many Rethugs for that matter) falling for this crap yet again. I think most people besides Little Boots actually *can* comprehend and recite the words "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me". Few will be willing to be fooled again and the public sure isn't going to like the idea of another war, no matter how cleverly the corporate media packages it up.

We need Dem leaders to stand up and loudly denounce this plan. This could be what brings the moderate R's back out too.

Julie

[Texas_Kat]

40. There are a lot of Dems I could say that too as well

"....fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"

I'm SO over the politics that exchanges rhetoric for principle, that trades political favors for policy, that ensures that political cash gets a political reward. All the while our families, our men and women in the armed forces and the world has to pay the price for the 'game'.

I'm not naive enough to believe that Dems aren't just as subject to manipulation and hubris as the Republicans are -- regardless of what we'd want to believe.

Santayana said it best: " "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." 

I will always remember who has acted on principle and who has merely mouthed the words.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

120. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it

It's the learning that counts, not just the remembering.

[Morgana LaFey]

52. I wish you were right -- unfortunately, even tho Iran has been mostly

on the back burner, I've heard too many knee-jerk sorts of supportive comments from Dems over the last several months.

[Donna Zen]

55. Who was fooled?

Many average Americans were fooled by the PR selling of the war. But of the congressionals, I reject the idea that many, if any were fooled. Bob Graham speaking on "The Darkside" Frontline, was not fooled, and from his testimony, was very clear about his stand when talking to Dem. legislators.

Many Democrats agreed with the Long War/Clean the Swamp policy.

In our press, there has been a gradual but steady ginning up of hatred toward Iran. And there have been Dem. presidential candidates who traveled to Israel to assure them that the U.S. could bomb Iran.

[calimary]

122. If we want them to stand up, we have to reinforce their backbones.

For your consideration:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3042082&mesg_id=3042082

[The Count]

119. But..."anti-war Edwards" thinks it's a good idea! And he's identical with Clark!

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1149572637421&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

[Clark2008]

126. Edwards is stealing Wes's words there.

Wes is the "carrot and the stick" guy. Always has been.

Yet another reason to discount Edwards - not an original thought in his head.

[Trajan]

130. Another unnecessary slap at Edwards ....

And I suppose you have evidence that Edwards NEVER had those ideas prior to Clark ? ....

Good think for Clark that we still like him in spite of his less-than-savory supporters ....

[Texas_Kat]

131. Quick google search

Waging Modern War: Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Future of Combat By Wesley K. Clark
Chapter 5 "Carrots and Sticks"

Published 2002

Didn't look for Edwards in 2002 or before since he was still promoting the Iraq war during that time.

[Trajan]

132. So ...

Wesley Clark invented the term 'Carrots and Sticks' ?

In fact : NOBODY has ever heard of a carrot or a stick until Clark invented them in 2002 ?

Cmon .. Get real .... and stop insulting our crop of decent Democratic candidates, AND their supporters here at DU, for such cheap shots ...

As I said: I wont let the insults from Clark supporters here dim my view of Clark, who is obviously bigger than they are ...

I am sure that Wes isnt so damned mean ....

Lucky for us ....

Well ... looky there: answer.com says the term dates from the 1800's .... Is THAT when Clark invented carrots ? .... :sarcasm:

[Tom Joad]

7. If aipac wants a war, who is the US to oppose it?

sarcasm intended. and yes, we can stop this war. in fact, we can stop aipac too.
www.stopAIPAC.org

[FrenchieCat]

11. Money in our politics is part of the problem.......

Wes said...
"You just have to read what's in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is divided but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York money people to the office seekers."

On both sides of the aisle, I believe is why the article in the Jewish press actually names Democrats in its insinuations.

[Tom Joad]

17. Funny that an prowar democrat was giving a press conference on

"ethics" yesterday. And the money just streams in from those who want war, and want it badly.

[FrenchieCat]

19. Who was that? n/t

[Clarkie1]

54. dunno, somebody I have on ignore. nt

[Tom Joad]

86. Rahm Emanuel. Was interrupted by peace activists.

[karynnj]

41. The division in the Jewish community is far less than

in the country as a whole. The neo-cons are a very small part of the Jewish population. In 2004 (the last election I saw the exit poll info from) Jews voted more than 80% for Kerry.

There is a hugh difference from the general Jewish American population and a Jewish neo-con elite.

[FrenchieCat]

45. So I guess it depends on who has the money.....to distribute and

whether they have enough to give away to influence whichever side of the aisle is required.....cause its the money aspect that concerns me, not how many vote Democratic vs. Republican.

Bottomline is that it takes very few with lots of cash to get done what they want done.

[karynnj]

57. There's a lot of truth in what you say

The reason I posted was to clarify that even among NYC area Jews (I'm in NJ), there was little support for the war. In fact, I could more comforably say what I thought of both Bush and the war at informal synagogue events than at any other social gathering that was not my personal friends. (ie work, neighborhood, or my kids schools.)

It actually makes it worse that it is not fear of offending a voting block, but MONEY. (As a voting block, we are 2% of the population and are a factor only in a very small number of states where we are concentrated.) It bothers me for the obvious reasons that what they want has been disaterous and morally wrong and it is wrong that money has that much power, but also because it is very scary to me that their sins will be considered the sins of all Jews.

[Jai4WKC08]

61. You shouldn't assume that "NY money people"

...are all (or even mostly) Jews.

AIPAC is not all Jewish, nor are the neo-cons, and neither are the big money people. It's a movement on the right, within the GOP, and is mostly fueled by evangelical Christians.

Like you say, most Jews vote consistently Democratic.

[karynnj]

76. I do know that - though it is true

that a number of prominent neo-cons are Jews. But as I said - most Jews are not only not neo-cons but very much against them.

My comment was to counter the idea that a significant number of Jews were neo cons. (Also most of us really don't consider Israel first when we vote - both parties are pro-Israel.

[No Exit]

94. That's true

But, after all, AIPAC is The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee.

I believe that there are some Jews who have some sort of misguided sense that "their crowd" is the only group that has any merit. This is also true of many evangelical "Christians".

Fortunately, these people--I am referring to disinformationists like Michael Ledeen, David Horowitz, Daniel Pipes, and our own Bush/Cheney adminstration neocons--are not accepted as representatives of what most American (or Israeli, from what I read) Jews think. (Viva Russ Feingold!)

I do think that this de Borchgrave is in with the neocons. Whatever he is, he is Moonie scum.

[femrap]

110. Isn't there a large part of the Jewish population

in Israel who want Peace? They want to live in Peace with the Palestinians.

However, the hyper-wealthy Jews of NYC seem to want nothing but War. And a war with Iran. What would this accomplish? Massive destruction of the environment...radiation everywhere. Is the revenge these people seek worth the annihilation of everyone? The entire planet?

To have so much money and be able to live a life of such grand luxury and yet want nothing more than to destroy hundreds of thousands of people as well as our environment....all for what? Do you plan on destroying all Muslims? Are Christians? Isn't living in Peace along side others worth something?

When does the cycle of Revenge stop?

Ask the Women in Black...

[Cameron27]

112. I think that's an overstatement and a broad brush indictment:

"The hyper-wealthy Jews of NYC seem to want nothing but War" ??????

[femrap]

117. I should be more specific...

those on Wall Street operating billion dollar hedge funds and investment houses who make billions off of war.

War is a racket...and many of the wealthy of all faiths or none want war to continue forever because it makes them so much money. So these wealthy use religion to get to the masses...it's been working for years. Just like using nationalism/patriotism has worked for years. Create Fear then keep the Propaganda machine pumping. And now that machine is owned by so very few. Thankfully, we still have the Internet.

Look at the power of AIPAC...referred to simply as 'The Lobby.' They have a media machine as well...broadcasting studio at their headquarters. All candidates must cow-tow to them for contributions. I don't know if AIPAC is part of war profiteers or just caught up in the religious fervor...probably a combination. I guess this planet's history is all about Religious wars...and I suppose one of them will destroy life as we know it. What a waste of intelligence. I wonder if humankind will ever see how organized religions are used to kill. I don't know which I dislike and distrust the most: Organized religions or Corporations.

But it's now getting to the point that wars can destroy the planet...radiation everywhere. Crops won't grow. Mass starvation. All over a fight about religion and/or nationality.

Greed is Greed. When the oceans, the crops, and animals have been destroyed, I wonder how that green paper is going to taste?

[capi888]

113. Most of the Jewish community in America are Democrats.

when WKC made that remark, it wasn't about Jews....it was about money from NY...which of course could have been from Corporations, Private people and even Legislators and people running for Election! Not all members of AIPAC are Jewish. I don't know WHY everyone thinks he was just talking about the Jewish Community...

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

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

[capi888]

133. Can I say ...

Lieberman is a prime example, ask why Ned Lamont didn't win??just askin':think:

[lala_rawraw]

24. its not just aipac, it is

The Saudis, Israel, UK, and US... a nice little group, don't you think?

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. Who is Bibi Netanyahu?

If these neo-cons so badly want war, why don't they give up all their wealth to build their own private army?

[UndertheOcean]

12. Former prime minister of Israel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Netanyahu

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. I never knew his first name was Bibi. His name always comes up

as Netanyahu, war hawk.

[Stinky The Clown]

29. His first name in English is Benjamin

I don't know if Bibi is Hebrew or a nickname. I suspect a nickname, since he's from Philadelphia.

[The Backlash Cometh]

67. Netanyahu is from Philadelphia?

So is Tom Feeney. What is up with the City of Brotherly love?

[chaz4jazz]

103. His name in Hebrew is Benjamin (imagine that).

Yes, Ben Ya Min is a Hebrew name meaning "Son of the Right Hand"

Bibi is his nickname. He came into prominence thanks to his heroic brother who was the commander of the commando raid on Entebbe Airport to rescue the passengers of an El Al flight that was diverted their by skyjacking terrorists.

Lt. Col. Yonaton (Jonathon, another Hebrew name) "Yoni" Netanyahu was the ONLY fatality when he was shot and killed by a terrorist from the tower as he conducted the operation on the tarmac. ALL of the Palestinian terrorists involved in the operation were shot and killed in the operation along with several of Idi Amin's soldiers who were assisting the terrorists.

All of the hostages were rescued though a few died in the operation and expired on the plane ride back to Tel Aviv.

Bibi Netanyahu used the martyred name of his heroic brother to climb to the top of the Israeli political scene and ultimately became a right-wing Prime Minister.

[The Backlash Cometh]

104. Has this Neti ever seen battle? Is he, gulp, a chicken hawk?

I thought I knew everything there was to know about Netanyahu.

[blm]

60. In the 90s the GOP neocons then were called Bebe's boys.

.

[NCarolinawoman]

33. I think he now is head of the Likuid (sp?) Party.

That is the right-wing extremist party in Israel. Many of my Jewish friends absolutely do NOT support this party.

[fuzzyball]

56. Likud will win in a landslide next election due to the

fiasco in Lebanon war.

[No Exit]

95. I don't get that. Olmert IS of the Likud party, and he presided over that fiasco.

I am troubled by what I see to be too close a connection between the extremist Likud party, and members or former members of the Bush/Cheney administration.

[No Exit]

96. A terrorist who is now treated as though he were a statesman.

Amazing how many of guys like that there are around the world.

[jaksavage]

106. He did

Cheney built it we are renting it by the hour.

[Texas_Kat]

10. Here's the most disturbing thing in the original article

''....And if Bush doesn't take on Iran, prominent Israelis are speculating that president Clinton 2 (Hillary) will do so."

http://www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20070102-125318-7565r

[capi888]

15. Interesting...

That they are naming names...??????????

[FrenchieCat]

18. Well we all know who's "tapping" in on the New York Money Bags.....

don't we; so it ain't no secret.

[capi888]

26. Nope it sure AIN'T

People better open their eyes and read these articles on WHO is being supported by AIPAC, and not by personality...We need a REAL LEADER!

[Superman Returns]

70. kinda off-topic

the article mentioned that if not for all the historical atrocities committed against the Jews, their population would be around 200 million. Anyone think thats true?

[Texas_Kat]

20. Note the plural "office seekers"

Hillary isn't the only one who's indicated that bombing Iran may be acceptable.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1149572637421&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

Note the trip sponsor at the bottom of the article.

[capi888]

23. Well Now isn't that interesting..

I am with Frenchie on this...we have to watch who says what...I just can't believe this..I am sick!

[femrap]

111. Wasn't Edwards a big hit at a recent

Bildenburg (sp?) get-together? In fact, he got a standing ovation...very unusual since those kinds of things aren't encouraged.

So by 'cleaning the swamp,' will this mean that AIPAC won't be able to offer these trips, etc?

Just how much $ does AIPAC supply to Presidential candidates? Looks like Wesley Clark isn't going to get much if he keeps pointing things out like he did here.

[capi888]

116. ALOT, and Edwards is a recipiant I am sure...

here is about JE:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1149572637421&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

in case you missed this one...here is another:

http://www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20070102-125318-7565r

Wes is not about money, he is more interested in saving our country!!! His knowledge,and experience speaks louder, then any candidate out there.
Country before Politics...OR money..

[venable]

14. He is right to be steamed

and I hope he lets dems on the hill know how angry he is.

somebody needs to light a fire under this congress.

This is a very serious situation. Bush MUST be stopped.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Well, guess we just have to look for the "signs" of whom says what

about Iran. Anyone talking Iran as though it is a separate issue from Iraq, we've are being warned; fuggit about them!

Cause this seems to be the strategery.....
"We need to turn the Iranian issue to a bipartisan one and unrelated to the Iraq failure."

[Adelante]

35. Wes traded in his Blackberry for a Treo

I know, I'm a small person :cry:

[MrRobotsHolyOrders]

25. Terry McAuliffe can eat glass.

His opinions should be respected and highly noted, all the way up until we place him in a rocket, and fire him directly into the sun. Maybe if the rocket goes off course, he can be a big grinning loser in elections in other solar systems.

Also, I bet there's a large group of generals just clamoring at the idea of a complete crackpot Israeli generalisimo lobbying about puting us into a new war with a better armed enemy, while our older, still deadly enemy runs partisan operations on our flank.

Otherwise, Wes, declare or pick a pony, because you're going to be needed to stop this fucking nonsense sharpish.

[capi888]

28. You can say that AGAIN..

This is insane...read all the posts with url's KAT posted this is getting out of hand!

[Contrite]

27. WES CLARK FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I NEVER thought I'd say THAT!!!

[capi888]

31. Proud of you Contrite!

Welcome! Sometimes it takes awhile but welcome abroard!!! We need help, this is serious stuff!!

[Contrite]

37. Thanks---better late than never!

Really, this is a SERIOUS wake-up call, here!!!

We need to get behind Wes on this!

[capi888]

39. We sure do...and Thank You...

for being so humbled...takes courage. It certainly is a wake-up call, I support Wes, always have, but when a new person jumps aboard, who may have disagreed previously, that means more then words can say. :toast:

[Adelante]

34. Heh

Shockeroo :pals:

[LittleClarkie]

63. Oh, he'd do.

I still have my personal favorite, though. ;)

Nevertheless, a steamed Clark is not a good thing. I'm glad he's on point and sounding the alarms.

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

64. How about, ... DEAN FOR VP!! :)

Seriously, that's a 1-2 punch!!! Afterall, both are the Dems -"Doctors of Strategy"!

CLARK/DEAN '08!

Never thought I'd say THAT, either !!! ;)

[Contrite]

91. I'll take it, in a heartbeat

Two men who can definitely lead, are "for the people" and that we can trust.

[capi888]

135. Good one KR

:rofl:

[Tom Rinaldo]

81. Thank you. We have to stop this war before it starts.

Clark has been been speaking out for diplomacy with Iran for years now. He's not afraid he'll be seen as being weak for saying war must always be a last resort. And that's not just a slogan to Clark. He conatantly advocates taking steps that can prevent wars. I pray to God he runs. Clark is never afraid to say what he believes must be said, even when it isn't popular. If he runs he'll be able to make preventing War with Iran into a major focus, I don't know anyone else showing that kind of leadership about Iran.

[Pithy Cherub]

30. Dear Wes - We need YOU!

This is so bad that it tracks to why a 'surge" is being pushed because troops would be stationed right next door. What are these lunatics thinking on FP, and there are no adults in the White House. Junior is on quest to cement his legacy to PNAC and there is nobody yelling, except Wes... The Israeli PM has an approval rating that might even be under junior's in the twenties and they are despearte to start a war. :scared:

Please keep speaking up Wes, please!:patriot:

[capi888]

134. More than EVER n/t

[democrank]

32. Every now and then sanity creeps in to the dialogue.

Frequently it`s because of Wes Clark.

[Cameron27]

36. They're out of their minds.

TALK LOUDER WES!

Looks like a surge into Iran is next on the list of debacles.:wtf:

[formercia]

42. Arnaud de Borchgrave

who used to work at the Washington Times. Hmmmmm....

[3waygeek]

48. Now at UPI...

which is (or was) owned by the Moonies. Also, he's an occasional guest on George Putnam's (a nonagenarian racist wingnut based in LA) radio show.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

84. Is George Putnam still around?

That would make about 150 years old, right? I remember him (already old) in the late 1960s. He was on local TV in Los Angeles and one of the earliest right wing crackpots I remember, long before Rush Limbaugh and the other kooks. The one saving grace I recall about George Putnam was that he stood up for Native American rights, which is an odd quirk of his I never understood, since he had an extreme right wing slant on almost everything else.

[No Exit]

97. Belgian-born disinformationist who is in with the likes of Ledeen and the Moonies

"Disinformation Agent
William Preston and Ellen Ray wrote a history of disinformation in the U.S., and observed:

The greatest assistance in disinformation – especially during the current Administration – is always forthcoming from the Reader's Digest. In 1977 the Times exposed Digest editor John Barron as having worked hand in glove with the CIA on a book about the KGB. Other fraudulent journalists like Robert Moss, Arnaud de Borchgrave, Daniel James, Claire Sterling, and Michael Ledeen, among others, seem to pick up disinformation themes almost automatically. In fact, coordination between the development of propaganda and disinformation themes by the covert media assets, the overt propaganda machine, and the bevy of puppet journalists is quite calculated. A theme which is floated on one level – a feature item on VOA about Cuba for example – will appear within record time as a lead article in Reader's Digest, or a feature in a Heritage Foundation report, or a series of "exposes" by Moss and de Borchgrave or Daniel James in some reactionary tabloid like Human Events or the Washington Times or Inquirer. Then they will be called to testify by Senator Denton's Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism, repeating one another's allegations as "expert witnesses".
After that they are given credibility by the "respectable" Cold War publications like the National Review, Commentary, and the New Republic. And finally, since they have repeated the theme so many times it must be true, they are given the opportunity to write Op Ed pieces for the New York Times or the Washington Post.
— William Preston and Ellen Ray, op. cit., pp. 7-8.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arnaud_de_Borchgrave

This info predates the current administration. Notice the laundering of "news stories" (wingnut propaganda). Does it remind you of something? Remember how Cheney, et al, would work hand-in-glove with propagandist/liar Judith Miller? She would write some LIE like the "aluminum tubes in Iraq" story, it would go in the lead of the NY Times, then Cheney would time an appearance on "Meet the Press" and would hold up the NY Times with the Miller story, and say, "See? This is the threat I'm talking about."

Reading about this technique taught me what laundering stories is. It's a method of propaganda that's been used by the Bush/Cheney maladministration, especially while they were lying us into the Iraq invasion.

[formercia]

99. The Great Wurlitzer

the network run by Crusaders to promote the Crusader agenda.

[No Exit]

102. Yup!

[jen4clark]

43. I'm freakin' out.

I've been scared of this for a long time, as General Clark warned us back in 2003 or earlier? of the PNAC plan. But reading this -- General Clark getting "steamed" -- drives it home. God help us.

[FrenchieCat]

46. Don't worry.....it won't happen unless this country is asleep at the wheel again......

and as long as enough, like Clark make sure that the red lights are flashing loudly enough so that we can hear and see. Anger makes news, and obviously Wes Clark is pissed......good for him and us.

[jen4clark]

49. General Clark being pissed

is what sent me over the edge. For someone like him to publicly acknowledged he's pissed is huge. Thanks for the reassurance, Frenchie Cat. Coming from you, it means a lot.

[Jai4WKC08]

66. That's a good point, Frenchie

When the General was speaking out against the IWR, he hadn't been retired that long (barely over two years, compared to 38 within the military system); he was used to advising behind the scenes and letting the elected leadership sort it all out.

He won't stop there this time.

[capi888]

59. I so agree Jen

I have the same feelings knowing Wes, that if he let it out, with a reporter there and didn't stop her from reporting his words, means, he has had it!!! Sick of the hypocracies of other candidates for their own goals, and not the welfare of the people of the U.S or their country.

[NCarolinawoman]

44. About two weeks ago Tony Blankly of the Washington Times predicted that

Bush would attack Iran before his term was out. This was on the Chris Mathews Sunday show.

The panel said he couldn't do it without Congressional consent. Blankly said "Bush might not think he needs it."

[Auntie Bush]

74. Since he's the Commander/decider/dictator- In-Chief he can do

any damn thing he wants. He has (or thinks he has) the power to attack Iran anytime he decides it's beneficial to him, his rich political buddies, big OIL companies and his legacy. Everything else be damned! He'll do as he pleases. He already passed a law saying he had the power in a signing statement.

He scares me and he's given us all good reason to be scared. He's going into Iran, many people are going to die and he'll make this world hell on earth for everyone. He's so stupid (witness everything he's done has been a blunder) he thinks all he has to do is bomb their reactors & facilities and he'll be rid of that nuisance, we'll be loved by the Iranians and he'll go down in history as the one who got rid of Iran's nuclear capibilities...end of story! Let the rejoicing begin!

Since he can't think or see beyond the nose on his face...he can't conceive the ramifications of his actions. The whole world is in peril!
Bush IS going to start world war III and Wesley Clark knows it. He's smart enough to envision what will happen...he's scared and so am I!

[Phoebe_in_Sydney]

127. just returned from a month in the Middle East

I was in Qatar, which is one of the US allies in the region.

But there are plenty of Iranians in Qatar (Iran is directly across the Persian/Arabian Gulf from Qatar) and they are delightful people.

I had an interesting conversation with an Iranian woman who said she was disappointed in the way women's rights had regressed in Iran in recent years (which was one of the reasons she was hoping to stay in Doha).

When I asked her was Ahmedinijahd to blame she said he was -- and declared that he is not popular with Iranians.

But, she added, whenever George Bush criticises Ahmedinijahd, Ahmedinijahd becomes more popular.

Name me a country that has turned on its leader after being bombed by a foreign power?

[lyonn]

47. bushco, PNAC, AIPAC (?), the list goes on, only know one

way to solve a problem, it's "bombs away". It looks like the internet is the only thing that can save our butts by getting this sort of info spread around. This is critical stuff....

Clinton (?), Edwards (?), who else is hell bent on protecting Israel instead of our own country? Why is Pakistan not being attacked, afterall, they have the "bomb" and are Muslim? So many questions.

[judy from nj]

50. Attacking Iran is a really stupid idea

If Hillary supports this, I would not ever be able to support here. Iran is 10-15 years away from having nuclear weapons, there is plenty of time to talk.

[CarolNYC]

51. Wes has been worried about this for some time...

I have seen him at events literally pleading with the attendees to push to bring the issue to the forefront in an effort to stop an attack on Iran before it's too late.

I think he thinks that if people are aware of what's being planned, they might be able to put enough pressure on the Administration to stop it from happening but people have to start talking about it and making it an issue...and start doing it yesterday!

[Clarkie1]

53. Clark needs to run if only to have his voice heard louder to stop this. nt

[Divine Discontent]

93. exactly! n/t

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

58. Neocons will take US to ME Regional WAR, just as OBL & AQ wanted!

Clark is right on is this dire concern!

Bush, Lieberman, Netanyahu, the AEI and all neoconic idealogues are now rabidly mad. Their intents stand against the core of American interests and undermine our national security!

US diplomacy is in dire need of REAL leadership! And I hope that Clark can salvage what's left of it by leading our country forward towards peace in '08 and beyond!! ~=/; )

[capi888]

62. Amen to that KR

Some people only are concerned about their own wants and not what is best for the People of the U.S. and our Country. We are in time of great crises, Wes Clark knows that...Country before Party..or Self!!!
His words will ring loud and clear, I hope it is not to late...

[dillydilly]

65. Hi Everyone - been reading here for many moons, but first time to post

We need to get this information out as much as possible and I suggest that we email Keith Olberman - he'll be p.o'd and will give some airtime I believe.
Keith's email is:

[e-mail]

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

69. KO needs to interview Clark! ....

I'm not sure if/when Clark's contract with Fox is up, but I hope it's soon.

However, Clark did recently appear on Bloomberg News, where he did discuss and critique this "surge of US forces" option by Bush, warning that it's imperative that the US plan include broader and greater regional diplomacy and dialogue, particularly with both Syria and Iran.

[capi888]

71. Hi ya dilly and Welcome.

Good to see you here. Good Idea! Better yet why don't you send it over. Some probably have already, so why don't you send it too!! :)

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

72. Arh,.. Pardon me' manners, mate ;)

Welcomes Aboard, dillydilly DU'er! ~=/: )

[kaycesf]

80. Haha! I'm with dillydilly, let's not dally and write KO!

I'm kinda new here as well. This whole game plan scares me. Wesley Clark has been warning about this from the get-go.

Ok. Writing KO now. If he would interview Wes it would be timely and important!!!

[Cameron27]

83. Hi, Welcome to DU!

It would be GREAT for KO to interview Wes Clark! I'm going to do a little email myself.:hi:

[kaycesf]

85. Well thank you seasonedblue! I just wrote KO and

gave him the link to the Bloomberg video as well.

Enough of us writing him to encourage him to interview Wes and maybe, just maybe he will do it!

[femrap]

114. Nice to have someone we can count on....

Keith Olberman.

Good idea, dillydilly....and Welcome to DU.

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

123. BTW: great idea: contacted KO at countdown@msnbc (n/t)

[Donna Zen]

73. The March of Folly

Everyone should Tuchman's book. From the inside of the rabid madness, everything looks sane. The world has borne witness to such folly before; collectively we muttered never again. But once begun, folly leads to further folly. Let us hope that they can be stopped.

Ironic, the Matthews was bitching the other night about the lack of dialogue before Iraq, and yet, it was him, Matthews and his collegues who promoted the national silence. And they are doing it again. Shortly after the 2004 election, Wes was on the Matthews show, and told him then, the MSM has a duty to bring bush's Iran plans to public attention. Here we go again.

"Bombing Iran will be a mistake of Biblical proportions." Tyler Drumheller

[BillORightsMan]

87. Yes DZ and the Dems won't "save" us

Check out this item at TomDispatch:
Let's Do It Again!
Doubling Down on the Imperial Mission in 2007
By Tom Engelhardt

~snip~

Every day, it seems, essential choices are being made in our names by our top officials, civilian and military, many of whom, as the year ended, only reaffirmed that our country is headed down an imperial path in the Middle East and elsewhere, a path based on dreams of domination and backed, above all else, by the principle of force. No matter their disagreements over the administration's Iraq catastrophe, on this, agreement has remained so widespread as to make all discussion of the basics seem beside the point. Despite recent failures on the imperial path, consideration of other paths remains almost inconceivable.

Naturally, the continual act of choosing the path we are on, and the hardly noticed Pentagonization and Homeland Securitization of our own society that goes with it are never presented to Americans as such. If no alternatives to what we are doing are ever suggested, then logic is with the doers, no matter the staggering problems on the horizon.

In fact, what we do in the world -- how, for instance, we choose to garrison the planet -- is seldom presented as a matter of choice at all. Either it's been forced on us by "them" -- the rogues, the jihadis, the madmen, the evil ones -- and so is the only path to our obvious safety (as defined by our betters in Washington); or it's so obvious that nothing needs to be done but reaffirm it. As in all Washington debates at this moment, what's truly important is simply to decide how to make that imperial path less rocky and those dreams of domination that pass for American "security" more achievable (or even, as in Iraq, less noticeably catastrophic).

End of introduction to sermon. Now to the illustrative texts and examples.

~big snip~
In Washington, this conundrum leads nowhere in particular. Instead, in the spirit of imperial-mission logic (and with the urge to bash the Bush administration for being late to such an obvious support-our-troops position), Democrats simply leaped onto the expand-the-military bandwagon even faster than Republicans. In fact, leading Democrats had long been calling for just this sort of expansion. ("I am glad has realized the need for increasing the size of the armed forces... but this is where the Democrats have been for two years," commented Rep. Rahm Emanuel, the new House Democratic Caucus chairman.) The Democratic leadership promptly pledged to make such an expansion one of its top reform priorities in the New Year.

Go read the rest. Plenty of links within, including Chalmers Johnson's "The Sorrows of Empire"

This perfectly explains why Rahm folded his tent upon hearing Cindy Sheehan & Code Pink chant "de-escalate, investigate, troops home now" at yesterday's big Dem "First 100 Hours" announcement.

Once again, General Clark is ahead of the curve...
:patriot:

[capi888]

88. OH SO Right n/t

[Donna Zen]

89. This line is important

in fact, what we do in the world -- how, for instance, we choose to garrison the planet -- is seldom presented as a matter of choice at all. Either it's been forced on us by "them" -- the rogues, the jihadis, the madmen, the evil ones -- and so is the only path to our obvious safety (as defined by our betters in Washington); or it's so obvious that nothing needs to be done but reaffirm it.

At one of his appearances for Steve Clemons, Wes talked about the strategic framework, which is what Johnson is referring to here. Clark said that as it is currently formulated, it is driving foreign policy which is dangerous, and he said, it is set up to lead us to the Long War. Anyone who is either afraid to challenge this thinking because of their own lack of credentials, or because they simply don't understand it, will inadvertently continue to take the country down the same path to war.

People project on other posters here their own brand of political support, thus all the calls of "cult" and Clarkies this and that. Actually, I know exactly why I support Wes Clark, and it has nothing in common with any simple like or don't like brand of politics as usual. I support Wes Clark because of how clearly he sees where we need to go; a rare set of skills and insights that have come together at a pivotal time.

[femrap]

115. Iran just had elections recently and

the party of the President was thumped pretty good. The people of Iran remember freedom and aren't too happy with this theocracy....especially the young and the women.

The worst thing the US could do is to attack Iran and stop this movement for freedoms by the Iranian people.

[Tom Rinaldo]

77. "How can you talk about bombing a country when you won't even talk to them?" said Clark.

"How can you talk about bombing a country when you won't even talk to them?" said Clark. "It's outrageous."

We can't be quiet about this. That's how the momentum for war with Iraq was able to build. The public tolerated all the Iraq bashing in 2002.

[Canuckistanian]

78. Netanyahu?

Man, I thought he was a political pariah these days.

Has that corpse risen again?

[Canuckistanian]

82. Haha haha, did you read this?

Jane Harman was also at the brunch, looking phenomenally fit and holding a bottle of water (you can always spot a Californian in a DC crowd; they're the ones carrying their own water. So to speak).

Damn Fine snark.

:thumbsup:

[Manifestor_of_Light]

90. You go General Clark!

I love him!!! What a great guy!!! Honorable men who have seen war want peace (unless they are certifiably nuts like McCain). General Eisenhower didn't want war; he'd seen it in Europe. General Clark doesn't want war either.

hotmilitarystud.com went to the WRONG guy!!!

BTW, my honey just happens to be the grandson of a certain General McLain. The one that started the Oklahoma National Guard and commanded the 45th and 90th Divisions.

[Divine Discontent]

92. you go WES!

I really hope he & Edwards are the ones to run for the Dems, they're my 2 faves, such a surefire win imho. Wes is a brilliant mind, and he speaks it without buttering it up, how AWESOME is that???????



www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable <<-- antibush prodem stickers/shirts

[annabanana]

98. from the article:

• ISG says, "The majority of the political establishment in Israel has grown tired of a continuous state of a nation at war." When even Israel's leadership sends out a message of fatigue and weakness, "why should we be surprised that the world agrees?"

Netanyahu then said Israel "must immediately launch an intense, international, public relations front first and foremost on the U.S. The goal being to encourage President Bush to live up to specific pledges he would not allow Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons. We must make clear to the government, the Congress and the American public that a nuclear Iran is a threat to the U.S. and the entire world, not only Israel."

[Sparkly]

100. Remember what Cheney said in January 2005

In an interview aired on MSNBC's "Imus in the Morning" show a few hours before President Bush's inaugural address, Cheney warned that Israel "might well decide to act first" militarily to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities if the United States and its allies fail to solve the standoff with Tehran diplomatically.

"Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards," Cheney said. In 1981, Israel sent warplanes to destroy Iraq's nuclear reactor.

"We don't want a war in the Middle East, if we can avoid it," he said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24677-2005Jan20.html

Ever since that statement, I was worried that it was a BushCo ploy to nudge Israel to launch a strike against Iran, and then claim that we couldn't help it and HAD to go into Iran at that point...

[whosinpower]

105. You know the article that Wes is upset about is total bull

I'm not saying that Iran is not an enemy of Israel. But the thought that Iran would actually use a nuclear bomb on Israel is beyond logic. Bomb Israel and you take out the palistinians along with the jews....and you contaminate the entire region for hundreds if not thousands of years. It is folly. Total folly. The iranians might be wanting nuclear weapons to even the odds because Israel already possesses such weaponry. And Israel wants to keeps its advantage or face actually having to deal with the palistinian crisis in a fair manner.

Anyone who gives the article any relevance is a wingnut, and I don't blame Clark for being upset, because it is these wingnuts that have the ears of government.

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

107. W's Neocons Foreign Policy still centers on Iraq, and desperation.

I agree;

"...But the thought that Iran would actually use a nuclear bomb on Israel is beyond logic."

I doubt that the neocons primary intent of preemptiion against Iran is about its nuclear program at all. In fact, it's my understanding that Amadinejad would neither have the power nor authority initiate a nuclear attack.

W and the neocons are desperate to salvage Iraq with some face of legitimacy. As they did prior to the Iraq war, their primary purpose is to sustain and generate more fear-mongering among their extremist idealogues against Iran for its "successful" destabilizing efforts via the Shia against W's blundered Iraq war strategy and ME policy.

[Contrite]

118. I think that is why he is upset

The assertions are bogus and Bibi is trying to make the threat real (along with the neocons)

[SOS]

108. Realistic threat assessments

point to a black market Pakistani, North Korean or former USSR nuke being purchased, smuggled and detonated.
Al-Qaeda has been doing practice runs of highjacking LNG tankers off the coast of Indonesia for three years now.
There are unlocked and unguarded chlorine tanks just a few miles from NYC. Even now, five years after 9/11!
And yet these f%cking idiots do nothing about these real threats and obsess endlessly about a non-existent Iranian nuke.

Clark understands. I hope he runs.

[capi888]

109. Yikes...more stupid moves by Bushco

Yes, agree this is really serious...our security is Soooooo lacking in U.S. and this bumpkin in office isn't doing anything....notta, notta!

hope he runs with my whole being!!

[question everything]

124. "New York money people"

Wow, new code words for Jews.

It used to be, way back in the 70s, when conservatives used the code word "East Coast Liberals" to refer to Jews.

Now we have Clark, or is it Huffington? coming up with new code words.

I wish I had the quotations from the pilot episode of "The West Wing," when Josh was supposed to have apologized to a right wing nut and she started using code words that sent Toby and then the President into rage.

[FrenchieCat]

125. Maybe it means folks in New york with big money that give to candidates!

I don't think that they are all Jewish, are they?

Also, it appears that Wes made the point that the Jewish community was divided on this (and he didn't say 50/50)... - So it doesn't appear that the Jewish community is the same as New York Money People.

Of course, I'm not Jewish, so maybe as a Black person, I miss the "codeness" involved. Maybe too, since it's new, I ain't familiar.

I know that Wes Clark's dad was a descendant from a Rabbi or something like that....so maybe he knows about this "code" issue that you are referring to.

Maybe what's bigger is that the issue of war against Iran is so amazingly crazy, until ain't nobody paying attention to PC codes right this minute cause they are paying attention to the actual message that Wes Clark delivered. :shrug:

[Cameron27]

128. I don't believe that Wes Clark

has an anti-semitic bone in his body, and I don't think he'd resort to code words.

[capi888]

129. That is NOT what he meant....

We have both Repugs and Dems involved with AIPAC...for financial support..and if you read about their influence in our politics you will see that Corporations, Candidates, Legislators...etc all get support from the money people. Not just NY, it all over...