Who nearly died in Vietnam; Won our last war; called for rightful interventions & denounced others?

[FrenchieCat]

If you guessed Wes Clark, you are accurate.

This post is for those who don't know much about Wes Clark; those who want to know more; as well as those have supported him over time and as well, for his uninformed distractors.

This is to confirm that Wes Clark nearly died in Vietnam of serious wounds while committing valor; won our last war; and has publicly and privatly called for rightful interventions (Rwanda/Darfur) while discouraging others (Iraq/Iran) early and often.

And for these actions and others, I call Wes Clark an "action hero".

So, what exactly is a Hero defined, and what does the word really mean?

he·ro (hîr'ōoo) Pronunciation Key , n. pl. he·roes
2. A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life: soldiers and nurses who were heroes in an unpopular war.
3. A person noted for special achievement in a particular field: the heroes of medicine. See Synonyms at celebrity.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hero (I only copied No. 2 and 3 of choices at link as applicable in my eye)

And while there are some called heroes simply based on the fact that they just happened to be at a certain place or position when a calamity happens ....others are called heroes not due to simply being “there”, but based on how they react and the intent of that reaction, and the result of such. And so, some have done nearly nothing to be heralded as heroes, while others have done much.

And so based on my own set of criteria, I believe Wes Clark to be a hero, among others. Certainly, he isn’t the only one that I would bestow this (what I consider to be) honor onto, but based on something that I read this morning, I’d figure that I would write about him in particular......as much as been written about others “heroes” lately.

Here’s are some examples of why I say what I say:

In August 1995, the general—three stars, working as J-5 for the Joint Chiefs—went to Bosnia as part of the negotiating team Ambassador Richard Holbrooke had put together to end the civil war that had resulted in the massacre of as many as eight thousand Muslim men and boys at the town of Srebrenica the month before.

In Belgrade, Clark had met for the first time Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic, who was sponsoring the Bosnian Serbs. Now the team had to travel to Sarajevo. Told that the airport in Sarajevo was too dangerous to fly into, the team decided to drive and asked Milosevic to guarantee its safety on a road held by Bosnian Serbs. Milosevic did not, and so the team wound up taking a fortified Humvee and an armored personnel carrier on a pitched, narrow, winding mountain road notoriously vulnerable to Serb machine-gun fire. Clark and Holbrooke went in the Humvee, the rest in the APC.

In his book, the general describes what happened this way: "At the end of the first week we had a tragic accident on Mount Igman, near Sarajevo. were killed when the French armored personnel carrier in which they were riding broke through the shoulder of the road and tumbled several hundred meters down a steep hillside."

It is not until one reads Holbrooke's book, To End a War, that one finds out that after the APC went off the road, Clark grabbed a rope, anchored it to a tree stump, and rappelled down the mountainside after it, despite the gunfire that the explosion of the APC set off, despite the warnings that the mountainside was heavily mined, despite the rain and the mud, and despite Holbrooke yelling that he couldn't go. It is not until one brings the incident up to the general that one finds out that the burning APC had turned into a kiln, and that Clark stayed with it and aided in the extraction of the bodies; it is not until one meets Wesley Clark that one understands the degree to which he held Milosevic accountable.
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/01/who_fits_the_profile_in_courag.html

The Award for Silver Star reads, "As the friendly force maneuvered through the treacherous region, it was suddenly subjected to an intense small arms fire from a well-concealed insurgent element. Although painfully wounded in the initial volley, Captain Clark immediately directed his men on a counter-assault of the enemy positions. With complete disregard for his personal safety, Captain Clark remained with his unit until the reactionary force arrived and the situation was well in hand. His courageous initiative and exemplary professionalism significantly contributed to the successful outcome of the engagement. Captain Clark's unquestionable valor in close combat against a hostile force is in keeping with the finest traditions of the military service and reflects great credit upon himself, the 1st Infantry Division, and the United States Army." http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Wesley_Clark

It would take him another year of rehabilitation to recover from his injuries, which doctors had warned him would leave him with a permanent limp due to the large amount of muscle lost to his right calf. Clark refused this prognosis, teaching himself to walk again and to use his injured hand. He would go on to occasionally receive perfect scores on his physical fitness tests throughout his career. http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Wesley_Clark

People at his speeches can be heard to remark, "He's small" when he glides to the stump, but he's not really; he's around five ten and not so much diminutive as compressed, like a man who never exhales. His stride is at once jaunty and athletic and somewhat artificial, like the stride of a man who has devoted time to teaching himself how to walk . . . as, in fact, he has, after getting shot four times in Vietnam. Taught himself to walk again, without a limp, despite the fact that a quarter of his calf muscle was gone; taught himself to shake hands manfully, despite the loss of the muscle around his right thumb. He had to learn those things because, as his wife says, he was desperately afraid of being profiled out of the Army.
The only thing he couldn't do was teach himself how to play basketball again, because no matter how many hours he spent alone in the gym practicing his foul shots, he couldn't stabilize the ball. . . .
http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_2.html

and yes.....even in the year 2007-

How "They" Tried to Smear Wes Clark and how it didn't Work!
This is a follow post on a story that I have followed since January of this year on the attempted smear against Wes Clark by the "Powers that Be". We should recall that Wes Clark dared to discuss those uncomfortable issues that are deemed "Taboo", i.e., "Third Rail" in our politics; the powerful affects of the AIPAC lobby on our politics extending to both sides of the aisle.
Read the three articles at the links that I have posted below to find out how Wesley Clark changed the dialogue for the better with some steadfast courage, sacrifice, and a little help from some likemind bloggers.
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/03/how_they_tried_to_smear_wes_cl.html

and....
He was right about Iraq!
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/01/wes_clark_on_charlie_rose_on_s.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/01/gen_clark_working_really_hard.html

and Darfur,
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/02/clark_s_work_on_darfur_a_curre.html

and Rwanda
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/02/rwanda_general_clarks_involvem.html

and Kosovo
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/12/kosovo_was_about_genocide_not.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/11/wes_clark_wanted_boots_on_the.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/01/gen_clarks_band_of_brass_opini.html

and was one of the first to warn and educate us on what was PNAC
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/12/wes_clark_and_pnac_project_for.html

and the MIC
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/11/wes_clark_what_he_said_about_t.html

and spoke out long ago against media Conglomoration, something I’m still waiting for others to do....
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/12/wes_clarks_feeling_on_media_co.html

and now Iran
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/03/what_in_the_tarnation_is_going.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/02/too_late_for_iraq_but_on_time.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/02/possible_war_with_iran_is_just.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/02/join_the_wes_clark_and_votevet.html
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/02/maxine_waters_on_hardball_wes.html

Wes Clark has also Decried the "Don't ask, Don't Tell" military policy before it was cool; has been the only General to ever appear on the cover of The Advocate and to ever be endorsed by major Gay publications. He was the first to request Rumsfeld be fired (back in 2003), called Bush's 9/11 mistakes criminal (2003), and to call the Iraq invasion a blunder of historic porportions (2003). He accurately foretold what would happen in Iraq in 2002, led a Vet group to making political commercials that were key in Democrats retaking congress in 2006 (by attacking 3 GOP Senators up for election), to date has called a transition to one payer Health Care reform, and has hosted a series of informational interviews on Voting machines and their dangers to our democracy.

So yeah....far as I’m concerned, Wes Clark is a hero. :patriot:

[HereSince1628]

1. I suspect Clark didn't "win" the last war alone...

And it's a rare General that wouldn't be embarrassed by someone making that claim on their behalf.

If Clark actually felt that way this participant in the SE Asian war games would move his humility/credibility indicator lower.

[FrenchieCat]

9. I don't see where I said he won it "alone"......

and in fact here's one of the links provided....

"Boots on the Ground" not High Altitude Bombing in Kosovo was favored by Clark!
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/11/wes_clark_wanted_boots_on_the.html

Not only did Clark not win "alone"....I have never said he had.....and in fact, he didn't even fight the war how he wanted to.

"one of the things they have always said in the U.S. Army is that our battles are really won at the soldier level, at the crew level -- platoon, company. Above that level, the leader sets the conditions for victory. He can sure lose the battle, but he can't win it. It's won at the bottom. It was won when those tank commanders, Bradley commanders and gunners put steel on target. "
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/04/05/sprj.irq.generals.clark/index.html

[HereSince1628]

18. In the subject line. you ask who won the last war and then answer it was Clark.

Sorry to take it that way, but that seems to be a ready implication of what you wrote. And that really was where I was coming from.

I'm not trying to make any statement about Clark's personal opinion. I was just pointing out that it's rather unlikely that _any_ general would make such a claim, and at the same time it's just as unlikely that any veteran would accept it.

Indeed, rhetoric like "Who won the last war?" isn't repreresentative of Clark.

[IA_Seth]

25. Words from Clark's mouth...

I have heard him speak before, and what he said was something along the lines of "Generals don't win wars, but they can lose them. The troops are the ones who win wars."

Not a direct quote, but that is his take on his role as a General. He can be responsible for failure, but could never claim victory as his own.

Hope that helps.

[Jai4WKC08]

27. Oh nonsense

You would only interpret it that way if you are looking for a way to attack Clark and Frenchie's OP. No war is won solely by any one individual. It's the leaders, the soldiers, the diplomats, the economies, the technology available to each side, the media... many many different people and factors. It's so obvious, it goes without saying. Either you think Frenchie is too stupid to know that, or you are.

But it is not at all uncommon to credit the general in charge. Grant won the Civil War. Pershing won WWI. Eisenhower won the war in Europe. Etc etc. In that sense, Clark did win the war in Kosovo.

But in one important way, Clark was even more instrumental in winning than perhaps Grant, Pershing, or Eisenhower, because he had to prevail against the Department of Defense to implement his strategy. Sec of Defense Cohen and most of the Joint Chiefs did not support Clark and he had to keep pushing back to do what he needed to. No one tried to stop Grant, Pershing, or Eisenhower from winning.

[AndyA]

2. I'm concerned about Wes Clark's connections with Acxiom.

With all the revelations lately about spying, it's a bit unnerving.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Here's a post on that.....

You should read it since you are unerved.....

http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2006/12/wes_clark_lobbying_for_axiom_a.html

[Adelante]

6. From Tom Rinaldo

REGARDING ACXIOM:

Robert O’Harrow, the Author of "No Place to Hide" thinks well of Clark
Robert O'Harrow Jr. is a reporter for the Washington Post who wrote the Book "No Place To Hide: Behind the Scenes of Our Emerging Surveillance Society"

Here is a partial reveiw of that book from Publisher's Weekly which I obtained at Amazon.com:

"The amount of personal data collected on ordinary citizens has grown steadily over the decades, and after 9/11, corporations that had been amassing this information largely for marketing purposes saw an opportunity to strengthen their ties with the government. But what do we really know about these data collectors, and are they trustworthy? O'Harrow, a Pulitzer finalist who covers privacy and technology issues for the Washington Post, tracks the explosive growth of this surveillance industry, with keen attention to the problems that "inevitable mistakes" along the way have created in mainstream society, from victims of identity theft who have been placed in financial jeopardy to travelers detained at the airport because of the similarity of their names to those of criminal suspects. O'Harrow gives the government's push for increased surveillance heavy play, but he effectively presents the story's many sides, as when he juxtaposes the perspectives of a Justice Department attorney, a civil liberties activist and Senator Patrick Leahy in the first chapter."

As for O'Harrow and Clark, they appeared together at a Center for American Progress Conference sometime in 2005. O'Harrow said this about Clark and Acxiom at that event:

"...There is a guy that I think many of us in the room respect and admire deeply, General Clark, and he serves as a great example of someone who was deeply involved in representing a company called Axiom. And Axiom was one of those companies that responded with – I know that from my reporting – very patriotic motives. They had a lot of that as a marketer and they shared it and they shared it to good effect; it helped. They also saw ways that they could change their business model and become part of the security industrial complex. And one of the people that was helping open doors for Axiom in Washington was General Clark. The reason I raise that is because I kept finding that General Clark got to places before I did and people spoke admiringly of his ability to say what he knew, to say what he didn’t know, to play it straight, and to in every case do it in the smart way, which is why people respect him."

Clark speaking to O'Harrow at that event:

"Can I just say one more thing about this impulse to privacy that you’ve mentioned, Bob, because when I was doing this – and I want to say this because Nuala is here, because when the government starts working programs and it does know where they go and where they going they are always cautious because everybody knows that these programs that do data are very sensitive. Before the government could even get a grip on some of these programs, when the word comes out on them they are blasted before people even understand it. So on the one hand, I understand exactly why there is an impulse for privacy. People – companies like Axiom were told, “Look, you just can’t compete for this contract if you talk about this to the press because we don’t know what the program is and we want to have – we want to be able to –“ this is – I’m speaking for the government – “We want to be able to see what data you have available. We want to figure out if we can use it, and we don’t want to have to answer a million enquiries from the press about it until we get it done. Then we’ll run it through.”

You know, my instinct on it was a little bit different than the government’s, but I didn’t have any influence on them. I mean, my instinct would have to bring in the ACLU and to say, “Please create a group that’s sort of like a trusted group that we can bounce ideas off of and we want to run these ideas by you. And if you have strong objections, we want to hear them. We want to hear them right upfront. What we ask is that you will work with us in a collaborative sense so that – you know, you tell us before you run out to the Washington Post the next day and we have got (unintelligible.)” So, you know, we are just exploring ideas. We want to try to put this together and I do think there is a need for that. There is a need for enough privacy in governmental decision-making that the government can come out with programs and then have a chance to explain them, not to take anything away from the press because that balance is a dynamic balance. It’s fought by and maintained by hardworking reporters who make a lot of phone calls and get turned down a lot, but it’s a very important public duty.

So I am not sure if the balance is right is what I am saying. I don’t know if it’s right and that is one of issues we ought to explore."


Taken from:
“NO PLACE TO HIDE: WHERE THE DATA REVOLUTION MEETS HOMELAND SECURITY”

MODERATOR:
P. J. CROWLEY, SENIOR FELLOW, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS

FEATURING:
GENERAL WESLEY K. CLARK
JAMES X. DEMPSEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY
NUALA O’CONNOR KELLY, CHIEF PRIVACY OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
ROBERT O’HARROW, JR., REPORTER, WASHINGTON POST; AUTHOR, NO PLACE TO HIDE
“NO PLACE TO HIDE: WHERE THE DATA REVOLUTION MEETS HOMELAND SECURITY”
http://www.americanprogress.org/atf/cf/%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/0504transcript.pdf

[smalll]

17. I'm concerned about some people's continuing obsession if not

"hero worshp" of a (currently) relatively obscure political media commentator who IS NOT RUNNING for President!

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. Thanks for your concern, and also your KICK!

That relatively obscure media commentator has Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid's home numbers on his blackberry, has delivered the Democrats weekly Radio address three times, and got asked to run for President by a Nobel Prize winning former American President.

That obsucre media commentator had a damn full life with a number of very notable accomplishments before becoming an "obscure media commentator", and that same "obsure media commentator" regularly travels to the Middle East to consult with a broad range of leaders there about what would have to be involved to bring about regional peace and security.

And some times it seems to take an obscure media commentator to take the lead and do what none of our elected Democratic leaders were willing to do and actually spearhead a public effort to prevent a war with Iran.

And I'm just fine, thank you for asking.

[TheBaldyMan]

32. that relatively politically obscure commentator has been right about a lot of things

I don't agree with everything Wes Clark says but I always pay attention to what he does say because it is invariably worth listening to.

He's also remarkably politically effective for someone that isn't in politics.

Guys like Jimmy Carter, Wes Clark and Jon Stolz give the lie to all military types being republican robots.

[PresidentObama]

3. K&R

:kick:

[Cameron27]

5. K&R

Wonderful post as usual.

I have to go offline for awhile, so I'm bookmarking.

:kick:

[roguevalley]

7. Love and respect and support this man. KICK!

[Adelante]

8. YES!!

:kick:

[kimmerspixelated]

10. No argument here.

Wes Clark Rocks! He has the know-how, actually WANTS peace, and has some privy inside info, that would come in mighty handy if he should become prez!

[FrenchieCat]

12. Yes.....I believe that you are correct.....

But I think that the military industrial complex does wield a lot of influence. I'd like to see us create a different complex, .... we need to create an agency that is not about waging war, but about creating the conditions for Peace around the world. We need some people who will be advocates for Peace, advocates for economic development not just advocates for better weapons systems. So we need to create countervailing power to the military industrial complex."--Wes Clark, 2003
http://www.nhpr.org/node/5339

[robbedvoter]

11. The one I trust!

[bonito]

13. I'm voting for him whether he runs or not.!

[xkenx]

14. Not since Bobby Kennedy....

have I been so inspired by a public figure as I have been inspired by Wes Clark.

[FrenchieCat]

15. Don't mind me......I'm just kicking for now....

keeping up with those who would provide information based on folklore instead of facts and then run away! :hi:

[Doc_Technical]

16. I like what Col. David Hackworth had to say about Clark.

http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?command=viewone&id=35&database=Hacks%20Target.db

[Adelante]

23. It was very nice, he retracted that "Perfumed Prince" slur he made

RIP Hack.

[Sparkly]

19. Thanks, Frenchie!

:applause:

[Big Pappa]

21. So true.

[karlrschneider]

22. I'm in Oklahoma, the ONLY state he won in the primary. And I would give odds,

even though my state being mostly red and went to Boosh, Wes would have had a damn good chance. WAY more than Kerry did. Okies are pretty psychotic when it comes to elections but a lot of us liked Wes. A lot.

[Dinger]

24. If I'm A repuglican Looking At This, I'd . . .

give up,
cry to my mama,
go hide and suck my thumb,
start thinking about 2024 & after,
bash Clark and hope for the "best",
troll various DemocratIC sites/blogs and piss on any Clark thread I can,
get professional help,
take up thumb-twiddling,
etc., you get the idea.

:patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[wyldwolf]

26. Famous retired Generals for $800, Alex.

[Jai4WKC08]

28. It's a video Daily Double!

Ding ding ding...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcJmaLMTs-Y

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. A well earned kick for the research compiled. n/t

[windbreeze]

30. K & R

not much more one can say...thank you Frenchie, once again..
wb

[Cameron27]

31. Thanks Frenchie,

I thought I'd read almost everything about Wes Clark, but I never saw the Esquire article.

snip> "He is sitting in his office, eating lunch, talking about what might convince him to join the field or stay away. He is talking about running for president and saying that the mistake he does not want to make is the one that's most common: the mistake of finding the reason to run not in oneself but rather in one's opinion of the guy already holding office. "They look at him and say, 'Hey, I'm smarter than that guy. If that guy can do it, it must not be that hard.' Well, they're wrong. It's hard. It's the hardest thing in the world. So you better have another reason." It's not the lure of power. He's had power. He was arguably the most powerful man in Europe and definitely one of the most powerful men in the world, and so he is not lusting for power so much as he is weighing his desire to "make a contribution" against what he believes is the ultimate consideration for anyone running for president against George Bush: "how much pain you can bear."

Excellent article. It reminds me why I supported this man in 2004, and why I still do today.

[FrenchieCat]

36. Oh yeah....that Esquire Article really provided much info on Wes

.....t'was a great one! :thumpsup:

[jenmito]

33. I never would've guessed...

Because I already KNEW! K&R for an outstanding job of research! :yourock:

[Forkboy]

34. Damn...I guessed Gumby.

[FrenchieCat]

35. No cigar for you.......