No John McCain. No. I'll Tell You Who "Knows how to win wars"

[Schema Thing]

Wes Clark knows how to win wars.



He also knows how to survey the landscape. General Clark in 2006: I think it's likely that Bush will pull a "declare victory and come home" strategy in the 2008 election" (substance thereof).

[nc4bo]

1. Darn right he does that's what a general does, mcliar. nt

[Indydem]

2. You do know Wes Clark...

damn near started World War 3, right?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/671495.stm

[nc4bo]

4. The point is he at least has the experience to make military decisions..

He also knows the price to be paid for making bad ones.

What does mccain have to offer?

[wmbrew0206]

8. I think you mean "has the experience to make operational and strategic level decisions."

A private in the Army knows how to make military decisions. I'd also say that McCain probably knows the price of making bad decisions. We probably don't want to try and attack him on that track.

[nc4bo]

9. thanks for that and I apologize for not saying it as clear and eloquently as you.

But, how can you compare his military experience to that of a general?

To lowly little ole me, there can be no comparison but you're right, mcsame's experience and lack thereof remains untouchable.

[wmbrew0206]

11. It is dangerous to do this on DU, but

Everyone forgets that McCain had a battalion level command and picked up Captain (O-6). That is considered a very good military career. Now it doesn't compare to being a Combatant Commander like Wes Clark, but it still a lot more military experience than 90% of the military will ever get. My point is if we set the bar as high as the OP and say you have to be a Combatant Commander to know how to make strategic and operational level military decisions only a handful of people qualify under that requirement.

Also, as far as the consequences of bad decisions, I think McCain had a daily reminder of what those consequences are for 5 years after he had been shot down.

[Schema Thing]

14. whoa there.

you said:

"My point is if we set the bar as high as the OP and say you have to be a Combatant Commander to know how to make strategic and operational level military decisions only a handful of people qualify under that requirement."



I thought it was pretty obvious what my OP was about: General Clark really does know how to win a war. He did it.

[wmbrew0206]

15. OK, I don't doubt Clark's ability to win a war, but Clark is not running

OP was saying that to know how to win a war, you have to have been a Combatant Commander. Seeing is that there are very few people who meet that requirement, only Clark or Zinni would be able to use that arguement against McCain.

Unless Clark is on the ticket, which he won't be, or Obama picks Tony Zinni, the OP's requirement for winning wars is met neither by McCain or Obama. I think this attack line would end up benefiting McCain.

I think Obama needs to put the focus on the economy, gas prices, and the cuts to programs McCain would make. That needs to be the main points he hits McCain on. I think David Axelrod is spending too much time and effort trying to turn McCain's one (preceived) strength into a weakiness, where we are better off letting him have one strength on a second or third teir issue, and hammering him on his weakiness on first and second tier issues.

[berni_mccoy]

5. He didn't though. And Bush DID! With John McCain's help!

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. So did JFK.

[Schema Thing]

13. Stupid, pathetic criticism.

No one with an IQ over 20 actually believes "Wes Clark almost started WWIII" with that incident.


The suspect thing is why, when someone such as yourself trots this canard out, are you inclined to take the word of the one man, British General Mike Jackson, over the word of another man, General Wes Clark?

And really, not even the "word"... just the words he happened to use at that particular time, which of course does not convey his overall viewpoint on the situation looking back, but is rather just a snapshot of a very stressful moment in time.

I mean seriously, why are you such a huge fan of British General Mike Jackson (a fine man, I'm sure) over and above this guy:

(from the NYT)

An Army general who helped broker the 1995 peace settlement in Bosnia was nominated today by President Clinton to take command of NATO and all American forces in Europe.

Gen. Wesley K. Clark, who is now the commander of American forces operating in most of Latin America, would assume the European post in July after Senate confirmation and would lead NATO at a time of historic shifts in the Western military alliance.

Like the President, the 52-year-old general was reared in Arkansas and went to Oxford University as a Rhodes scholar, although it appears that the two men do not know each other particularly well.

Pentagon officials said General Clark owed his nomination chiefly to Defense Secretary William S. Cohen, who interviewed a dozen other candidates as well -- all three- and four-star generals -- before recommending General Clark to the White House this month.

''Apart from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, NATO is the most important uniformed assignment we've got,'' a senior Pentagon official said. ''Wes Clark has the soldierly skills and the diplomatic skills that make him right for NATO.''

General Clark would replace Gen. George A. Joulwan, who has been the Allied commander in Europe since October 1993 and has announced his retirement from the military.

General Clark is widely considered to be more scholarly and politically wise than most of his peers in uniform. He rose quickly through the military after graduating first in his class from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1966.

He is a veteran of the Vietnam War, in which he was awarded the Silver and Bronze Stars. He received his fourth star as a general in June at the age of 51 -- young for that rank.

He speaks Russian, which may be of use as NATO attempts to reassure Moscow about the imminent expansion of the Western military alliance. Russia has protested NATO's expected invitation to three former Warsaw Pact members -- the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland -- to join the alliance later this year.

General Clark also has an intimate knowledge of the situation in Bosnia, where American-led NATO peacekeeping troops have been stationed since December 1995. He was the senior military officer on the American delegation that forced the combatants in Bosnia to the bargaining table in Dayton, Ohio, and hammered out the peace agreement.

The NATO post would bring General Clark's involvement in the Bosnian peace process full circle, since he would be expected to oversee the American military withdrawal from Bosnia. The Pentagon has insisted that the American participation in the peacekeeping operation in Bosnia will end next June no matter what the consequences.

[jwirr]

3. Good answer.

[ravishane]

7. I didn't support Clinton's military adventurism

And thus want nothing to do with Clark. I understand that a war-monkey will get a lot of votes for Obama, but I have trouble stomaching these kinds of people.

[anonymous171]

10. That is why the GOP and the MSM tried so hard to destroy Clark.

[wmbrew0206]

12. Uh, no. Clark, fairly or not, could not be taken as a serious VP candidate

due to his departure at EUCOM and what Hugh Shelton, his boss at the time, said about him. I don't agree with it, but unfortunately it is the political reality.