2007: It’s Clark versus McCain

[IA_Seth]

With permission to post in it's entirety.

-----------
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10411

2007: It’s Clark versus McCain
By Gordon Suber

January 9, 2007

President George W. Bush will tell the American people why it is necessary to escalate the Iraq war, adding 20,000 American troops.

Writing in the Washington Post last Sunday, former presidential candidate (2000), Senator John McCain wrote that a small, short surge is a terrible idea. He advocates a larger number, for a longer period.

Writing in the Washington Post last Monday, former presidential candidate (2004) and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, Wesley K. Clark set forth why he believes a surge in troops in Baghdad is a terrible idea. He advocates diplomacy.

None of us knows who will be battling for the presidency in 2008, but what I know now is that when it comes to finding a solution in Iraq in 2007, it's Clark versus McCain.

The battle of ideas is between two heavyweights. Clark the Democrat. McCain the Republican.

Clark the graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point.
McCain the graduate of the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis.

Both men are decorated veterans of the Vietnam War.

After Vietnam, both men went on to serve America. Clark: A distinguished career in the United States army -- rising to four-star general. McCain: A distinguished career in the United States Congress -- rising to senior senator from Arizona.

Here is a portion of what each man wrote:

McCain: “The worst of all worlds would be a small, short surge of U.S. forces. We have tried small surges, and they have been ineffective because our commanders lacked the forces necessary to hold territory after it was cleared.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/05/AR2007010501810.html

Clark: “What the surge would do is put more American troops in harm’s way, further undercut the morale of U.S. forces and risk further alienating elements of the Iraqi populace.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/07/AR2007010700980.html

Americans have two major decisions to make in the next two years – and they are intertwined in ways that will affect our country for years to come:

First, which man’s thinking will best serve the American people, and holds the best hope for extracting our troops from Iraq?

Second, are these two men the strongest candidates their respective political parties can muster to continue the battle of ideas in 2008?

Gordon Suber is writing a political biography of Wesley Clark

[Cameron27]

1. That would be quite a match up,

McCain wouldn't stand a chance.

[Ladydawnelle]

2. American WAKE UP!!

Gen. Clark is the ONLY logical answer in 08 and the ONLY option to an Insane McCain Train that would surely occur.

I've admired Clark since long before the 04 election and followed his path. He's never strayed never tired and always with ONE main concern and that was for a better America and the protection of our American troops in harm's way (for NO reason)!

They don't just pass out those stars to just any grunt! I know as I served many years ago. You have to walk the walk to talk the talk! And This General is NOT a warmongering chickenhawk like MOST in the current White House.

I'm ashamed of them all. Especially the POW pushing for yet MORE death and destruction. I fear McCain's mental state has been degrading ever since his release from captivity. I wouldn't trust him to lead any herd of lemmings off a cliff.

[FrenchieCat]

3. The American people will continue to sleep and allow the

Corporate media to decide for us who the nominees shall be.

Dems will nominate good hair with calculated rethorics, the great charismatic smiler, or one who is married to a former President. It's just that simple. :shrug:

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[FrenchieCat]

5. "death Dealer"? Can you clarify?

You mean the General who won the war to prevent the Genocide of Albanian Muslims during the presidency of Pres. Bill Clinton, who's wife avatar you are currently sportin'?

[k_jerome]

6. i have nothing but respect for death dealers...

they do the job many of us will not. that does not change the fact that their job is killing people. oh, you only like to hang cute descriptions on the other candidates. i get it.

[FrenchieCat]

8. They who voted for the IWR are the real Death Dealers......

While General Wes Clark was negotiating peace treaties at Dayton in reference to Bosnia and drawing up plans to save as many of the 800,000 who were being macheted to death in Rwanda, what were you doing exactly to make a difference in saving folks from certain death?

[k_jerome]

9. General Clark was a life taker...

his purpose in life was to kill the enemies of this country, in between voting for his repub bosses. Don't be ashamed.

[FrenchieCat]

10. You are the one that should be ashamed.

His purpose in life is to defend our constitution against all enemies, abroad and at home....and I wish more would take defense as seriously....instead of allowing the President to become our dictator for the sake of political expediency in order to run for a higher office.

In reference to voting....he voted for more Dems than he did Pugs. In fact, he was with the majority of the country in reference to who became President every single time....except for Al Gore...who Clark voted for, but who did not get to serve his elected term.

See ya one day, but not very soon!

[Jai4WKC08]

13. The "purpose in life"

For all of us career military officers was to protect YOUR ass and your ability to call us "death dealers" at places like DU.

[k_jerome]

15. thanks. nt.

[Dinger]

18. Wes Saved The Lives Of 1.5 Million Ethnic Albanians

Please don't try and link Clark to the repukes. That shit is old, real old.

[k_jerome]

19. i'm not arguing for how many lives he saved...

just saying he took some too.

[high density]

12. So everybody that has been in the military is a killing robot?

That logic you're using there doesn't quite fly with me.

[k_jerome]

16. i didn't say killing robot. nt.

[Ladydawnelle]

20. how trite

So I guess my service to my country oh so long ago makes me a participant in death as well?

Shame on you!

Do your homework! @%^$ (delete non ladylike verbage)

Voting for BILLARY is no better than voting for a Hater PUG

[k_jerome]

21. the military kills people...

nothing wrong with that.

[Ladydawnelle]

23. Tucker is that you???

You sound as goofy!

DEFENDING A LAZY, FAT generally cowardly Nation has to be done by SOMEONE otherwise we end up living like scared little sheep in some far off sandy desert!

It's not at ALL about killing. I never KILLED anyone. But had I been challenged to defend my country while I served against an enemy that was coming to MY shores I would have done it.

I was against this bad right turn into Iraq from the get go! It was an illegal, immoral invasion. But dammit those boys and gals that got caught up in this mess MOSTLY didn't do it for the killing. I am sure SOME of the far RIGHT WINGERS kids that were brain washed into being HATERS way too young MAY have had that on their minds......... but NOT most of them.

If you can't distinguish between the two and still feel calling us killers makes you feel some how superior............ keep drinkin that KOOLaid dingleberry! I have no desire to try and save you.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. I thank you and all veterans who have served our nation

Thank you for your willingness to risk your own lives for the lives of others.

Our military is under civilian control. They do not pick and chose when and who to fight, rather they stand ready to follow the orders of our democratically elected government, and lately it seems to me that our career military has have been putting up a hell of a lot harder fight protecting our constitution than our elected civilian government has. Hopefully that will start changing now with Democrats in control of Congress.

[SOS]

30. "Death dealers"

On March 21, 1999, Hillary expressed her views (on Serbia) by phone to the President: “I urged him to bomb.”
-Source: Hillary’s Choice by Gail Sheehy, p.345

"We went through an evening of discussions. I called President Milosevic aside and I said, "Mr. President, you have to understand that NATO is very serious. You have to pull out the excess forces. If you don't, there's an activation order. And if they tell me to bomb you, I'm going to bomb you. Come on, Mr. President, you don't want to get bombed by NATO. You tell your generals to cooperate. You figure out a way to get those forces out of here."
-General Wesley Clark on PBS Frontline, discussing his role at Rambouillet in February 1999.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[k_jerome]

14. yeah, you? nt.

[Lex]

7. I'd love to see Wes Clark run in 2008. He needs to announce

or at least announce an "exploratory committee."


:thumbsup:

[GeorgeGist]

32. If by ONLY by accident...

Gen. Clark dies before 2008 are we doomed to ride the Straight Talk Express?

[FrenchieCat]

17. Oooh....Look what I found!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3048509

People on 4th level of "ignore" can't post in a thread that you start or a comment that you make. Guess this is meant to apply to the most ridiculous of those who are currently doing their "bit". :)

[IA_Seth]

22. Yeah, and I thought I'd never use it! n/t

[FrenchieCat]

24. I didn't either.........But I will only debate with those who are rational, not attempt to

deal with those who just have no sense, no matter what!

As Martha Stewart would say...."it's a good thing"! :)

[Dinger]

25. oooh....I Found It Too!

Must be my lucky day:)

[Ladydawnelle]

26. Vote at MyDD straw poll

So far the General is in 3rd place. Sure are a LOT of pretty boy lovers over there!

http://www.demochoice.org/dcballot.php?poll=DD0107

[Ladydawnelle]

28. Daily KOS poll

Of course Wes is in the lead here!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/29/123353/15

Poll

What Democratic Ticket would you most likely vote for in 2008
Clinton / Obama
0% 2 votes
Obama / Edwards
1% 6 votes
Clark / Edwards
23% 75 votes
Clinton / Edwards
1% 4 votes
Edwards / Gore
0% 3 votes
Gore / Obama
11% 37 votes
Clark / Obama
36% 117 votes
Clinton / Gore
0% 1 votes
Edwards / Fiengold
3% 11 votes
Obama / Fiengold
1% 6 votes
Clark / Gore
18% 59 votes

[Imagevision]

27. nah! At best, 2007: It’s Clark versus Rice -- Bush will never support McCain

Cheney to resign due to health issues after investigations begin to reveal too much -- Bush to replace with Rice and Negroponte to be boosted up to the secretary of state tag.

[Ladydawnelle]

29. I think RICE will be replaced for her incompetence

She's failed at every attempt at any negotiations everywhere!

but the Chainsaw Cheney part would be something they would TRY to pull.

I don't think his heart problems are as bad as they claim. It's always been an excuse to use LATER....... yea sounds about right for the lying liars!

[KT2000]

33. Clark needs to run!

He needs to declare soon.

He never says anything without knowing the facts that support his position. He is also much smarter than the media - he never allows himself to be cornered. He could win too!