A General Endorsement

Top 3. Oct 31, 2003 8:29 AM

» dcantrell - I know I don't admire the general!

In response to message posted by JohnRutherford:

I don't think the general knows what his plan is. He has made comments, taken them back, and changed his mind so many times that it should make him dizzy.

At first he supported the war in Iraq, and praised the administration. Now he says he would not have supported the war and that it was a mistake.

If he is that wishy washy he does not need to lead our country.

Besides his own commanding officer had less than glowing words for the general.

-- posted by dcantrell

Top 4. Oct 31, 2003 9:42 AM

» cdbnj - Don't know much about the general

In response to message posted by JohnRutherford:

I'm not sure who I'm going to vote for. I don't agree with everything Wesley Clark says. But then, nobody really stands out among the crowd. I'll have to listen to their opinions a little more before making a determination.

-- posted by cdbnj

Top 5. Oct 31, 2003 10:00 AM

» chuckn - Re: not sure I admire the general that much

Lots of interesting questions in this thread. No easy answers.

I'm not a fan of Wesley Clark. However, his civilian reserve idea isn't such a bad one - but with numerous caveats.

The civilian reserve wouldn't be soldiers-but translators, electricians, architects, doctors, truck drivers, etc. At the moment, Iraq and Afghanistan could use American civilian reserves - more so than American soldiers and large companies like Halberton running and planning and trying to do everything.

I'm not sure I'd use the word 'fodder' - but sure, these people would be in danger. Obviously, in Iraq they would be sitting ducks - just like our soldiers are.

However again - while I don't find the idea of a civilian reserve repellent - I was against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. So…. if I pretend that these were justified wars, then a civilian reserve would have been invaluable in rebuilding these countries.

Where would sending in a civilian reserve have been a good idea? Maybe Bosnia. Maybe the Congo. I'm not going to argue about these suggestions in this thread - just coming up with possible examples. Come up with your own.

Natural disasters in foreign countries (and our own) might be another reason for civilian reserves. They could be offered to the U.N. in times of need. (And, at the risk of sounding jaded and self-serving, civilian reserves would be good PR for the U.S..)

Clark is a bit vague about what he's proposing. If I were a campaign advisor, I'd have him describe the civilian reserves as an emergency Peace Corps on steroids.

The downside to the civilian reserve idea is that, like anything, it could be abused. For example, if it had been in place over the last few years, Bush and his thugs would've used it to further justify getting into messes, continuing this egregious military imperialism that make them salivate like Tex Avery cartoon wolves. "Hey, let's invade this country, completely annihilate the place - and then afterwards we'll send in the civilian reserves and everything'll be just peachy!"

-- posted by chuckn

Top 6. Oct 31, 2003 10:18 AM

» plox - Re: Re: not sure I admire the general that much

In response to message posted by chuckn:

Chuck, I've heard my dad talk about the Civilian Conservation Corps and think it would be a good idea to bring something like that back. For the same reason it was used before, to provide employment in this country during a depression.

BUT, that is a far different idea than sending hapless civilians overseas to be shot at. Even Peace Corps volunteers were not sent to war zones were they?

-- posted by plox

Top 7. Oct 31, 2003 10:26 AM

» plox - Re: Re: not sure I admire the general that much

In response to message posted by JohnRutherford:

Could you provide some links to info about Clark? I haven't researched him so you have a chance to set the record straight.
All I have picked up so far in passing is that he is considered to be a conceited sob by people who served with him and almost started a war with Russia.
And that he has this notion of a Civilian Corps to be pressed into service in foreign adventures like Iraq.

-- posted by plox

Top 8. Oct 31, 2003 12:01 PM

» pete_prbell - Re: not sure I admire the general that much

To All,
Not sure I admire him too much either.
I m a Brit with a keen interest in US Politics.
He would have something of a problem with the British. At the end of the Kosovo campaign (which he ran), the Russians started a quick move into Pristina, he ordered the BRITISH to go in and beat them to it. General Mike Jackson, commander of British Land Forces, got PM Blair to countermand the order, and told Clark: "I wont start World War Three for you".

Peter

-- posted by pete_prbell

Top 9. Nov 1, 2003 9:18 AM

» chuckn - Re: Re: Re: not sure I admire the general that much

In response to message posted by plox:

Plox! You're not paying attention! The war in Iraq is over! President Bush announced it his own self on an aircraft carrier months ago. Now, it's time for rebuilding, so it's perfectly safe for Civilian Reserves....

-- posted by chuckn

Top 10. Nov 1, 2003 9:25 AM

» plox - Re: Re: Re: Re: not sure I admire the general that much

In response to message posted by chuckn:

I saw some research poll somewhere that people who got their news from Fox were 3 times as likely to have mistaken ideas....like WMD had been found in Iraq, that most of the hijackers were Iraqi, etc. You know, the ideas that just sink in by osmosis because of hearing words without hearing meanings.

-- posted by plox

Top 11. Nov 2, 2003 2:53 AM

» JohnRutherford - Re: Re: Re: not sure I admire the general that much

In response to message posted by plox:

For those looking for more information on Wesley Clark, the best starting place is www.clark04.com and also just try any given search engine or googlenews. Tons of stuff exist.

For the argument of Clark having "changed his mind" on Bush and the war, it is answered by the same message in my article. This is a difficulty of any general entering politics. Having served under different president in both parties, he has praised them all at one time or another. All part of his job as a military officer having no affiliation with any political party. Colin Powell has given great praise to presidents of both parties. Clark praised G. W. Bush for his leadership following the terror attacks and he praised him for his leadership of our troops since. Supporting the troops is not the same as supporting the war.

The time is right in this country for a Washington outsider with leadership experience to be our president. Wesley Clark is that man. The rest of the Democratic candidates simply do not fit the mold of what is needed today to defeat Bush and take our country back for the people.

-- posted by JohnRutherford