Skip to comments.Why Wesley Clark Got the Ax at NATO [History repeats in Ukraine]
Posted on 04/23/2022 2:24:13 AM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
Defeated generals are sent home in disgrace, but it is most unusual to dismiss victorious ones.
Kosovo: NATO’s war against Serbia ended in victory. Gen. Wesley K. Clark, was very much the victorious general of that war.
So why was Clark fired? Officially, he wasn’t fired, but merely asked to step aside early.
Clark was caught.
The entire structure of the U.S. armed forces is built on: classic war, fought by Army infantry, Marines storming ashore, armored forces, artillery, attack helicopters, fighter-bombers that dive low to attack the enemy, as well as strike aircraft and bombers that operate more safely with stand-off weapons, and the entire panoply of naval forces of course.
To fight classic war, equipment and readiness are needed, but also willingness to accept casualties. Without that, the Pentagon with 13 Army and Marine divisions resembles a man with 13 luxurious cars and one gallon of gasoline.
The high priests of the military will carefully explain they only refuse to accept casualties in “operations other than war"--OOTW--or insignificant, not-worth-dying-example: Somali.
The entire “national interests” argument is mere rationalization
The truth: countries are willing to fight and accept casualties, will do so; when they no longer tolerate combat and its casualties, they invent clever new reasons to avoid them in virtually any circumstances except immediate self-defense.
Thus, any war the U.S. is likely to fight--unless Mexico attacks across the Rio Grande--will be classified as an OOTW not worth dying for, raising the huge question of what use it is to keep the present array of forces replete with ground units, attack helicopters and fighter bombers that are not usable in combat without some risk of casualties.
Clark exposed the gap between pretended “combat readiness” and the refusal to accept its real-life risks. He could hardly be forgiven for that.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
“The brave Ukrainian resistance cannot be maintained indefinitely in the absence of food, water and replenishment of ammunition, so the clock is ticking. Meanwhile, a substantial number of Russian forces are being freed up to move north, reinforcing Russian efforts to encircle and annihilate Ukrainian forces holding back the main Russian effort in Donbas.
The implications of the battle of Mariupol for both Russia and Ukraine are operationally significant, and for Ukraine the battle and 100,000 innocent lives hang in the balance.
Russia is sending a message to the West.
Russia is also sending a message to Ukraine and the West: whatever the problems in the north around Kyiv, Russia will use the means necessary, and suffer the losses required, to attain its objectives in Ukraine. A city of 400,000 has been deliberately erased through heavy and indiscriminate use of firepower and total disregard of international law and humanitarian conventions.
“The messages to the West should be clear. First, the outcome in Ukraine will be determined largely by “the facts on the ground.” Modulating Western military assistance to suit Putin flirts with strategic failure. Ukraine must be given the armaments necessary not only to resist but actually to defeat the Russian invasion, or there will be more Mariupols.
Second, despite escalating sanctions, time is not always on the side of Ukraine and the West – Putin has shown a STALINESQUE capacity to shrug off defeats and disloyalty, while Ukraine’s fierce spirit of resistance is under daily assault.
Make no mistake: the West is not yet winning against Putin’s attack on NATO and the rules-based international order.
The destruction of Mariupol was not inevitable. With adequate armor and artillery, Ukraine could have attacked and broken the siege; with more airpower, Ukraine could have blown apart and run off the besieging Russian forces; with more detailed and timely U.S.-provided intelligence, Ukraine could have used its relatively meager military resources more effectively.
Russian military vehicles move on a highway in an area controlled by Russian-backed separatist forces near Mariupol, Ukraine, April 18, 2022. Mariupol, a strategic port on the Sea of Azov, has been besieged by Russian troops and separatist forces in eastern Ukraine for more than six weeks. (AP Photo/Alexei Alexandrov, File)
The overriding lesson is that Western policy, led, by the United States must be more proactive than reactionary, and more grounded in shorter-term military than in longer-term economic measures.
If we seek the surest and most rapid end to this tragic struggle at the negotiating table, now is the time to tell Putin, “You will not win,” and to provide Ukraine the means to relieve the siege of Mariupol and make Putin’s military defeat in Ukraine a reality.” - Retired Gen. Wesley Clark
His former Presidential campaign’s press secretary was
Mary Jacoby—Glenn Simpson’s wife. By the way of the Rose
Law firm as an intern—Hillary’s former employer.
I hope Durham performs well next month.
“If we seek the surest and most rapid end to this tragic struggle at the negotiating table, now is the time to tell Putin, “You will not win,” and to provide Ukraine the means to relieve the siege of Mariupol and make Putin’s military defeat in Ukraine a reality.” - Retired Gen. Wesley Clark”
That’s not the goal nor the part Ukraine plays in achieving it (Clark sees that, or he wouldn’t have said if). This will not end rapidly, it must first expand. That’s going to take time and lots of innocent lives (the CIA/State Dept/etc, will ensure there’s enough dead as they did in 2014) for the appearance of justification of NATO going all in.
Globalist villain against globalist villain - nobody is going to win.
Ukraine needs the good stuff. They need light armor with the latest thermal sights to win at night. They need the big stuff like MLRS (multiple launch rocket system). Our MLRS is a corps-level asset and is rationed to our own troops but this war is made for it. It will greatly increase Russian losses of men and material. If America is serious about stopping Russia’s criminal aggression, then MLRS vehicles must be put into Ukrainian hands.
DoD are not the police. Impaling your forces in “police actions” is criminal.
The Russians are trying to send that message, but it's a lie.If it was the truth, they'd have mobilized far more fully than they have. Because right now, they are chewing through their pre-war army and don't have the replacements in the pipeline. If they get to the point where that pre-war army has taken enough combat losses to lose effectiveness, they're done.
This is a 23 year old article that time has proven wrong.
1) Wesley Clark was fired because he was recklessly confronting the Russians and others outside the scope of his orders. He also had a reputation as a jackass, so nobody felt like speaking up for him to the Secretary of Defense.
2) We have, subsequent to this article, shown quite a willingness to accept casualties. Many soldiers I have served with are either in the ground or suffered the wounds to prove that.
I don’t get it’s relavance to Ukraine.
I wonder if they will consider using nucs then?
The Terror War Needs Liberal Democrats, Too
The latest Democrat in the race is Gen. Wesley Clark, Rhodes scholar, former supreme allied commander of NATO, and ubiquitous TV presence before and during the Iraq war. General Clark recommends himself to his party as the man who can take down President Bush.
General Clark was being asked his opinion of a military action that began this spring, and that he kibitzed 24/7. Shouldn’t he know his own mind?
The prospect seems to flummox him. “Mary, help!” he called to Mary Jacoby, his press secretary, who came back from her seat at the front of the jet to untangle his thoughts. It is good to know that Ms. Jacoby is nearby. One hopes she will stay close to the general should he ever make it to the Oval Office, to help him whenever he has to put himself in a position.
Mary Jacoby is the wife of Glenn Simpson, founder of FusionGPS.
Mary Jacoby is the daughter of Jon Jacoby, who introduced Walter Smiley to the Stephens family of Arkansas. Smiley is the founder of Systematics which the Stephens family purchased an 80% stake. Hillary Rodham Clinton was the intellectual property lawyer for Systematics.
Wes Clark is a Clintonian creation. He is deep state Neocon Hydra.
Let’s be clear. The Clintons used him as the chief component in their Wag the Dog distraction during the Monica affair.
“I’m not going to start Third World War for you,” Jackson told Clark
Mon 2 Aug 1999 10.11 EDT
Nato supreme commander General Wesley Clark is not being allowed to fade away quietly. Days after the Clinton administration relieved him of his command two months early, Newsweek is reporting that the victor of Kosovo was blocked from sending paratroopers to Pristina airport to pre-empt an unexpected Russian advance.
Lieutenant-general Sir Michael Jackson overruled General Clark because the British commander did not want to spark a clash with the Russians.
Thank you Sir Michael Jackson
That was a pretty good article you posted from The Observer.
Boy, times have changed.
I’m sure the Clintons used him like they use everyone! At least they didn’t physically murder him! Just his reputation. So cruel.
Totally agree. REmember, just because Biden says he sending Ukraine something doesn’t mean he is! He does not only slow-walk but probably money-launders thru his REAL best friend Putin!
“After the Clinton administration relieved Clark of his command two months early, the victor of Kosovo was blocked from sending paratroopers to Pristina airport to pre-empt an unexpected Russian advance.
Lieutenant-general Sir Michael Jackson overruled General Clark: “I’m not going to start Third World War for you,” General Jackson told the US commander, according to Newsweek. In the hours that followed General Clark’s order, both men sought political backing for their position, but only General Jackson received it.
News of the clash between the British and US commanders comes just days after the US snubbed General Clark by ordering him to step down next year, two months early, to make way for Air Force General Joseph Ralston, vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.
The move is widely seen as a rebuke for the man who led Nato to victory, but who clashed repeatedly with his superiors.
Trouble flared between the two men as soon as General Jackson was appointed commander on the ground in Kosovo.
Talks on Russia’s role had broken down and the American general was so anxious to stop Moscow from stealing a march on the allies, he ordered British and French troops to take the airport.
General Clark then asked fellow American commander Admiral James Ellis, in charge of Nato’s Southern Command, to land helicopters on the runways to prevent giant Russian Ilyushin transport coming in. However, Admiral Ellis also refused, saying General Jackson would not like it.
The Russian planes were only prevented from landing after US officials persuaded Hungary to deny them permission to overfly the country. Both generals turned to their political masters for support, but while the British government backed General Jackson’s judgment, General Clark received no support, effectively meaning his orders were overruled.”
Do tell us more about this “rules based order”.
And Clark was fired because he wanted direct combat with Russia and tried to get Brits to move against them. The Brit general refused saying “I will not start WWIII for you”.
Clark is still a Democrat, Hillary loving Ivy League tool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.