Skip to comments.
Gen. Clark: Saddam Not a Criminal
NewsMax.com ^
| 9/21/03
| Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
Posted on 09/21/2003 8:37:32 AM PDT by kattracks
In a little noticed interview with Fortune Magazine last week, presidential frontrunner Gen. Wesley Clark defended Saddam Hussein against charges that he was engaged in crimes against his own people at the time the Iraq war started, contending instead that the Iraqi dictator should have gotten a pass because his atrocities took place ten years ago.
Asked why it was right for President Clinton to use military force to halt Slobodan Milosevic's crimes against humanity in Kosovo, but not for President Bush to do the same thing against Saddam, Clark said that in Iraq, "The imminence of stopping a guy from committing a crime in progress - it wasn't there."
"In Kosovo you had ethnic cleansing actually unfolding, and we had intervened to stop it," the ex-NATO commander insisted, without commenting on the torture chambers, rape rooms and mass graves discovered in Iraq by coalition forces.
Instead, the Democratic frontrunner suggested that the Iraqi dictator deserved a pass by outlining what Fortune described as Clark's "Statute of Limitations for Genocidal Thugs."
"It was ten years ago that Saddam brutalized the Shiite Muslims in the south," he argued. "And he used chemical weapons 15 years ago."
Instead, said the retired military man, Saddam brutality was really no worse than crimes committed by leaders in China more than a decade ago, telling Fortune:
"We still deal with communist China, right? During the Cultural Revolution they had cannibalism in China. And the same guys that ran over the students in Tiananmen, they're still there."
Fortune writer Bill Powell pointed out, however, that while China is still a police state, "the recently departed General Secretary Jiang Zemin, to take but one example, was promoted from mayor of Shanghai to succeed Deng Xiaoping in part because he avoided bloodshed during Tiananmen. . . . Have you ever heard of Saddam promoting someone because he avoided killing somebody?"
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
2004 Elections
Saddam Hussein/Iraq
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2004; 2004election; balkans; civilrights; dummycrat; election2004; humanrights; kookyclark; limbacher; prodictator; prosaddam; rat; saddamite; usefulidiot; warcrimes; wesleyclark
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-187 next last
To: kattracks
Iraqi dictator should have gotten a pass because his atrocities took place ten years agoDiscounting the INCORRECT assumption that the atocities by Saddam were NOT still ONGOING when the above statement was made, by Clark's logic any torture or murder committed that is NOT IMMEDIATELY dealt with, MUST therefore be excused. This man is an airhead. How did this PASSED OVER Brigadier General make 4 Stars?? Only X42 knows the answer!
21
posted on
09/21/2003 8:56:56 AM PDT
by
PISANO
To: kattracks
Clark said that in Iraq, "The imminence of stopping a guy from committing a crime in progress - it wasn't there." Is this guy a complete nutwad?
That fact that Sadaam kept breaking the ceasefire agreement alone was enough to justify this war.
To: EggsAckley
How quickly he has attained this title!! I think this is good.
By now everyone knows Weasly Clark was hand picked by the clintons. A few more remarks like this and the little general is toast, and it can't do the clintons any good either.
The clintons and their stooges have, more than likely, been working on Clark for months (when was it first mentined he would run?)and he still sticks his foot in his mouth BIGTIME.
To: kingu
"Thank you, Former Gen. Clark, for exemplifying why Democrats should never be allowed to hold office."
AGREED!
24
posted on
09/21/2003 9:04:12 AM PDT
by
jocon307
(how much trouble is THIS post going to get me in?)
To: kattracks
Apologize, apologize, apologize. Then imphasize the good so you appear to care. Right out of the Clinton play book.
This dude is a real wack job.
To: sirchtruth
At the time the war started, Saddam had the unique distinction of being the only head of state that was routinely firing missiles at our planes. As you pointed out, for that reason alone Hussein had to be driven from power. Otherwise, we would have gone back to square one as far as credibility was concerned because people would go back to thinking that you could kill Americans and nothing would happen to you a la the 1993 WTC bombing, the Mogadishu fiasco, the embassy bombings in Mozambique and Kenya, the Khobar Towers bombing, and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole.
To: sirchtruth
How about the 5000 children who were dying every month during the era of sanctions? All the bleeding heart NGOs wanted us to drop the sanctions policy because it was killing Iraqis. Where are these spokesmen now that the word is out about the number of Iraqis murdered by Saddam and the Baathist regime? I guess if the NYT doesn't promote an idea then it did not really happen, and we can all just 'move on.'
27
posted on
09/21/2003 9:10:56 AM PDT
by
maica
(Mainstream American)
To: kattracks
Dear "General:" For your own protection, please step away from the crack pipe.
28
posted on
09/21/2003 9:13:24 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I'm not always cranky.)
To: finnman69
What the hell is that? Is that a French kepi? That would be perfectly appropriate...
29
posted on
09/21/2003 9:14:28 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I'm not always cranky.)
To: Young Werther
Yes. I believe that to this day, that is the only crime/criminal for which Israel has invoked the death penalty.
To: kattracks
Mary Help!
31
posted on
09/21/2003 9:20:47 AM PDT
by
Spruce
To: Tom Bombadil
Wait, I'm confused. Is it Ramsey or Wesley running for president?
32
posted on
09/21/2003 9:22:19 AM PDT
by
idkfa
To: kattracks
The headline leads one to believe Clark said "Saddam is not a criminal" but I don't see such a quote in the article.
To: kattracks
Instead, the Democratic frontrunner suggested that the Iraqi dictator deserved a pass by outlining what Fortune described as Clark's "Statute of Limitations for Genocidal Thugs."So if he became CIC (LoL's) would he allow the re-enstatement of Saddam as Iraqi President?
This guy is actually in the running? If he has a gnats a$$ of a chance for succeeding in his endeavor we are in much more trouble than I have ever dreamt possible in this country!
34
posted on
09/21/2003 9:25:01 AM PDT
by
EGPWS
Comment #35 Removed by Moderator
To: kattracks
Gen. Clark: Saddam Not a Criminal Right, and OBL built day care centers. I'll write Clark and suggest Patty Murray as his running mate.
36
posted on
09/21/2003 9:27:50 AM PDT
by
Mr. Mojo
To: ChadGore
I don't think we'll have much trouble with this guy. He likes to suck his toes.
Can you believe this salad brain was first in his class at West Point??
To: kattracks; *balkans; vooch; Destro; Seselj; PiP PiP Cherrio; smokegenerator; boston_liberty; ...
"In Kosovo you had ethnic cleansing actually unfolding, and we had intervened to stop it," the ex-NATO commander insisted, without commenting on the torture chambers, rape rooms and mass graves discovered in Iraq by coalition forces.
To: kattracks
This guy sold out the his principals of truth to be a political whore.... how can he sleep at night???
39
posted on
09/21/2003 9:29:13 AM PDT
by
Porterville
(I spell stuff wrong sometimes, get over yourself, you're not that great.)
Comment #40 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-187 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson