Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clark Has Lots of Ammo for War With Bush
Capitol Hill Blue ^ | Sep 24, 2003 | CALVIN WOODWARD

Posted on 09/24/2003 10:43:43 AM PDT by fight_truth_decay

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next last
To: billbears
With all due respect, the reasons were clear. Here's what Bush told the UN last year:

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately and unconditionally forswear, disclose, and remove or destroy all weapons of mass destruction, long-range missiles, and all related material. (Remember, all parties -- the UN, other nations -- all concluded that Iraq had an active WMD program. The lack of weapons is a curiosity of the first order, but this objective was not disputed by anyone a year ago.)

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all support for terrorism and act to suppress it, as all states are required to do by U.N. Security Council resolutions. (Iraq was funding Palestinian terrorism against Israel; in fact, one of the guys blown to bits in Baghdad on the decapitation strike aimed at Saddam the first night of the Iraq war was a top Palestinian terror master. The links to terrorism are pretty well known. Read Michael Ledeen's book WAR AGAINST THE TERROR MASTERS as one example; Yosef Bodansky's THE HIGH COST OF PEACE as another.)

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans, and others, again as required by Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will release or account for all Gulf War personnel whose fate is still unknown. It will return the remains of any who are deceased, return stolen property, accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait, and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues, as required by Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. It will accept U.N. administration of funds from that program, to ensure that the money is used fairly and promptly for the benefit of the Iraqi people.

...These reasons for war against Saddam were clear. The Democrats hate the idea of a Republican prosecuting a successful war, so they and their surrogates in the media, conveniently ignore them.

21 posted on 09/24/2003 11:17:43 AM PDT by My2Cents (Well...there you go again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: lodwick
flip-flop wesley

perfumed prince

sissy?
22 posted on 09/24/2003 11:18:57 AM PDT by WillowyDame (BUSH 04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
He predicted incisively that America would win quickly but face deadly trouble in the aftermath.

Clark did nothing of the sort. All of his predictions of doom and gloom were wrong, dead wrong. Furthermore, we are not involved in a "deadly aftermath".

23 posted on 09/24/2003 11:21:47 AM PDT by KC_Conspirator (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft
And yet, for all of Wesley Clark's brilliance, what does he propose aside from what the Administration is already doing to stabilize and reconstruct Iraqi society? Turn things over to the EU or the UN is all I've heard.

The Democrats all pretty much have one thing in common -- They think that America and the world would be better off if the United States, both in our foreign and domestic policies, were more like Europe, and we surrender our sovereignty to the UN. This is Clark's perspective. Remember, for all the attempts to compare Clark to Ike, all Clark did was save the European Union from Serbia. What the Democrats forget is, OUR ANCESTORS (most of us) CHOSE TO LEAVE EUROPE! We don't WANT to be more like Europe.

24 posted on 09/24/2003 11:22:14 AM PDT by My2Cents (Well...there you go again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
Clark is a brilliant military man...provided we are inclined to use the military tactics popular in the 1990s. The point is, just about every so-called military expert who served during the 1990s, but who have subsequently retired from the military, got it wrong about Iraq.
25 posted on 09/24/2003 11:24:18 AM PDT by My2Cents (Well...there you go again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft
"He predicted incisively that America would win quickly but face deadly trouble in the aftermath." WOW! It took a Rhodes Scholar to figure that out. I'm impressed! With all the ex-Baathists, criminals turned lose, and all the arab volunteers no one one think that. How did he ever come to that conclusion? I tell ya here is a man with foresight.
And it takes so much courage to predict bad things for a Republican policy, since the Republicans control all the media! </sarcasm>

26 posted on 09/24/2003 11:24:39 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
Yeah, clear as mud. BTW, where are those 30,000 munitions? How about the tons upon tons of WMDs? Surely they've gone through enough closests and empty rooms to find something, anything. How about those ties to 9/11?

Lord knows the Iraqis supported the 9/11 terrorists more ardently than our 'ally' Saudi Arabia < /sarcasm>

27 posted on 09/24/2003 11:26:40 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
I had heard that he did not predict swift victory...bog down...all that rot...I did not watch the fool, as I do not watch CNN / MSNBC....the article says he predicted swift victory....I do not know if the article is correct on that point.
28 posted on 09/24/2003 11:27:35 AM PDT by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: WillowyDame
How about "Dandy"?
29 posted on 09/24/2003 11:28:35 AM PDT by My2Cents (Well...there you go again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Yeah, clear as mud. BTW, where are those 30,000 munitions?

Why not ask Hans Bliz. The tons of WMD material in Iraq was the UN's figure. Bury your head in the sand if you choose, but if you're unwilling to support the fight, get out of the way.

30 posted on 09/24/2003 11:31:26 AM PDT by My2Cents (Well...there you go again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
I have heard for months that Clark was wrong about almost EVEYTHING about the war in Iraq....was this not accurate?

He was 100% wrong at every turn.

It is now blatantly obvious he was playing politics in the midst of the war.

Shame on you Wes.

31 posted on 09/24/2003 11:38:14 AM PDT by CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Excellent comments...

By the way, did you hear the interview Britt Hume had with Cong. Jim Marshall last night? He served in Vietnam, and knows a little something about guerrilla war. He said that he, and many other members of Congress, were concerned by the conflicting reports out of Iraq. The mainstream media, on the one hand, keeps reporting that things are not going well. The Defense Department, on the other hand, keeps reporting steady improvement in the situation. Rep. Marshall and others (a bipartisan group) went to Iraq to see for themselves, and they've just returned.

His conclusion is that while there is a guerrilla war going on, it is not like Vietnam. In Vietnam, the VC and the No. Vietnamese were backed up by the Soviets and China. In Iraq, the guerrillas are riff-raff, certainly coming in through leaky borders with Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Marshall's assessment is that things are going well, but that we will overcome the sporatic guerrilla attacks IF, and only if, we win over the Iraqi people. The Iraqis have, and will continue, to rat-out the troublemakers in their own towns. The worse thing we can do, he said, is to send a message that our commitment to stablizing Iraq is hesitant. Of course, that message of doubt and hesitancy is exactly the message being planted in the minds of Americans by the seditious news media, and by the Democrat Party. If we lose the peace after winning the war in Iraq, it will be because our will was undermined by the news media and their Democrat patrons.

32 posted on 09/24/2003 11:46:08 AM PDT by My2Cents (Well...there you go again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
A whole new meaning for the KKK......Klinton, Kennedy, Klark
33 posted on 09/24/2003 11:47:39 AM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Based on your comment, I think we need to DEMAND back all the salaries the UN (hence US) paid to the inspectors. That money would be better served providing the electricity and water that many in the media say in non-existent in Iraq.
34 posted on 09/24/2003 11:54:38 AM PDT by BushisTheMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft
"He predicted incisively that America would win quickly but face deadly trouble in the aftermath."

President Bush told the whole nation to expect this. The media (and WUSSY CLARK ) have forgotten this little detail.

35 posted on 09/24/2003 11:59:33 AM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
Weaselly MCCLELLAN Cluck!!
36 posted on 09/24/2003 12:00:29 PM PDT by kaktuskid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Could you PLEASE post that picture on every thread about Clark? There are soooooo many new Freepers that need to be reminded and to tell their friends and family!
37 posted on 09/24/2003 12:04:53 PM PDT by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
......You may still need to use military force, but you have to use it in a very precise way."

Like using armor to deliver chemical agents on religious nutjobs barricaded in their compound?

That's the kind of fighting Clark knows how to do.

38 posted on 09/24/2003 12:06:22 PM PDT by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
Here are the Waco Kid's bullets:

1. I have single-handedly violated Posse Comitatus Act and contributed to the death of 80 Americans in Waco, TX.

2. I have provided air support to an Al Qaeda ally in Bosnia in 1995

3. I have provided air supoport to an Al Qaeda ally in Kosovo in 1999

4. I have guts - I have almost started WWIII. That stupid British general blew it.

5. Unlike Bush, I tell a tall stories. 93 destroyed Serb tanks, for example.

6. I am part of Soros' International Crisis Group. You know Uncle Soros, he contributed $10M to topple Bush.

39 posted on 09/24/2003 12:17:22 PM PDT by DTA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
I agree with your assessment. Regarding Clark, his candidacy will hopefully re-open questions about Kosovo, which the media uncritically call "successful," but which was arguably a major blunder, putting U.S. troops on the side of a Muslim terrorist group (the KLA) a mere two years before 9-11. I would love to hear Clark explain the rationale for THAT to the American people.
40 posted on 09/24/2003 12:32:33 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle (uo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson