Posted on 10/03/2003 6:14:47 PM PDT by blam
Bush should face an inquiry over Iraq war, says general
By David Rennie in Washington
(Filed: 04/10/2003)
General Wesley Clark, the front-runner in the Democratic race for the White House, launched a high-risk attack on American foreign policy yesterday when he said the Bush administration should face an investigation into possible "criminal" conduct in its drive to war.
Gen Clark, who as Nato supreme commander led the war in Kosovo, accused the Bush administration of entering office already determined to attack Iraq, then seizing on the September 11 attacks as justification.
Gen Wesley Clark
He called for an independent review of what he called the "possible manipulation of intelligence" to convince the American people that war with Iraq was necessary.
"Nothing could be a more serious violation of public trust than consciously to make a case for war based on false claims," he was due to say in a speech last night. "We need to know if we were intentionally deceived.
"This administration is trying to do something that ought to be politically impossible to do in a democracy, and that is to govern against the will of the majority," he said. "That requires twisted facts, silence, secrecy and very poor lighting."
Though a political novice, Gen Clark has surged to the front of the crowded pack of Democrats vying to challenge President George W Bush next year, less than three weeks after entering the contest.
Amid complaints that his views on the Iraq war have been vague and contradictory, Gen Clark threw caution to the wind yesterday.
He is playing a high-stakes strategy, attacking the Bush administration directly on national security and defence, using his military credentials to back up some of the gravest accusations levelled against the current government.
In a book due for publication later this month, Gen Clark will accuse the Bush administration of having a five year plan to attack nations across the Muslim world.
In Winning Modern Wars, Gen Clark records a conversation with a "senior military staff officer" he met at the Pentagon in November 2001, at the height of the Afghan campaign.
America was headed next for war with Iraq, Gen Clark says the unnamed officer told him.
"But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan. So, I thought, this is what they mean when they talk about 'draining the swamp'," Gen Clark writes.
He has argued that America is wrongly ignoring Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as terrorist sponsors and called for the war on al-Qa'eda to be pursued through United Nations resolutions and an international tribunal for prosecuting terrorists.
His personal pitch, the tough-as-nails former warrior with a strong liberal streak on social issues, has some of the party's wealthiest and most powerful backers swooning, as they dream of neutralising Mr Bush's status as a victorious commander-in-chief.
Gen Clark recently returned from a fund-raising trip to Hollywood, where he was feted by producers and actors not normally noted for their love of the uniformed military.
Republicans have made much of his history of backing away from serious allegations when challenged for chapter and verse details.
Recently he accused the White House of trying to have him sacked as a cable television commentator because of his opposition to the Iraq war strategy.
Curiously, Gen Clark, a registered independent, has yet to join the Democratic Party formally and has come under fire from rival candidates for his business ties to Republican lobbyists and his admission that, as a younger man, he voted for Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.
But at a meeting of the Democratic National Committee in Washington yesterday, Gen Clark began by declaring his support for abortion rights, the environment, racially based "affirmative action", public education, universal health care and trade unions.
"And if that ain't a Democrat, then I must be at the wrong meeting," he said to applause.
Add: North Korea, Saudia Arabia and Pakistan and I'll agree it's a good plan.
And you thought the "No blood for oil" rhetoric was a little shrill when we attacked Iran?
LOL! It always gets me every time the media repeats it: The best that the Democrats can offer is somebody WHO ISN'T EVEN A DEMOCRAT!
Iran? Don't you mean Iraq?
Just shows how astute Clark is. Not too many people with any sense of the middle east had much doubt that Iraq was the next duck on the target range. Limbaugh predicted it from the start.... and as every liberal knows, he never served. What does that say about Clark....unless.... he is just playing partisan politics.......naaaaaawwww.
Uh oh, he left out "gay rights". What an insensitive homophobe.
You're right general; we certainly wouldn't want to step into the middle of a vipers nest with a long term plan , now would we, hmmmmm?
kinda says it all, doesn't it
Just damn.
If you want on the new list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
[As i mentioned, the B/C & JD! lists are going to float into and out of whack over the forseeable future, while I try to cobble a rig back together for myself. My apologies for any incovenience or misunderstandings in this time frame. New signups/removals may be flaky in this time-frame as well; please bear with me, and keep in mind you may have to FReepmail me more than once for me to get it done. Thanks again!]
oops... left hand typing keyboard dyslexia attack (you knew that was what I meant-I hope)
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.