Clark and Vietnam II (Even David Hackworth hates Wesley Clark!)

NATO's Wesley Clark is not the Iron Duke, nor is he Stormin' Norman. Unlike Wellington and Schwarzkopf, Clark's not a muddy boots soldier. He's a military politician, without the right stuff to produce victory over Serbia.

Known by those who've served with him as the "Ultimate Perfumed Prince," he's far more comfortable in a drawing room discussing political theories than hunkering down in the trenches where bullets fly and soldiers die. An intellectual in warrior's gear.

A saying attributed to General George Patton was that it took 10 years with troops alone before an officer knew how to empty a bucket of spit. As a serving soldier with 33 years of active duty under his pistol belt, Clark's commanded combat units -- rifle platoon to tank division -- for only seven years. The rest of his career's been spent as an aide, an executive, a student and teacher and a staff weenie.

Very much like generals Maxwell Taylor and William Westmoreland, the architect and carpenter of the Vietnam disaster, Clark was earmarked and then groomed early in his career for big things. At West Point he graduated No. 1 in his class, and even though the Vietnam War was raging and chewing up lieutenants faster than a machine gun can spit death, he was seconded to Oxford for two years of contemplating instead of to the trenches to lead a platoon.

A year after graduating Oxford, he was sent to Vietnam, where, as a combat leader for several months, he was bloodied and muddied. Unlike most of his classmates, who did multiple combat tours in the killing fields of Southeast Asia, he spent the rest of the war sheltered in the ivy towers of West Point or learning power games first hand as a White House fellow.

The war with Serbia has been going full tilt for almost a month and Clark's NATO is like a giant standing on a concrete pad wielding a sledgehammer crushing Serbian ants. Yet, with all its awesome might, NATO hasn't won a round. Instead, Milosevic is still calling all the shots from his Belgrade bunker, and all that's left for Clark is to react.

Milosevic plays the fiddle, and Clark dances the jig. Stormin' Norman or any good infantry sergeant major would have told Clark that conventional air power alone could never win a war -- it must be accompanied by boots on the ground.

German air power didn't beat Britain. Allied air power didn't beat Germany. More air power than was used against the Japanese and Germans combined didn't win in Vietnam. Forty-three days of pummeling in the open desert where there was no place to hide didn't KO Saddam. That fight ended only when Schwarzkopf unleashed the steel ground fist he'd carefully positioned before the first bomb fell.

Doing military things exactly backwards, the scholar general is now, according to a high ranking Pentagon source, in "total panic mode" as he tries to mass the air and ground forces he finally figured out he needs to win the initiative. Mass is a principle of war. Clark has violated this rule along with the other eight vital principles. Any mud soldier will tell you if you don't follow the principles of war you lose.

One of the salient reasons Wellington whipped Napoleon in 1815 at Waterloo is that the Corsican piecemealed his forces. Clark's done the same thing with his air power. He started with leisurely pinpricks and now is attempting to increase the pain against an opponent with an almost unlimited threshold. Similar gradualism was one of the reasons for defeat in Vietnam.

Another mistake Clark's made is not knowing his enemy. Taylor and Westmoreland made this same error in Vietnam. Like the Vietnamese, the Serbs are fanatic warriors who know better than to fight conventionally in open formations. They'll use the rugged terrain and bomber bad weather to conduct the guerrilla operations they've been preparing for over 50 years. And they're damn good at partisan warfare. Just ask any German 70 years or older if a fight in Serbia will be another Desert Storm.

It's the smart general who knows when to retreat. If Clark lets pride stand in the way of military judgment, expect a long and bloody war.

Col. David H. Hackworth, author of his new best-selling "Steel My Soldiers' Hearts," "Price of Honor" and "About Face," has seen duty or reported as a sailor, soldier and military correspondent in nearly a dozen wars and conflicts – from the end of World War II to the recent fights against international terrorism.

Disclosure: I'm a liberal who was wondering what you folks thought about Clark. It's strange to see the world on it's head like this. Conservatives agreeing with communist essays, Democrats interested in a general ... we live in interesting times, folks.

You will find Clark has little respect among veterans or active duty military. He was a political general and a Friend of Bill who was promoted ahead of more able people. While highly intelligent, he makes poor decisions. He also has a ego that is extreme. Clarks's professional commentary on the Iraq war was almost all wrong, embarrassingly so for a professional military man. He has never held any elective office - I suspect if you Dems pick him you may find him displaying Perot-like tendencies to weird-out people.

Actually, i think a recent Hackworth article was posted where he was actually kissing Clark's rear-end.

Indeed. Recent as in Monday. I posted this article last Wednesday. It certainly changes the meaning of this post, but I had no way to know last Wednesday that Hackworth's Bush Hate is so overwhelming that he would end up happily performing one of the most pathetic flip-flops in recent history.

At first, I thought this article said more about Clark than it did about Hackworth. It appears it says more about Hackworth than Clark.

I never served with Clark period. I served as a Hornet Force company commander with Omega/CCS in 68- early 69 before going to the launch site.I was blessed with NCO's with more combat experience then most officer's I ever met.My higest ranking NCO had been with the 101st with Hackworth. He had been hit in the head/eye, and; he covered my fanny always on his tour with SOG.

Both this fine SFC and myself look at a heroic 20 year old 1LT who came to the company in late 68. The man went into COSVN HQ on 24 April of 1969, was hit in the chest, and; this fine young man lay face down on the LZ, called in air support until his dying breath. I cannot bring this man back, nor SFC Jerry Shriver, nor any of those men. They had guts that only few men have today, as too many a man uses his medals for politics. Any officer with a medal of any kind for valor, can look at himself and know he has an NCO or EM to thank.

Sadly, I saw a few award hungry officers in our unit. They numbered all of two. Officers do not make a combat unit period. It is the NCO's. Far too many people look at Clark and Kerry as heroes. It is the NCO's in SF, and the riflemen and other enlisted men in all ground units who are the heroes period.

Clark was wounded and medevaced. He was written up for a Bronze Star V that day. Had he not been a West Pointer do you believe he would have had his orders rescinded then given a silver star? Let's be real and honest. We all knew some fine West Pointers.

Now, Kerry's record is quite a mystery. How many of us that served in real combat in Vietnam know of anyone with three purple hearts in three to four months of service?

I suggest that Kerry is a fake. I want to see his medical records. He darn sure did not take care of his troops period. I will show my medical records, which clearly state exactly where two bullets entered, what bone was shattered, where they exited, the exact muscles hit, and whether there was any artery or nerve damage.

Do you need ten years with troops to be a leader? I don't believe that, unless you are a full Colonel or General. Do I believe Hack? Most of the time. Would I go into combat for him? Yes, based on what my NCO's from the 101st that came to SF said, I would.

Do we really want another Kerry or Kerrey? Sadly, the Navy officers, except pilots, have a reputation for treating EM very lowly. I am sorry, but; I feel that way. I believe the Navy officers treat enlisted worse then any service. Dressed in whites, they refuse to get dirty.

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.