Clark: Bush lacks will to find bin Laden

Clark: Bush lacks will to find bin Laden

Democrat says he would have had the al Qaeda chief by now
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/17/elec04.prez.clark.bush/index.html


(CNN) --Democratic presidential contender Wesley Clark said Wednesday that President Bush has shown a lack of will in pursuing al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

In a blistering critique of the commander in chief, Clark said that "capturing Saddam Hussein doesn't change the fact that Osama bin Laden is still on the loose."

"If I'd been president, I would have had Osama bin Laden by this time," Clark said at a news conference in Concord, New Hampshire, where he was campaigning for votes in the nation's first primary, January 27.

"I would have followed through on the original sentiment that the president gave us -- Osama bin Laden, dead or alive.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

I watched Clark's speech on CSPAN, it was very powerful!

You hit the nail on the head Wes.

Bush will get Bin Laden and Wes will look like an....
I like Clark by the way

Clark said he would "have gotten Bin Laden by now". How is what you said relevant?

blah, blah, blah. Bin Laden will be caught, it's just too early to benefit his 2004 election.

"From a briefing prepared for Bush at the beginning of July 2001: "We believe that OBL will launch a significant terrorist attack against US and/or Israeli interests in the coming weeks. The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against US facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning." And so it came to pass; yet Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser, says she never suspected that this meant anything more than the kidnapping of planes.
...
On 9 September 2001, Bush was presented with a draft of a national security presidential directive outlining a global campaign of military, diplomatic and intelligence action targeting al-Qaeda, buttressed by the threat of war. According to NBC News, President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaeda...but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks.
...
Finally, BBC News, 18 September 2001: "Niaz Naik, a former Pakistan foreign secretary, told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October. It was Naik's view that Washington would not drop its war for Afghanistan even if bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taliban."

Was Afghanistan then turned to rubble in order to avenge the 3,000 Americans slaughtered by Osama? Hardly. The administration is convinced that Americans are so simple-minded that they can deal with no scenario more complex than the venerable lone, crazed killer (this time with zombie helpers) who does evil just for the fun of it 'cause he hates us, 'cause we're rich 'n free 'n he's not. Osama was chosen on aesthetic grounds to be the frightening logo for our long-contemplated invasion and conquest of Afghanistan,...Clinton's National Security Adviser, Sandy Berger, personally briefed his successor on the plan but Rice, still very much in her role as a director Chevron/Texaco, with special duties regarding Pakistan and Uzbekistan, now denies any such briefing. A year and a half later (12 August 2002), fearless Time magazine reported this odd memory lapse..."

Much much more:

http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/pr_gore_vidal.html

If he's caught, Clark will look foolish and the GOP will be all over him. Let me play devil's advocate, did Clark say how he would have caught him by now?

One of the reasons why I sent his campaign some money this weekend.

Lieberman is on TV more than Bush, Colin Powel and Rice combined. They are ignoring Clark because they are afraid of him. His passion and sincerity are coming through more and more.

Clark is virtually ignored whenever possible. The repugs are terrified of him. They KNOW he could easily beat Bush....some of the others could too, but Clark is a shoe- in.

I love this guy! If Clark were to become the Democratic nominee next year, he will tear Bush to shreds, chew him, spit him out, and then poop on Bush's mangled body.

Way to go General!

God do I love both Dean & Clark - they gotta hook up and kick the living shit outta that asshole junior.

I think Clark insinuated in his article that if need be, he'd exposed junior and his AWOL record if junior is gonna question the patriotism of the democratic party.

Clark rocks.

And this early, too! He is building steam like a locomotive; if he and * go head to head in a debate, Wes will come off looking like a superhero and * like the wimp that he is.

I wanted to say more, but IndianaGreen took the words right out of my keyboard!

Candidate. It's not just a soundbite; it's an entire
policy for Iraq and the US now. I'm glad Bush's propaganda
isn't intimidating General Clark.

It is good to hear a candidate other Dean then speaking out in such a strong manner. Inpressive.

from who? The Serbs ? the Vietnamese?

We don't need any more wars, general.

Clark's job as a general was to win those wars.

Your criticism is misplaced.

attack the chimp,not each other.

did you HEAR THAT GEP? KERRY? JOE???

This Dean supporter loves what Clark had to say today. He nailed Chimpy on every salient point and, to boot, made sure that, in the "euphoria" over Saddam's capture, we don't lose sight of the real enemy.

I got an e-mail from a quasi-Repuke friend (he's voting ABB in '04) who was concerned about the claim Gen. Clark made that "(he) would have had Bin Laden by this time". He was afraid that it was over the top and would turn voters off.

I think it was completely appropriate, and a damn accurate claim to boot! I think any of the candidates would have had OBL by now, instead of being mired in an Iraqi quagmire as we are.

dots to the Saudi buddies, the Osama buddies all flying out of the country....oh, my.....lack of will....what a lovely, loaded phrase.

The whole thing he did today was incredible.

Remember the context...he said that our forces had the know how to be able to catch Osama...what was lacking was PRESIDENTIAL WILL...that is a very loaded statement. He called Iraq a diversion. You can bet he believes that he and the US forces he knows so well, could have found bin Laden because there wouldn't have been the diversion...


Repeat on CSPAN tonight...9 ish ET?

And lack of context is frequently used by those that distort his words.

9ish ET, 6ish PT...

http://www.clark04.com/speeches/021/
http://www.clark04.com/issues/iraqstrategy/

We "switched" gears and moved against Iraq and our citizens just accepted it all without a lot of questioning. When 10,000,000 people marched last Feb. and were dismissed as nothing but focus groups that should have been a huge red flag to Congress. Why wasn't it?

Hey chimpy, are you too numb from drinking to feel that?

This is a big assed gamble on the part of General Clark. He's betting the farm--hell, he's betting OUR farm--that bin Ladin doesn't get caught in the next 10½ months. That's one hell of a bet and one hell of a long time to wait to see if we're gonna get an October surprise fuck flying straight out of Peshawar to a Gitmo near you.

I hope he knows what he's doing. I hope he's not letting stuff go to his head. He's stalled in the polls and is not closing the deal on becoming the non-Dean candidate. This is a whopper of a hail Mary pass

* got the confidence of the Murikan people by acting boldly and talking big - not that he had any ability/intention to follow through on his words. Bold talk seems to be what our current populace sees as the mark of a "true leader." OBL could be captured tomorrow, and I don't think they would blink an eye about Clarks' statment. They just want someone who will make them feel confident and protected. And Clark has the brains and willpower to follow through - and the credentials to prove it.

If OBL is caught in the next 10.5 months, the Dems lose no matter what.

DTH

you were diverting our resources to Iraq? And, experts tell us, that Al-Qaeda does not work from the top down, it works within its individual cells to do terrorist acts. So, let's see...Afghanistan still a mess, terrorists still being trained in madrassas over the border in Pakistan...

So Clark's policy stands intact and still addresses the key issues, even if Osama is captured...Bush has told us this will be a LONG WAR....so, we'll just have to point out that it's still going on...

THAT SAID....Randi Rhodes predicts Osama will be "found" around October...or some other Osama stunt will occur..

Then, we're totally screwed!!! Unless a very gutsy candidate connects the dots to Saudi Arabia and the bin Ladens (which Clark has already hinted at...he's repeatedly been calling for pressure on Saudi Arabia to form a force with the US to go after Osama in Pakstan...)

I was waiting for someone to come out and make the connection to OBL. Guess what not only do a lot of Democrats feel that this is a problem...but a lot of rethugs think that too. I know several people that are like WTF about OBL. If we found Sadaam alive we must believe that there is a good chance OBL is alive. This is a miserable failure on Bush's part and has disguntled americans including this one right here. Nice job and continue the good fight general...move forward and move out!


Fall in soldiers of Democracy!!!!

Hoorahhh DUERs

:kick:

. . that OSAMA is "tryna kill his daddy" ???

. . oh - that won't work though will it ?

Bin Ladens and Bushes have a "history"

Didn't Junior rush the only flight out during the "no-fly" restriction with a plane full of BinLadens right after 9/11 ?

And there ain't no oil in Afghanistan is there ?

Think I just "killed" my own idea

:dunce:

"If I'd been president, I would have had Osama bin Laden by this time,"

I have been begging someone to say that!

........as much as I dislike Bush, I think this is a rather broad statement to make. In all probability, they are tracking every move BinLaden makes, and they will sniff him out when the political wind is
just right. :nuke:

What better way to throw a wrench into the Democratic presidential campaign? October would look to suspicious, September interferes with the repuke convention headlines, so it's gotta be the summer. And June would be just the right time to screw with the post-convention fund raising by Democrats.

Everything is a photo-op to the GOP agents. It won't matter if the Osama they catch is as fake as the turkey dinner bush was waving around in Baghdad, the important thing is imagery.

The last few years in America have left me with but one inescapable conclusion:
WE ARE IDIOTS PREPARED TO BELIEVE ANYTHING THAT MAKES US FEEL GOOD

Too much can happen in 5 months.

Per DU copyright
rules please post
only 4 paragraphs
from the news source.

Thank you.


DU Moderator