Wes Clark won war, but ran afoul of his Pentagon masters and lost his job

Uh oh - It looks as if Clark was duplicitous with his bosses in the Pentagon and in the White House.

Link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4052506/

This is BREAKING on Newsweek - and exclusive


Excerpt:

What really happened? According to a knowledgeable source, Clark ran afoul of Cohen and Shelton by being less than totally forthcoming in morning conference calls during the Kosovo war in the spring of 1999. From his NATO headquarters in Brussels, Clark wanted to wage the war more aggressively, but back in the Pentagon, Cohen and Shelton were more cautious. They would give Clark instructions on, for instance, the scale of the bombing campaign. "Clark would say, 'Uh-huh, gotcha'," says NEWSWEEK's source. But then he would pick up the phone and call Tony Blair and Madeleine ." As Clark knew full well, Blair and Albright were more hawkish than Shelton and Cohen. After talking to the State Department and NATO allies, Clark would have a different set of marching orders, says the source.



I will say this: the timing is suspicious to say the least. Benefits Kerry most IMHO. Bull and Scones anyone?

Nice detective work!

flamebait. Self-deleted for personal control

from an inside source.

Basically it looks like he played fast and loose with the rules and it jkind of reminds me of Alexander Haig, except Clark could actually bomb the sh*t out of people (including civilians).

Funny that Cohen and Shelton were MORE likley to try and hold Clark back from the massive bombing raids where many civilians were killed as we all know now. Depleted Uranium and cluster bombs (a violation of international law IMHO probably) were in his arsenal and at his fingertips.

and if you would read the article it is mostly favorable to CLark.

THe right-wing is trying to smear Clark. And any Democrat who believes raging headlines from the Union Leader ( right-wing) and Faux has got some serious problems.

Not fox or the union leader. I

Rivals Mine Kerry Senate Years for Material to Slow Him Down(the GOP FILE!)


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/politics/campaign/25RECO.html

Rivals Mine Kerry Senate Years for Material to Slow Him Down
By TODD S. PURDUM


ASHINGTON, Jan. 24 — The moment John Kerry began to seem like the candidate to watch in the Iowa caucuses, the campaigns of his Democratic rivals Howard Dean and Richard A. Gephardt swiftly used a handful of Mr. Kerry's decade-old Senate votes and statements against ethanol and agricultural subsidies to attack him as not supportive of Iowa's essential industry.
<SNIP>

For example, at the end of the cold war, Mr. Kerry advocated scaling back the Central Intelligence Agency, but after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, he complained about a lack of intelligence capability. In the 1980's, he opposed the death penalty for terrorists who killed Americans abroad, but he now supports the death penalty for terrorist acts. In the 1990's, he joined with Republican senators to sponsor proposals to end tenure for public school teachers and allow direct grants to religion-based charities, measures that many Democratic groups opposed. In 1997, he voted to require elderly people with higher incomes to pay a larger share of Medicare premiums.

The record is susceptible to two broad strands of attack. Mr. Kerry's rival Democrats point to a series of shifting stands on issues, like his qualified praise for the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress and his vote authorizing President Bush to use force in Iraq. They say these are at odds with his claim to be the "real deal" Democratic alternative to Mr. Bush, capable of "standing up for people and taking on powerful interests," as he says in his stump speech.
<SNIP

"Whether it's economic policy, national security policy or social issues, John Kerry is out of sync with most voters," the Republican national chairman, Ed Gillespie, said in a speech on Friday.
Mr. Kerry's spokesman, David Wade, said the senator was "proud of his independence and unashamed that his resistance to orthodoxy leaves him hard to pigeonhole," adding that he had "fought a lifetime for what's right even when it's neither popular nor predictable." He added, "Ed Gillespie may be the last guy left who doesn't realize it's George Bush who's out of touch with the American people."

<snip>A Kerry campaign aide said that if the campaign was forced to defend itself, it was "armed with a treasure-trove of votes that prove John Kerry's commitment to strong national defense, a stronger intelligence-gathering operation than George Bush has delivered, and to a long record of fighting the deficit, reforming education and restructuring welfare."<snip>

okay. Proceed.

Or try again.

not the Faux spin. You haven't read it have you?

I have not seen this anywhere else except the link I posted.

:toast:

:-)

don't you know that?

And his real one was Clinton, and he served Clinton rather than his chain of command.

And people have a problem with this? Not that I care for it, but the Just War liberals have no case.

over Clark. This speaks volumes

Is this an "October Surprise" from the Kerry campaign?

It seems as if Shelton would be the likely source on this leaked at the last moment to help Kerry, but this is only a guess.

I support Dean and do not like either Kerry OR Clark -- but this is a nasty bit of business and it is NOT Fox doing it - it is Newsweek,

Somebody is squealing in order to hurt Clark.

Who benefits.

Kerry is IMHO a bad strategist - so I think this MAY actually blowback at Kerry and help Dean.

I can hope can't I?

Hmmm...double teaming on Clark? :puke:

to a 4 star General without stepping on some toes along the way?

Neither would I expect that person to be shy about waging war. Nor does it mean that veterans who have experienced the real horror of war are more likely to wage war than say someone who went AWOL?

One thing I do have to give Clark credit for, is that not one American life was lost in Kosovo and we did end an ongoing civil war and caught the brutal dictator who is now on trial at the Hague. At least the mission was a success?

and don't forget the British military guy who has claimed he wouldn't start WW3 for Clark. Wait till he comes out and talks more.

Nice try.

said one British Commander. Wait till he hits the talk shows.

I hope the host of whatever talkshows he hits does a background check on the misinterpretation of Clark's methodology by the notorious Gen. Jackson.

http://www.clarkmyths.com/myth4.html

going on in Kosovo? Before you attack somebody for what they did, you should see where the line of fire is at on your candidate.

for the Iraq Resolution? That's the one that I can't forgive. That and the $87 billion and the Patriot Act.

The hell if it's right or wrong for the country. That is why Kerry is going to lose in the primaries & his smear tactics from him & his supporters will clinch the deal.

The longer Clark stays in the campaign, the more Kosovo is going to come back to haunt him.

He'll get it both from the GOP in the form of questions about his competence and obedience as well as from the antiwar left for the atrocities in the bombing campaign (1,600 civilians killed, according to the Washington Post; see Zoltan Grossman's September 2003 essay here: http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0910-07.htm).

No surprise there -- and it's not exactly unwarranted, either. Moral human beings always have qualms about war and especially about those who wage it with reckless zeal. Since Clark is running on his military record, it's only fair and necessary that he be forced to answer for it.

But the main point is that this issue of duplicity is going to sink Clark's campaign.

If he LIED to the sec of defense and the commander of the joint shiefs and was taking orders from the sec of state and Blair -- then no wonder Clinton had to can him.

I can just see Bill and Wesley having a few big cigars and planning his political future with the Stephens group and his keeping the seat warm for Hillary in DC. (this is sheer speculation, but the rumors have been that his candidacy IS to help her)

Point is this - if this story is TRUE then Clark is in big trouble.

The fact that it might emanate from the Kerry campaign (and damn i thought I was in a drive by shootout from the Clark and Kerry posses a few minutes after I posted this after seeing it on MSNBC) _ MIGHT hurt Kerry in the long run as well.

These guys ALL seem to be playing pretty dirty. It wouyld serve them right if they cancelled each other out so my guys Dean and Edwards could shine these DLCers on and then sink Bush.

I heard Kerry but the article implies otherwise

On edit:

a google search shows he is advising Edwards.

Sorry if I jumped to conclusions about Kerry -- but I still think it hits Clark hard and who it helps now is an open question.

Maybe Edwards leaked it. But if it is true it is true.

NOT cool to lie to the chairman of the joint chiefs or the sec of defense when you are only a general.

Were these his "nominal" bosses or his REAL bosses.

Or was Clinton telling him what to do? If so then he should be covered unless he disobeyed direct orders and did NOT get Clinton's approval.

Who knows?

If Clinton does not bail him out then we should know whether he is Clinton's candidate.

"But if it is true it is true." The article is loose and full innuendo.
Surely you require more than that smear piece to validate what really happened?

Clark had a difference of opinion on how the war should be fought. He's said this on many occasions. He succeeded in getting it done his way. He's said many times that he wasn't always liked at the pentagon because he didn't play the game the way they did.

Slobo has been caught, Clark is seen as a hero for having ended "ethnic cleansing". No Americans were killed. He brought together a real and diverse coalition. There's a boulevard named after President Clinton Clinton has also said that the pentagon basically pulled the wool over his eyes with the early retirement thing. And it was Clinton who gave Clark the highest honor that a civilian can get. He retired three months early. He wasn't fired.

now there are specifics.

Unsourced. Unsubstantiated. That's specific details in your book?

This is just a quick smear hit to slow down Clark...Details? Specifics?
Someone needs to pick up his votes...Wonder who...

"When she first pushed to threaten force against the Serbs in Kosovo, a senior administration official exclaimed, "You people always want to bomb someone. It's some kind of orgasm." Albright silenced the men in the room by remarking, "I forget what an orgasm is."

Other than that, a rehash of a much more detailed overview of Clark's record from early fall in the NYT. Of course, this article presents only the points, timed appropriately, to support an agenda to derail the Clark candidacy the only time they can, in the Primary.

"I have always felt that a politician is to be judged by the animosities he excites among his opponents."

One that applies to the current state of our electorate (provided here tongue-in-cheek, never can tell with Winny)

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

And one that applies when one of our candidate's wins the Presidency and begins our nation's long battle to restore true democracy

"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

n/t

Saw him on C-Span at a NH rally. When this was raised he said that he had a significant difference of opinion with his (Republican) commanding officer. Clark believed that the Pentagon orders he was given would result in ethnic cleansing and raised an objection -- and was fired for his view. He said he never was insubordinate, or failed to follow an order.

BTW -- anyone doubt that Clark, if he were an active general today in His Chimperial Majesty's army -- would be fired for his opinions on US involvement in Iraq? You bet he would! LOTS of Pentagon career military leaders have been displaced or fired by Rumsfeld for having gone against what Friends of George W wanted to do.

This is merely contrarianism to make the very competent Clark look incompetent. In hindsight -- looks like he made the right call -- doncha think?