Tom Clancy wrestles with Iraq war

...(Clancy) "almost came to blows" with Richard Perle, a Pentagon adviser at the time and a longtime advocate of the invasion.

"He was saying how (Secretary of State) Colin Powell was being a wuss because he was overly concerned with the lives of the troops," Clancy said. "And I said, 'Look ..., he's supposed to think that way!' And Perle didn't agree with me on that. People like that worry me."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/books/05/25/author.and.the.general.ap/index.html

Bushistas--they are in serious trouble!

"It troubles me greatly to say that, because I've met President Bush," Clancy said. "He's a good guy. ... I think he's well-grounded, both morally and philosophically. But good men make mistakes."


How can Clancy after working with Zinni still have anything positive to say about Bush? Why do people like him want to give bush who is by any account a totally irresponsible and incompetant leader so much credit? What would bush have to do to prove clancy's wrong?

The support bush stills enjoys is mind boggling.

yesterday. Matthews just could NOT get him to say he thought people flat out ought to resign - no straight-up yes or no answers, just a bunch of Texas Two-Stepping about how - they've served the president badly and somebody's got to be held accountable. He even was fairly complimentary about bush, painting him as almost a victim in all this, rather than the root from which this evil tree has sprung.

And let me also point out - as long as we have mealy-mouths tip-toeing around the subject, and - in effect - beating around the bush, we're goint to get similar mealy-mouth results. Is ANYBODY besides Al Gore going to name names? And flat-out accuse those who are guilty? ANYBODY going to come up with a straight answer about - who should be held accountable for this? As long as nobody seems willing to call for specific people to be held specifically accountable, you won't get ANY specific measures or preventive steps or punitive steps or anything AT ALL.

Amazing that wants to protect shrub. just mind-boggling.

He is not a neocon. And he has long had ties to, and concern for, the military. The chickenhawks could care less for the military -- to them, the entire military is no more than cannon fodder. What's amazing is that Clancy is not more negative toward them.

use that phrase? I am sure that will be a comfort to the gold star wives and mothers.

would have used that phrase. After all, he's got one of those "beautiful minds".

"But why should we hear about body bags, and deaths, and how many, what day it's gonna happen, and how many this or what do you suppose? Or, I mean, it's, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that? And watch him suffer."
— Barbara Bush on "Good Morning America,"
March 18, 2003

Is there any reason why Perle or the other chickenhawk neo-cons would care about our troops? Didn't Kissinger call them brutes that should be taken advantage of?

fungible: A commodity that is freely interchangeable with another in satisfying an obligation

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-0404180403apr18,1,7011132.column?coll=chi-news-col

"Well, it is--the reason it is contained is because we have the extra troops there. That is self-evident," Rumsfeld said, showing a little irritation. "Come on, people are fungible. You can have them here or there. We have announced the judgment. It is clear. You understand it.

We'd see who was the real "wuss".

Hell, put it Pay per View - I'd sign up in New York Minute.

My fantasy is to do a Sidney Bristow on Ann Coulter

His last couple of Jack Ryan books were Republican talking points.

book?

What he has not been has been a neocon. He has a fantasy view of the world at odds with their fantasy view.

worthy of living on God's Green Earth!

:puke:

and isnt that good>?

Clancy is still and Un-Patriotic Right Wing Shill!!!

He hates the war but still loves *!!!

:puke:

And it will give all his war lovin fans something to think about.

Remember! They don't actually listen to us or facts or anything. But if Tom is teaming up with Zinny it speaks volumnes!

It troubles me greatly to say that, because I've met President Bush," Clancy said. "He's a good guy. ... I think he's well-grounded, both morally and philosophically. But good men make mistakes."

I love his books. I'm glad he's on nature's green earth.

He is a moron, and he can go fuck himself.

back during the treasonous impeachment, he had a lot of fun.

on anything? I read one book by him, interesting. That is all. He writes FICTION.

180

at least, what is intended to be nonfiction.

Does he have access to top secret and higher information? Does he have information unavailable to all? I do not think so, he just does a fine job of selling himself, as do many other self styled 'experts'. They are everywhere, everywhere.

IMHO

180

If I witnessed Clancy cold-cocking Richard Perle,...I'd have a shit-eating grin on my face for the rest of my life!!!!

:bounce:

*shrug*

mistake?" Oh, OOps, I broke it? I don't think so.
As someone wrote people like Perle and Bush used the troops
like rich kids who got a set of soldiers for Christmas.
Get them out, now!! As for Clancy, what a pants load!

With the difference that it wasn't just a single mistake, but rather incompetence of unprecedented and catastrophic proportions. I'm not suggesting that he should be talked up as a good guy, but "incompetent" is compatible with the public Bush that people who voted for him and admired him saw. "Evil" simply is not and will be a much harder sell. If both are true, incompentence is the trait to stress.

It makes me :-).

,...anyone who opposes the neocons. Yes, I am. :hug:

Yes, I am. :hug:

OK....Georgie is someone you would like to sit and have a beer/barbeque with....what the hell has this got to do with being President of the US. The homeless man on the corner seems to be a good guy but I don't think he is capable of leading our country.

Why are we allowing the mediawhores to use the comparisons of Georgie-nice friendly guy, Kerry-cold and imfriendly?

These Neocons: Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Perle, Wolfowitz, etct., etc., are the biggest threat that this Nation has ever had and to endure and to label them as someone you would love to have in your home to share refreshment with is more than a little creepy.

These are people who would not be on our side in a debate about almost anything....else. It is a thousand times more powerful that people who like them can't support this war than it is that people who their natural opponents don't support it. And it's more than significant that neither one would say that they'd vote for Bush unless he changed leadership at the Pentagon. And they told him. This is the proof of the incompetence that defines this administration. This is very good. We don't have to love these guys. What they're saying huge stuff.