"Wesley Clark: The Anti-War General" - Chicago Tribune

A very long overview of Clark's life and career. Generally positive, but not a white wash by any means, it does dwell on some of the controversy surrounding Clark. The link is to Yahoo's News Page, which carries the story:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2027&ncid=2043&e=7&u=/chitrib_ts/20031230/ts_chicagotrib/wesleyclarktheantiwargeneral

Too many interesting quotes to choose from, but I found the Kosovo discussion quite interesting. Here's a little:

"Even some of Clark's biggest supporters think he acted defiantly in dealing with Cohen and Shelton.

"Wes was clearly going around them and trying to set up the conditions to achieve victory," says retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, a former Operation Desert Storm commander who spoke frequently to Clark, Cohen and Shelton during the Kosovo campaign.

Necessary steps

But McCaffery believes Clark's aggressiveness was necessary.

"It was a remarkable victory. If we had to do it a thousand more times, we'd probably lose it a thousand times," McCaffrey says."

Clark's hit on that:

"I never went around the chain of command," Clark states flatly.

Clark argues that his job as NATO commander was a "two-hatted" position, partly a U.S. military job and partly a diplomatic post, as commander of the 19-nation NATO troops. It required him to deal with heads of state and to make political assessments for the secretary of state and other White House officials.

"I don't think Gen. Shelton and Secretary Cohen ever appreciated that that was an essential part of my job, and that was what I had to do to hold together," Clark says."

The only real quibble I had with the article, and it is minor relatively speaking, is that it mentions Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf as a Clark critic, not acknowledging that he subsequently retracted his comments since old Norm was only going on the hearsay he heard from Shelton's unsupported comment (Clark and Schwarzkopf essentially don't know each other). Anyway give it a read if you are interested.

pretty fair all and all. :)

oximoronic statement if I ever heard one.

When you've experienced war first-hand, it tends to make you anti. This is precisely the reason the Bush admin are such hawks. None of their sorry asses ever served, so they see war in a very different way.

is in command.

being anti-war contradicts that 100%.

If he was "anti-war" he wouldn't have been a general.

Oximoron!

to do so. A general, especially one who has been shot 4 times, most often does not WANT to go to war. It's very easy for a general to be anti-war.

if he doesn't like war.

Duh.

Than one who loves war any day.

Lots of people do, every day, even for years as a profession. I know TONS of lawyers who HATE being a lawyer, but do it for the money.

Others aren't motivated by money. Others are motivated by sense of duty, honor, patriotism.

I genuinely believe that a general who has seen the horrors of war up close and personal is exactly the kind of person we want making the life-and-death decisions of our nation's Commander-in-Chief. I genuinely believe that Wes Clark is anti-war, and means it.

DTH

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

He killed babies, women, and baby seals every day of his career! :eyes:

Until you give a source for your hyperbloic allegations.

War is a fact of humanity since the very beginning.

We need more people in the military like Clark! There actually have been times when the nation was correct in fighting.

We need more people in the military like Clark! There actually have been times when the nation was correct in fighting.

let him go back to the military then, instead of trying to be president.

as an American citizen.

You have a perfect right to refuse to vote for him.

In November, that'll mean another vote for Bush.

See where your principles can lead?

But I doubt it'll come to that.

When Election Day comes you'll fall into line and march right into the booth to vore for Clark.

Until then, have a nice year.

Should Dean go back to practicing medicine, or being governor?

Should Gephardt go back to the house?

Should Kerry go back to the Senate.


Silly.

People serve because they love their country; they put their lives on the line.

It's the politicians who send them!

http://www.grunts.net/legends/butler.html

Of course Clark is not the anti-war candidate just against the iraq war so the title is misleading. The only blanket non-interventionist is Kucinich but I don't agree with that policy either.

"anti-military" General.... then it would be a contradiction. He IS anti-war whether you want to believe it or not.

You are correct in more than a literal sense, but there is some figurative truth in that phrase. Some Generals would go to greater length than others to make sure that war is only used as a last resort, precisely because they know how much of a horror it really is. Some might be more itching for a good fight, but for the most part I accept that most in the military would rather not have to command their troops into battle, they literally understand that death will follow that order.

that statement is misleading and just plain double-talk to anyone with a brain.

Don't believe everything the media tells you is the lesson to be learned.

If people still don't get it...watch Training Day.

They knew it was a mistake.
It was the politicians who sent them.
The Neo-cons are all safe in D.C.
Our troops are getting killed & maimed.
Get a clue about the military, & stop with the obvious cheap hits.

...I thought it did a pretty good job explaining why Clark's early retirement happened, and why Clinton didn't intervene.

Speaks volumes for Clark, IMO that he went to such great lengths to put Kosovo to rest.

Thanks for putting this up, it IS well worth the time it takes to read it.

Laura

I read it this morning with my coffee and thought it was a good look at Wes. He's a Democrat by DNA...loved that. :) I really like the pictures they have with the article in the Trib. The one on the first page (it's a HUGE 3 page article) is priceless. It made me smile. I also didn't know that he had a diamond from his biological father set in his West Point Class ring. That was touching. He wears it every day...it's his wedding ring, I think. The argument he had with his mother over why she didn't tell him about his Jewish heritage was sad. She didn't tell him because of how Jews were treated and wanted to protect him. That's a mother for you! Anyway, I liked the article and am hanging on to it for the pictures...they're great.

Thanks, again.

Overall an honest piece and certainly a good read. I would think readers new to Wes would view him in human terms from this article, instead of the simple heroic, which can only be good. Of course, there are those who will always view life in stark terms of black and white, but I like to think most people see through that.

Even non-Clark supporters should make a print out to keep on hand. If you are ABB it might proove valuable to you if Clark gets the nomination, lots of good to Clark gets the nomination. It answers a lot of important questions about who he is and what he did.

So... kick!

"What's behind the criticism? Jealous generals," he said. "The worst nightmare would be to salute and call him Mr. President or Mr. Vice President."

Seems like old Norm was an instructor at West Point when Clark was a student there, taking part in the debate team. Norm seemed dubious about the value of debate, as opposed to the rough and tumble of football, whatever.

So, Norm may never have had Clark serving under him, but he knew who he was long before Clark had any stars on his own shoulders.

That article in the Boston Globe that was discussed here some weeks ago included that little factoid in the Clark bio.

Maybe Norm just forgot, or maybe it was a "goof". Who knows?

Albeit grudgingly.

And we need to write to the Tribune and request that they
correct their mistake, since Schwarzkopf admitted later that
he doesn't even know Clark, and was repeated gossip.

Does anyone have that latter Schwarzkopf quote handy?
The one where he basically said ~whoops, my bad.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=927030#927044

"Was asked on CNBC about his comments about Clark. He said he was only repeating second hand information from General Shelton. He didn't know if it was true or not and said,"I said, if that's the case" meaning he didn't know if it was the case or not."


That Norman is some piece of work.

for a) making it quite clear he based the statement on Shelton's assertion, and b) offering a correction when it became clear Shelton's assertion couldn't hold water. That's more than I have seen from Gen. Shelton.

Maybe Gen. Shelton's simply too embarrassed to set the record straight (as suggested by Gen. Clark) or maybe he's too much entrenched in politics as usual. Any chance of William Cohen coming out to set the record straight? Nah, don't think so, either...

Either way, Shelton's undocumented smear about "character and integrity" has come to bite him in the rear.