NOT to flame but I have a few questions

[spotbird]

about Clark which Iwould like serious answers to. First, I am undecided but leaning Clark because he is attacking Bush hard at some real vulnerabilities, which I wish they all were doing more of the same. Second, I do have some reservations which I’d like addressed. I have not read or posted in the candidate threads because early on they seemed circular and angry, I missed information so stick with me please.

Now the questions. Clark is supposed to have said that if the administration had included him early on he likely would be on their side today. The quip was something like “If Rove had returned my calls...” Did he say anything of the sort? When did he realize that they were criminals?

There was some sort of fundraiser in Arkansas where he sounded like he really supported the President, what was that all about? Did he ever contribute money to the Republicans or Bush?

Why was he relieved of his NATO command? The right says it is because he didn’t work and play well with others, but what is the real story. I do remember that while he was still at a rank where he would get performance reviews they were all stellar and given by folks who would not now support his candidacy. What is the deal with that?

These questions stem from genuine curiosity because I want to support him, please don’t give angry answers. Thanks.

[democratreformed]

1. I have never heard from anywhere but the smear

news stories that he said that about Rove returning his call. I can't say absolutely not, but I haven't heard that from any reputable source.

I have never seen documented anywhere that he contributed money to any Republican. After his retirement, one of the things he did was public speaking. The speech you are referring to was one of his speaking engagements. Later, he did the same thing at a Democratic fundraiser.

I posted several articles yesterday which explained why he was "let go" early as the NATO commander. They are under the thread "Shelton comments about Clark" or something like that.

I'll go find it and come back here and post the link for you. In all, there were five articles from 1999 which dealt with this issue. I would also be glad to e-mail them to you but they are on my computer at home.

[democratreformed]

4. Here's yesterday's thread with the articles

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=762449&mesg_id=762449

[spotbird]

8. Thank you. I will read them.

I have to run now, but getting started is important and your help is valued.

[neuvocat]

2. About the NATO thing

Clark said that it was more over policy decisions than anything else. I think you might also be referring to General Hugh Shelton's remarks about Clark's character. However it turns out that Shelton is an advisor for Senator Edward's campaign.

I don't know if we'll ever get to the bottom of that one but I hope that helps.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

3. on his early retirement

some people suggest that Clark was given an early retirement because he ordered British Apache gunships to fire on Russian troops in Bosnia.

http://www.thenation.com/edcut/index.mhtml?bid=7&pid=945=====================================


-this can hardly be held against him by the hawks, however, because it is an instance where they would be out-hawked - and they hate it when that happens.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

5. COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT

There was no order to fire on Russian troops. That is a complete falsehood. The order was to move onto the runways to prevent Russian cargo planes from being able to land. Undoubtedly the rules of engagement were incredibly strict to the point of being a straitjacket.

Here is a neutral, contemporaneous account. Note the clear absence of any orders to fire, attack, etc.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/671495.stm

:eyes:

DTH

[democratreformed]

9. More on this incident - documented

Link: http://www.iht.com/IHT/DIPLO/99/jf061999.html

[returnable]

6. The Rove phone call line

Clark said he was kidding. Some rightwing hacks said he wasn't. You have to decide who you believe.

As for his being relieved of his command and the fundraisers, I see others here in this thread have already tackled those issues.

I hope you find the answers you were looking for. The Clark campaign could use another supporter :hi:

[xultar]

7. OK, these have been answered before but I'll try again

Why was he relieved of NATO Command,
I know one reason he was fighting the pentagon because he wanted to send troops to Rawanda to stop the 100,000+ people from getting hacked to death. Time and Time again he has said that it was policy. Right after he was relieved he received the congressional medal of honor and 2 other major awards. You can't pick those up at Wal-Mart. He received Prais after the relief of command for Cohen, Some one has posted it here. So how can you give him praise after you relieve him and then 7 years later come up with some BULLSHIT about character and integrity...
So that should say enough about his NATO experience...Others please chime in.

As for supporting the president. You'll never hear Clark attack the president in a disrespectful manner. Remember Clark is a military man. I'm sure he supported the president a little bit. I think all supoorted him at some point especially after 9/11. CLARK HE HAS NEVER CONTRIBUTED TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OR CHIMPY

As for the administration, Clark has worked under Democratic and ReThuglican administrations. So, if Gore had won he probably would have continued in his current capicity and worked for the Gore Administration. In Al Franken's book, Al mentioned thta Clark was supposed to brief Condi Rice on his terrorism plan. Clinton Administration asked him to create a terrorism plan. GWB should have implemented the plan. Maybe 9/11 would have never happened. So if they had implemented his terrorism plan he probably should have been the guy to get it rolling. But because it was a Clinton Administration initiative they decided not to implement...then 9/11.

Whew, I think I've done all I can do. I gotta watch the Debate now.

[Mairead]

12. Check your facts

"he received the congressional medal of honor"

His most-prestigious decorations are the Silver Star, DSM, and DDSM(5).

[spotbird]

10. Thanks everyone!

You gave me places to go and things to think about. I'll read them later today.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

11. Some Answers

The phone call thing was a bit of dishonest reporting by Newsweek right after Clark declared, they made it seem like "fact" even though it was obviously hearsay testimony by two conservative Republicans who had every reason and motive to lie. Clark disputes it, and I believe him.

Clark never contributed money to Bush or Republicans. He contributed $1,000 to Erskine Bowles, Democratic candidate for Senate in NC (or SC?) in 2002. That's the only record of any contributions by him. He did speak at a Republican fundraiser where he had some good things to say about Bush's team right after Bush took office. He also spoke at Democratic fundraisers and actively campaigned for Democratic candidates Katrina Swett and Max Cleland in 2002 (he actively campaigned for no Republicans).

He was relieved of NATO command because he disagreed strongly with SecDef Cohen and his flunkie, Hugh Shelton, on the Kosovo intervention. Clark strongly supported intervention as a humanitarian matter, while Cohen and Shelton preferred to stay out of it and sit on their thumbs.

His performance reviews were all stellar, and although there are a few generals who now oppose his candidacy, their opposition can be explained well by their Republican affiliations, and with the following quote from a profile from the NYT:

By and large, the jobs General Clark got in the Army were fix-it jobs, turnaround jobs where he often replaced fired officers. He worked on shattered morale, on developing an all-volunteer army, on ways to reduce casualties from friendly fire. If you did jobs like these well, you bred resentment. His performance reviews were extravagant in their praise. He bred resentment.

DTH