wesley clark ?

[tinanator]

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usamhi/usarsa/SPEECH/cgscspch.htm

I dont think so.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

1. Wow! Will Dean propose closing the School of the Americas?

Sounds to me like Clark is a high ranking member of the American Empire. I kind of like the idea of getting it out in the open - can Dean do that? Will Clark do that?

I bet Kucinich has something to say about SoA.

[Tinoire]

2. By the way- Remember how you asked me what I would do if

Remember how you asked me what I would do if the race came down to D or C and I told you I would slit my wrists first and then vote for X? Well, I have switched my position. I will slit my wrists first and then vote for Y.

Either that or go 3rd party.

[Ficus]

3. School of the Americas?

AGAIN CONGRATULATIONS AND THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US AT THE SCHOOL OF THE AMERICAS. - Wes Clark

wow. this really bumps my opinion of Clark down.

:dem: :dem:

[BigMcLargehuge]

4. I'm locking this

Please refesh your understanding of the Thread Starting rules for General Discussion.

Thanks

Big McLargehuge
DU Moderator

1. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include profanity, excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation. Inflammatory rhetoric should also be avoided.

3. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

4. If you wish to start a vanity thread (ie: a discussion thread in which the sole purpose is to share your personal opinion) you must state your opinion in a non-inflammatory manner which respects differences in opinion and facilitates actual discussion.

5. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.
 

[RichM]

5. Clark - a kinder, gentler imperialist. Look at this debate quote

from last night:

================
CLARK: ...What's going on in Iraq is a struggle by the Iraqi people to maintain control of their own country.

We need to change a little bit what we're doing in the military over there. We need to have lots of people in our armed forces studying Arabic. We need to put people who can speak Arabic in there and communicate with the Iraqi people. We are not doing that.
And when we stand up those police stations and we leave them alone and they're attacked, we need people there who can call in the kind of U.S. support that's necessary to beat down this insurgency.

We can have a successful policy, but only if the Iraqis are in charge of their own country, and only if we have the right military plans to succeed.
=====================

So Clark wants to be able to "call in US support TO BEAT DOWN THIS INSURGENCY." Just what you'd expect from a US general -- a few pretty words about letting the Iraqis have their own country, then POW! Down comes the iron fist. He is not really talking about giving the Iraqis their country back. He is talking about making sure the US military operation "succeeds." This implies STAYING in Iraq and "winning" and maintaining control.

If the Iraqis are really "in charge of their own country," why should the US military be the real force behind the scenes? Why should they be there at all? Clark seems to be on both sides of this issue at the same time. On the one hand, he's "giving them back their own country;" on the other hand, the US Army is still there, with the "right military plans to succeed," & ready to be called in to crush "insurgencies." This is not much different than Bush's plan. It's Bush's plan with some lipstick on it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10799-2003Nov24_4.html