another Dean / Clark catfight coming ?

[arewethereyet]

seems Dr Dean has co-opted General Clark's job creation plan. Oh dear...

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/bw-elect/2003/dec/29/122909874.html

[TexasPatriot]

1. good for Dean

I'm glad he's doing stuff like this - it shows that Clark has a sound vision for a domestic agenda. It could help later to bring Dean Supporters into the fold in the summer.

[Rose Siding]

2. They consulted with each other before Clark

could make up his mind to run. Hopefully, each benefitted from the other's advice.

[WiseMen]

3. Just like Dean Stole Kerry's Anti-War position and Kerry's "BRING IT ON"

[killbotfactory]

4. Kerry was anti-war?

You must be talking about the 70's.

[polpilot]

33. No Kerry was for dropping the bombs but against them hitting the ground.

Pro-war vote, anti-war stance, pro-anti war, pro-war/peace/bombs/oil/pro-Bush..Kerry's positions are best understood after a fifth of tequila.

Dean '04...

[isbister]

36. Re: Kerry's positions are best understood after a fifth of tequila.

Actually, there best understood if you stop drinking and have the ability to pay attention for more than a few seconds.

[exclark4dean]

37. That is VERY funny !

[blm]

5. he stole Kerry's first foreign policy speech and his environmental

initiatives. As if Dean cared about either for the thirty years that Kerry worked on those issues.

[Sean Reynolds]

6. So Dean doesn't have the right to release a plan about American cities?

Areas that have been blighted since the 60s? I guess Clark shouldn't be talking about the Iraq war, since Dean was opposed to it over a year ago.

[SahaleArm]

8. I guess you would be wrong

Senate Armed Services Committee - Setptember 2002:

Force should be used as the last resort; after all diplomatic means have been exhausted, unless information indicates that further delay would present an immediate risk to the assembled forces and organizations. This action should not be categorized as “preemptive.”

http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatementsandpressreleases/107thcongress/02-09-26clark.html

[Sean Reynolds]

10. Then there's this.....

Can anything be more moving than the joyous throngs swarming the streets of Baghdad? Memories of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the defeat of Milosevic in Belgrade flood back. Statues and images of Saddam are smashed and defiled. Liberation is at hand. Liberation — the powerful balm that justifies painful sacrifice, erases lingering doubt and reinforces bold actions. Already the scent of victory is in the air. Yet a bit more work and some careful reckoning need to be done before we take our triumph.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0917-14.htm

Now I believe Clark opposed the war. But when it was a success, he did state that liberation justified the war and erased any lingering doubt about the actions.

[StephNW4Clark]

12. Um, what's your point

How convenient that actually he says what he's been saying. Good that Saddam Hussein is gone, but you need a post-war plan.

Nice editing job though.

"Is this victory? Certainly the soldiers and generals can claim success. And surely, for the Iraqis there is a new-found sense of freedom. But remember, this was all about weapons of mass destruction. They haven’t yet been found. It was to continue the struggle against terror, bring democracy to Iraq, and create change, positive change, in the Middle East. And none of that is begun, much less completed. "

[Sean Reynolds]

15. My point? Clark was happy the US attacked Iraq when Baghdad fell.

Fact is, I didn't edit out ANYTHING, it's clear as day - Clark states that the victory only justifies the war.

I again quote:

Liberation — the powerful balm that justifies painful sacrifice, erases lingering doubt and reinforces bold actions.

Liberation JUSTIFIES painful sacrifce, ERASES lingering doubt and REINFORCES BOLD ACTIONS. Meaning that the war was just because we liberated Iraq. Tell me where it's not clear?

[StephNW4Clark]

Actually...

Clark has always said and again mentions in the article that Liberation involves more than military success. It involves the post-war plan. Which I reiterate, includes finding WMD, helping build a new democracy in Iraq, etc. So quite frankly, I agree - Liberation would have justified painful sacrifice, etc., if it also entailed discovering WMD, moving towards democracy in that region, etc.

He's been quite clear and consistent on this point, since his period from Kosovo, mentioned in Holbrooke's book as well as his own.

But snip it out without context. It's all good. Better to be without sense than misapply it as you do.

[Sean Reynolds]

22. So you're saying Clark was for unilateral attack on Iraq if done right?

Well then he really wasn't against the war, just against parts of the war.

[Donna Zen]

34. Diplomatic rules and Rogier

There is a formula for writing persuasive arguments. Clark must know this, because it is always the construct I've noticed that he follows. Also, he was writing for a foreign press...there are very strict rules about that. Always ask when analizing anything: "Who's the audience?"

Actually, I thought he slid the knife rather effectively and accurately. What does he call bush in that article? I don't feel like going back..maybe on edit.

Anyway, either those who post the soundbite found at the onset, either don't get it, or more likely, don't want to get it. That is my conclusion anyway,

[SahaleArm]

13. After the fact - War had already commenced...

and the conclusion had to be done right, to which every candidate agrees. Though their plans differ, there must be a transfer of power to the Iraqis and an international authority. Much of the article seemed like an even-handed look at the status of Iraq on April 10, 2003. Not really partisan in tone, more from a military, logistical, and diplomatic standpoint. We're there, what do we do to get out...

Then there’s the matter of returning order and security. The looting has to be stopped. The institutions of order have been shattered. And there are scant few American and British forces to maintain order, resolve disputes and prevent the kind of revenge killings that always mark the fall of autocratic regimes. The interim US commander must quickly deliver humanitarian relief and re-establish government for a country of 24 million people the size of California. Already, the acrimony has begun between the Iraqi exile groups, the US and Britain, and local people.

...

As for the diplomacy, the best that can be said is that strong convictions often carry a high price. Despite the virtually tireless energy of their Foreign Offices, Britain and the US have probably never been so isolated in recent times. Diplomacy got us into this campaign but didn’t pull together the kind of unity of purpose that marked the first Gulf War. Relationships, institutions and issues have virtually all been mortgaged to success in changing the regime in Baghdad. And in the Islamic world the war has been seen in a far different light than in the US and Britain. Much of the world saw this as a war of aggression. They were stunned by the implacable determination to use force, as well as by the sudden and lopsided outcome.

[Sean Reynolds]

16. But Clark stated liberation JUSTIFIED the war.

Liberation is at hand. Liberation — the powerful balm that justifies painful sacrifice, erases lingering doubt and reinforces bold actions.

That is the problem I have here. Clark has gone from supporting the war, by saying liberation justified it - and then turning around and saying he was against it all along.

[SahaleArm]

21. Is it from a military standpoint or a dimplomatic one?

It's certainly not definitive when the entire article is taken in context and digested. He does lay it on pretty thick before turning to the next two paragraphs on reality.

In the first place, the final military success needs to be assured. Whatever caused the sudden collapse in Iraq, there are still reports of resistance in Baghdad. The regime’s last defenders may fade away, but likely not without a fight. And to the north, the cities of Tikrit, Kirkuk and Mosul are still occupied by forces that once were loyal to the regime. It may take some armed persuasion for them to lay down their arms. And finally, the Baath party and other security services remain to be identified and disarmed.

Then there’s the matter of returning order and security. The looting has to be stopped. The institutions of order have been shattered. And there are scant few American and British forces to maintain order, resolve disputes and prevent the kind of revenge killings that always mark the fall of autocratic regimes. The interim US commander must quickly deliver humanitarian relief and re-establish government for a country of 24 million people the size of California. Already, the acrimony has begun between the Iraqi exile groups, the US and Britain, and local people.

[Sean Reynolds]

23. But why did he say the war was justified because we liberated Iraq?

I don't understand that. Just because we liberated Iraq, does NOT make the war just. Fact is, Bush crapped on the war from the start and NOTHING could justify it. EVEN if Bush had gone to Baghdad; toppled Saddam; and restored peace.

Yet it's clear from Clark's point of view, the war was justified if it were a success, thus meaning he was FOR UNILATERAL war, just not the way Bush handled it.

[SahaleArm]

25. There's no statement explicitly justifying unilateral war...

I guess we'll disagree because the quote by itself can justify more than one position. In the context of the greater article it serves as a forewarning of what has failed to happen and the results we've seen for the past 8 months since. He's always been for multi-lateral disarmament.

On edit: Can you find a piece before the war where Clark justified unilateral invasion instead of multi-lateral diplomacy backed by an international coalition?

[SW FL Dem]

26. I don't rely on transcripts

I watched CNN 18 hours a day before and during the invasions in Afghanistan and Iraq. I watched Wesley Clark for months. I cheered when he raised issues challenging the current administration and their motivations for the attack on Iraq and their plans to end the conflict. Everyone misspeaks now and then. Luckily most of us don't do it on national television. To me, the saddest thing is
that on DU it seems to be OK to point out the mistakes made by everyone but Howard Dean.
For the record, I was there when Democrats.com and truthout.org were formed. I have voted Dem since 1976, the first year I was eligible to vote. I am a 45 year old Dem who is really discouraged by the hate I see here for people like me.

[Sean Reynolds]

28. It's not a transcript.

It's a letter Clark wrote to the London Times right after Baghdad fell.

[meow mix]

39. *waves*

hehe! hi!
yeah its pretty bad..
i just chalk it up to the koolaid factor and forget it. =)

[Crunchy Frog]

41. Welcome to DU SW FL Dem

Don't let the hate get you down. It's a small minority of very vocal and obnoxious people. Most of the people on here are great. You may want to hang out in other areas of DU where there is genuine constructive discussion going on. Unfortunately, you will find precious little of it in GD Primary.

Hope you decide to stick around. We need more voices of rationality here. :toast:

[dogman]

9. Rerelease

The plan was released months ago by Clark. Bush uses Clarks foreign policy ideas. It's all good. Wes is best. We thought the D-hole was foreign policy. It looks like their was a domestic policy hole also.

[Sean Reynolds]

11. Tell me where Clark got the rights to pen a plan for urban America.

Because last I checked this is an area in dire need of attention. Dean can come out with a plan on urban cities, just like Clark can on about rebuilding Iraq.

[StephNW4Clark]

14. Huh. So I guess Clark has pretty good domestic agenda.

Thanks, Howie, for confirming that Clark has no holes.

Unfortunately, lack of foreign policy experience is a bit too gaping to fill with a VP. Especially since the Constitution specifically states it is the SOLE responsibility of the President to handle foreign affairs.

But then again, Dean and his campaign have a cavalier attitude towards facts so this should be expected.

[Sean Reynolds]

17. Why, because BOTH want to help inner cities?

I guess Dean must have an amazing foreign policy agenda, being he was against the war in Iraq.

:eyes:

[StephNW4Clark]

20. Nope

for mirroring Clark's plan. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, after all.

Unfortunately, Dean can rage against the war all he wants but "I told you so" isn't a foreign policy. Nor is it an adequate substitute for experience.

[Sean Reynolds]

24. Show me where he copied Clark's plan.

I guess on that logic you can say Gephardt copied Dean's tax policy, and Clark copied Dean's health care policy.

[dogman]

30. We know it by heart, it's been there so long

Wesley Clark for President!
www.Clark04.com

[Sean Reynolds]

31. If you know it by heart, you'll show me exactly where Dean copied the plan

[dogman]

32. Click

Try the link

[Dookus]

7. nonsense...

no candidate has a monopoly on ideas. I imagine ALL the Democratic candidates have a lot of similar plans. Nothing unusual about it, and it's a slur to imply some are "stealing" ideas from others.

[killbotfactory]

18. Wow... Clark's amazing...

Who would have thought of raising the minimum wage and investing in infrastructure and small businesses?

Clark should copyright his positions, that's how original and awesome they are.

[jmaier]

19. Well

your post pretty much begs the question. Nice work, we needed another flame fired up around here.

[Jack_Dawson]

27. What else is new? Bush steals from Clark, Dean steals from Clark...

If I was running against a Rhodes Scholar, I'd "borrow liberally" as well.

:boring:

[thinkahead]

29. bwahahaha

as they all try to mimic Dean's internet grassroots campaign.

Fact is most of the candidates are fairly similar on the issues. Funny we are so divided these days, and can't embrace the huge effect the Dean campaign is having on politics in this country.

[Tom Rinaldo]

35. I think it's cool

Finally, after having a late start in the campaign which left Clark vulnerable to the chilling fate of "All the good ideas have already been claimed", finally Clark gets to say "hey, I got there first!". Of course it is silly, except that exact type of crap was thrown at Clark earlier.

[Eric J in MN]

38. I wish Howard Dean would take Kucinich's plan to lower middle class taxes.

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/taxes.php

Walter Mondale said he wanted to raise taxes and lost.

Michael Dukakis said he would only raise taxes as a last resort and lost.

Bill Clinton said he would LOWER taxes on the middle class and won.

Howard Dean should endorse Kucinich's Progressive Tax Act of 2003.

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/taxes.php

[diamondsoul]

40. Dean can't endorse Kucinich's tax plan-

purely because of his unwillingness to cut the Pentagon budget.

As much as I really, really don't want Howard Dean to be the next President, rationally speaking, his fiscal plan just won't allow for middle class tax decreases, probably for at least a full term, and possibly even if he served two terms. He's not being a jerk, he's looking at what he's willing to cut, what he's not, and how he can still balance the budget with this huge deficit looming over our heads. Credit where it's due, he's got his priorities, Kucinich has his, and ne'er the twain shall meet. LOL