Wes Clark sez...

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by pettyfog, Jun 29, 2008.

  1. Spencer

    Spencer Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    But Don he did of course go to war in Iraq on the flimsy pretense which was used. He whole heartedly voted for and supported the war. The neo cons sold it and McCain bought it. The war which caused us to take our eye off the ball in Afghanistan. Not to mention McCain's desire for a century long military presence on Iran's doorstep, setting up a new showdown, just as the neocons advocate. Military service or not these actions as a politician speak for them self.

    If I didn't know any better I'd say you should vote for that Obama fella 8)
     
    #21
  2. Lyle

    Lyle New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    I am particularly proud of our country for having gotten rid of Saddam Hussein's horrible regime. Supporting the War is not something anybody should be ashamed of, in my opinion. The post-invasion was intially messed up, but the Bush administration has learned from its mistakes and is putting the next President it a much better position than a year or two ago.

    War is ugly and disgusting, but unfortunately we live in a violent world with very bad people in it, like Saddam, Kim Jung Il, Robert Mugabe and the Sudanese government, which makes doing ugly and disgusting things a must.

    I'm voting for Obama, by the way. He's ruthless like Caesar. Watch out Osama, here comes Obama!!!
     
    #22
  3. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Back to the point:

    It surprises me that Clark's statement that McCain's 5 years in captivity didnt teach him anything about being a 'president' was not immediately turned back on him. But I didnt think of it, and neither did anyone else that I read.

    Oh, I nibbled at it when I pointed to Clark's order to attack Russians and I'm sure that was most prevalent to everyone else.

    The KEY element, however was not brought up... McCain could have been released early as a political gesture. As the son of a prominent naval officer, his release would remove an identifiable face in the ranks of POW captives. And been a PR coup for NV's cause.

    Surely, when given the choice McCain, who was otherwise just another pilot, must have thought about it. He might even have thought about whether or not the war was just and whether we should have been there in the first place, and his role in that war.

    In the end, John McCain, under at least SOME degree of pressure, decided that it wouldnt be right for him to accept a privilege not offered to others in captivity. And that his release would score propaganda points for the enemy.

    Sounds Presidential to me.

    Under perhaps the same degree of personal pressure, Wes Clark made the wrong decision in ordering an attack on Russian military units.

    Here's another guy who came to the same conclusion...but all I had to do is read the head, to think about what I wrote above.

    Why McCain's Captivity Matters
     
    #23
  4. ChicagoFan

    ChicagoFan New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    McCain is out there constantly playing up the "Look at me! I'm a hero! I was held in a prisoner of war camp!" stuff all the time. Christ, last week, he even tried to claim that his time as a POW made his healthcare plan better! :roll:

    If the right-wing loons don't want McCain's credentials examined, then stop touting his time as a POW as somehow connected to his ability to be President.

    Clark specifically HONORED McCain for his service and for his sacrifices, but merely pointed out the fact that despite all of the righties playing up McCain's "war hero" status, being held as a POW does not have any bearing on one's qualifications for President.

    As always, the bed-wetting righties, being wholly incapable and unable to respond logically or coherently, just spout their usual fake outrage and hand-wringing, crying about something Clark never said.
     
    #24
  5. dcheather

    dcheather Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    I thought the whole thing was about attacking McCain credentials on military and foreign policy. Fine, if you want discredit his policies that's fine...but you don't have to take make a comment like being shot down doesn't make you qualified to be President. That's not what anybody in the McCain campaign has said, that's not the point of them touting his military service or POW experience. The whole point of touting his military and POW experience is the sacrifice he's made on behalf of his country.

    Wes Clark could have made almost any argument on why Obama may be better than McCain, but he chose the route of dismissing McCain's POWs experience making him qualified for President. And, yes, getting shot down doesn't make you qualified for President. But really it's not the big issue at play here. If you can't see why Clark's statement is a bad idea to make then you should really stay out of politics. (Clark included)
     
    #25
  6. FFCinPCB

    FFCinPCB New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach, FL
    It is a bad idea on a personal level, but a point that resonates with many (as evidenced by many on this website) and has the desired result of somewhat neutralizing the political effectiveness of McCain's or the Republican's use of that no doubt terrible experience.

    Which really, is probably a good thing. Being a POW absolutely shows the mettle of this man, but does not exactly show how great his decision making was, or is.
     
    #26
  7. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Which means you totally dismiss my take on it?

    Granted, you cant apply one stressful situation to another in a totally different environment, but it DOES show a measure of the man outside of his ability to withstand privation.
     
    #27
  8. dcheather

    dcheather Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    I'm not looking at Clark's statement in terms of a Republican v. Democrat issue. It's just stupid to try and turn something that a lot of people admire about a man into a negative, or neutralize it in that manner (especially when the man was held captive and tortured for 5 years). And try to do it on a National news program, so when it backfires it runs on a national news networks for a week or so.

    In politics if you want voters to gloss over an opponent's strength, then attack his/her flaws. If most people right now are against free trade, then attack him on his free trade votes. You always talk about the weaknesses not the strengths of your opponent.

    I doubt Clark's statement neutralized any positive of his military service, instead it probably helped McCain with Republican (who have been lukewarm to McCain) and independent voters.
     
    #28
  9. FFCinPCB

    FFCinPCB New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach, FL
    Pretty much. It's just your opinion. I don't put much weight in it.


    No offense, of course. I'm sure you understand.
     
    #29
  10. FFCinPCB

    FFCinPCB New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach, FL
    Ah, but the Swift Boat Veterans kinda put a new twist on it, just looking at it from a spin perspective.
     
    #30
  11. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Ah, well... then perhaps I need to point out AGAIN, the topic title is WES CLARK SEZ..

    The issue is what Wes Clark says for national consumption and the supposed context in which he says it. When a national figure critiques someone else's bona fides, it is from HIS context that you judge it.

    The POINT IS - Wes Clark is the WRONG sockpuppet to make that statement. It doesnt matter that he is technically correct it matters that his history is far from admirable, let alone full of success.

    The POINT is that anyone who runs on service to the country or comments on another's service, needs to have that examined. We'll just cut to the chase and say McCain made the right decision at the pivotal time... otherwise he wouldnt be a Senator, just a footnote in Nam war history.

    The fallout is that, once again, Obama's campaign is embarrassed by even the casual person who pays attention to such things erupting in hoots and derision, not on the facts but who is advancing them. And once again, Obama has to cut someone loose in one way or another.

    In the larger picture which is far more important, it boils down once again to those Barry associates with, now and in the past. Will it hurt him? No... it hasnt bothered anyone to the point of double figures approval drops that so many former and current Marxist/Maoist/World socialists are crawling out into the light to support Obama. Or how many of his campaign staffers have Che posters on their office walls.

    That the only thing Barry ever managed was community action programs, doesnt seem to faze. The point that NONE of the final three EVER managed anything (sorry.. Clark is also technically right on being a Squadron Commander) is troubling... but that's what we've got.
    - - -- - - - -
    As far as 'Swift-Boating', if you step back and look at it, I'm pretty sure the only thing that made an impression on the average voter, from all the pissing contests, was that John Kerry misremembered the date he was in Cambodia, that he got three purple hearts from minor wounds and left early, then testified on US war crimes. They wont even remember that the pal he testified with was a lying phony.

    And of course his intro at the convention... which was a BIG mistake.

    - - - - -- -
    By the way, a heads-up... this wont be the LAST silly sally at McCain's wartime record. His own plane was involved in the biggest carrier fire disaster during the war.
    It's on record and it's on youtube. I expect it to be put front and center.... something like "John McCain: always at the wrong place at the wrong time"
     
    #31
  12. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2006
    Location:
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    1. The Che poster you showed on an earlier thread was, I believe, in the San Antonio Democratic Party HQ. As you pointed out then, people will wear anything if it's a fashion statement, and that this shows their ignorance -- IGNORANCE=LACK OF KNOWLEDGE. It's a hell of a leap to translate that poster into "how many of his campaign staffers have Che posters on their office walls."

    2. Please, please, please identify the "former and current Marxist/Maoist/World socialists" who have been absent from the political stage for a while and ar now "crawling out into the light to support Obama." Please identify the Marxist/Maoist/World socialist organizations that each of them belongs to.

    3. Clark's comment is only an "issue" because it was seized upon by radio and TV commentators. That's fine; that's their job. What Clark said, however, IS TRUE. While the military is part of the defense department, and the defense department is part of the executive branch, spending 20+ years in the military does not give any indication of McCain's ability to run the executive branch. Granted, based on that definition, Obama has even less, but that's not the point. Oh, and Clark's comment pales in comparison to the 2000 NeoCon Bushie whispering campaigns in Arizona and South Carolina that his time in the North Vietnam prison camp had made him too mentally unstable to be president.

    4. Each campaign has been embarrassed several times a week for the last month or so. Where's the thread about McCain's inability to remember what he said -- on camera -- from week to week? I know it's in the "same shit different day; why bother to talk about it" folder that this thread should have been left in.

    THE POINT IS that, with 'fog and others, when criticism comes from the left it is either classified as unpatriotic, socialist, terrorist, and evidence of hatred of America, or it is ridiculed as simplistic and evidence of someone being duped. When it comes from the right, it's characterized as shining a light into a dark corner, and the viewer shouldn't be offended by the bombast and tone.

    THE POINT IS that Clark's comment implied nothing sinister nor did it come anywhere near a criticism of McCain's military service, nor of his time in a prison camp. As I said very early in this thread, there's no fire there BECAUSE THERE IS NO SMOKE. This issue is right up there with "where's the lapel pin" in terms of a non-story.
     
    #32
  13. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    It's the same place as Obama's waffling Don. We cant comment on each and every embarrassment.

    The latest Che-lover is a judge and Obama campaign organizer in Toledo. If you want, I'll look it up.

    And if you want I'll email you links to each and every leftist insignifica .. like I said, I aint gonna put em all here, it's embarrassing.

    It seems odd that you STILL dont get it.. it has nothing really to do with McCain. It has to do with campaign bullshit. and like I said, who is behind Barack and what they say.

    If you WANT I can also email links on White-power support for Barack because THEY believe that one term and that's the end of race-relations going forward.
     
    #33
  14. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2006
    Location:
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    no need; I just wanted you to identify which of those three categories Brzenzki belongs to -- seeing as how he was a hard-line anti-Communist Cold Warrior.
     
    #34
  15. Clevelandmo

    Clevelandmo Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    If you think McCain (Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, etc) all voted for the Iraqi war resolution under the flimsy pretense of the neo cons, you are deluding yourself. They all had their own brains, their own staffs, direct experience with the Iraqi issue, their own agendas, and their sworn duty. Blaming this on evil-doing neo con manipulation is so lame. Here is what President Clintion said about Iraq in 1998

    Taken from his speech to the joint Chiefs of Staff; here is entire text

    http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/ ... nton.iraq/
     
    #35
  16. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    If I had to put him in a pocket, I'd put him in 'Third World apologist'... which is what I've said all along, isnt it?

    It aint the labels, Don.. it's the words, actions and results. Isnt that the meme on Dubya?
     
    #36
  17. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Way to go, Mo. But you forgot J Rockefellers's ringing speech, the 14 UNSC resolutions ignored, the fact that GoI is looking to sue the UN on its sanction and participation in the Oil for Food fraud...and my personal favorite drive-by:

    "If Dubya lied on the WMD, why didnt we find them?"

    I know the answer, I've written the answer ...but some think it's too silly. Even though it was Saddam doing it. He destroyed most and shipped the rest to Syria, so they couldnt be used against him.. AND didnt list the WMD's as disabled so his enemies would think he still had them.

    Added: News that GoI has now met 15 of 18 benchmarks is met with Dem response that it's too slow; they aint doing enough, quick enough. Never mind it's lightning speed compared to what the Dem congress is getting done on our own problems.

    Why the hell dont the Dems just use the progress in Iraq as proof they were RIGHT in pushing withdrawal on a timeline? It was THEM who made it happen by threatening to pull out!


    Win-Win, right?
     
    #37
Similar Threads: Clark
Forum Title Date
Miscellaneous Arthur C Clarke Mar 18, 2008
Miscellaneous The da Vinci/Verne/Heinlein/Clarke paradigm Oct 5, 2006

Share This Page