WHY WE NEED GENERAL CLARK AS PRESIDENT

“"jihad bush , baybe....."
stratdewd
08:30:21 PM
12/11/03

Go ahead and accuse BB of being a lifelong liberal commie pinko, you dum-dum.”

“"Moore may be an attack dog but Limbaugh is an attack dog and a liar."
Tom Terrific
12:43:27 PM
12/11/03

Moore wouldn't know the truth if he was drowning in it...”

“Gotta go with FG on this one. I watch the Academy Awards and watched him get booed. I then later watched him deny it, saying he was only being booed by some scabs in the upper deck.

Pleeeease. The guy might have scored points with me if he had said what he said, walked away and been a man about it, but denying the obvious truth is pathological.”

“phaeddy, you still don't get it do you? yes real people were booing....because moorse is completely full of crap. geesh man, he hates this country. i wouldn't wipe my ass with a page from his book.


i don't care what BB is, he's just another bush jihader in my book.


environmental issues won't matter if we got no country. can any government be uncorrupted when given too much controll? no, it can't. no matter what your intentions, if you make government too powerful, it will become oppresive to all.



besides....i thought we were lovin howard dean this week....”

“HUH???”

“I'll drink to that!”

“Strat's been at the oxycontin again.”

“phaeddy, you still don't get it do you? yes real people were booing....because moorse is completely full of crap. geesh man, he hates this country. i wouldn't wipe my ass with a page from his book.


I doubt he hates this country any more than Rush does. It's all about whose hype you buy into, and you've bought into the conservative radio hype so deep you couldn't climb back out with an elevator.”

“I agree, FC.

LMMFGDAO @ Buddha -- Thank you VERY MUCH! Nice capper to my day!

Do I even need to say anything to strat? Yep!






Keep it up, slappy! I couldn't say anything that would harm you worse than what comes outta yer own mouth! LMFAO at ya, Strat!!!”

“"Moore wouldn't know the truth if he was drowning in it..."

He'd know the truth if it was swimming in BBQ sauce!”

“Can't wait to see what happens in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Saw a talk by Edwards on PBS tonight. I like what he says and where he came from. I hope he receives some serious consideration from the voters.”

“Clark: Bush lacks will to find bin Laden
Democrat says he would have had the al Qaeda chief by now


(CNN) -- Democratic presidential contender Wesley Clark said Wednesday that President Bush has shown a lack of will in pursuing al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

In a blistering critique of the commander in chief, Clark said that "capturing Saddam Hussein doesn't change the fact that Osama bin Laden is still on the loose."

"If I'd been president, I would have had Osama bin Laden by this time," Clark said at a news conference in Concord, New Hampshire, where he was campaigning for votes in the nation's first primary, January 27.

"I would have followed through on the original sentiment that the president gave us -- Osama bin Laden, dead or alive.

"Instead, he executed a bait-and-switch. He took the priority off Osama bin Laden. He shifted the spotlight onto Saddam Hussein."

The retired Army four-star general also said that if Bush questions the patriotism and national security credentials of Democrats in the coming campaign, he would not hesitate to match his record against the president's.

"I'll put my 34 years of defending the United States of America, and the results that I and my teammates in the United States armed forces achieved, against his three years of failed policies any day," said Clark, who was NATO supreme commander during the 1999 air campaign in Kosovo.

He added, "We've got a president who will go halfway around the world for a photo opportunity but won't go halfway across town for a funeral for an American serviceman.

"I've been to those funerals. I've comforted families. ... I don't think you can make good policy at the top if you don't understand the impact at the bottom of your organization."

Bush has on only two or three occasions met with the families of fallen servicemen and women, most recently at Fort Carson, Colorado, and he has not attended funerals or greeted caskets returning from Iraq.

A senior administration official told The Washington Post in November, "The president believes funerals are a time for grieving families to be together and mourn their loved ones and celebrate their lives, and he has not felt comfortable intruding on that."

Clark, who returned this week after testifying at the war crimes trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic in The Hague, Netherlands, weighed in on the case of deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

Clark said Saddam should be tried in Iraq, by Iraqis, under standards drawn up by international experts -- with the death penalty as a potential punishment.

"I think that you cannot take the death penalty off the table. ... It has to be there, to be applied to war criminals who've used chemical weapons, to those responsible for genocide," Clark said.

While congratulating U.S. forces for capturing Saddam from "that snake hole in the ground," Clark said he "can't understand why the president hasn't devoted the same energy and resources to going after al Qaeda that he did to going after Iraq."

"Right now, having captured Saddam, the right course for the country is to redirect our energies and capture Osama bin Laden, now. We've got momentum, now," he said.

"It's a question of presidential will. If the president will show the will, I'm confident our armed forces will find a way to take him."

As president, Clark said he also would "insist that Saudi Arabia take responsibility" and provide resources and intelligence to help the United States get bin Laden, including creating a joint U.S.-Saudi commando unit to root out terrorists.

He said the United States should put "intense political pressure" on Pakistan to find bin Laden and move "substantial" U.S. special operations forces and intelligence personnel from Iraq into Afghanistan.

To free up those assets, Clark said the United States should end its "fruitless" hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and turn the task over to the international community.

"I could never understand why we insisted on doing this anyway, when the international community was fully willing to participate and do it," he said.

"The experienced U.N. inspectors, who've done it before ... were champing at the bit, waiting to go there. We kept them out."

Clark said the hunt could be turned over to international inspectors because "weapons of mass destruction are no longer a threat to the United States, at least not from Iraq. We're there.

"We need to move on -- let the international inspectors clean out the remnants of this, sort out the programs, talk to the scientists."”

“Osama?

Wasn't Saddam responsible for 9/11?”

“I think Saddam was Osam's troll.”

“I think the good general is the last one to be handing out critiques of military operations.”

“Oh, Nigal?”

“I think the good general makes a hell of a lot of sense. Sh_t, how much more straightforward and to the point can you get. The arguments are logical and doable, ferchissakes!”

“I agree. Why would we take the word of a Four Star General, West Point grad over a Desserter?”

“My cynical side couldn't agree with you more, Laq. But, looking at it from a pragmatic point of view, I think that even if he didn't have those credentials, his reasoning reflects a lot of what has been going through my mind since the advent of this Iraq quagmire. The success in Afghanistan was only a partial success to me. I, for one, don't believe bin Laden is dead. An assumption like that has to be based on something and, frankly, I just don't see it. During our invasion of that country, the Northern Alliance pretty much did the ground work with the U.S. providing air strikes, if I remember correctly. I also rememebr a reluctance on the part of the administration to use ground troops at the crucial time when it mattered. Being that bin Ladedn was reported to be so close to being captured, it seems that maybe we missed the boat there and didn't use our resources to get to him as well as we could have. Some may disagree, but if I had to set up a deck of cards of the most wanted, bin Laden would be my Ace of Spades...”

“During our invasion of that country, the Northern Alliance pretty much did the ground work with the U.S. providing air strikes

Yes, but there was little "ground work" to be done, as the Taliban performed a strategic retreat. The U.S. did not have a glorious victory in Afhganistan, regardless of the propaganda coming from D.C. The Taliban knew a central government would fail, the U.S. would lose interest, and they would return to power. Already, they're making their return.”

“That's absolutely correct, Mutt. But, one of (if not the main) tagert goals was bin Laden, am I wrong? So,IMO, flushing him out should have headed a list of priorities there..”

“tagert=target”

“Regarding Osama, it's not apparent to me that removing him will decapitate Al Qaeda. Given its cellular structure, chances are even the top-tier decision makers are segmented and can withstand to lose a cell, or even two, and retain some operational capacity. I'd keep the hunt for AQ leadership as hush-hush as possible, without placing much significance on a figure who is now more than likely little more than a figurehead.”

“Good thought, Mutt. And one that has occurred to me. Unfortunately, given human nature, there is always someone to fill in the shoes of the fallen ones. That's why the gov't will always be hunting down drug lords as long as that market exists as well as why there will always be terrorism as long as their puropose exists. I guess it's just that bin Laden has done a lot of damage in his past. Losing him would probably be a morale boost for the U.S. (just as Sadaam was) and would definitely be a setback for them.”

“Let’s keep some perspective Q. Clark has a less than sterling military record. Let’s not sugar coat it. Do really good generals get names like [fill in the blank] Butcher? We keep hearing about Iraq being a quagmire while the operations Clark was in charge of years ago are still going on. Why are we still in Bosnia?”

“Osama is hiding out in an extremely geologically rugged country where the vast majority of the people love him and regard him as a hero. We'll be lucky to find an identifiable body one day, much less the living Osama. It's not like going after Saddam, where the vast majority of the locals hate him.”

“why there will always be terrorism as long as their puropose exists

Yes, terrorism will never completely disappear as long as there are religious zealots (and to a much lesser extent secular zealots). However, it is possible to erode the base of support from terrorism. Regarding current events, it comes back to the Arab psychology: the perception the U.S. is vulnerable, and the perception that terrorist organizations can withstand U.S. counter-assaults. Lacking a major overhaul of Arab culture/government/religion, it seems to me the best outcome would be to instill a sense of impotence in their minds. That is, hit them as hard as we can as often as we can on as many fronts as we can. Who's going to sign up to be a terrorist if that most certainly means death/imprisonment without any gain? Who's going to fund terrorism if that most certainly means seizure of their assets or regime change? Who's going to support terrorism if it means invasion and secular democracy - the antithesis of their goals?”

“Election time is coming. It's easy enough for Clark to throw bullets of criticism and make claims. Does the general indicate just how he would have accomplished acquiring Osama by now?”

“Who's going to sign up to be a terrorist if that most certainly means death/imprisonment without any gain?

This is the part that gets me about these people. They aren't afraid of deaths. These nitwits are convinced that this is the right thing to do! That's what makes 'em terrorists!


Who's going to fund terrorism if that most certainly means seizure of their assets or regime change

This is where I agree with you more. Hit 'em in the funding. Freezing or confiscating their assets is where you make them impotent. Death? They don't give sh_t about death!”

“But mutt... If they are motivated to fight what they regard as a great evil and think that their reward for helping to defend their religion will be in the afterlife, how can they be discouraged by some temporary Earthly suffering?

Isn't one common explanation for the rise of Nazism the humiliation the Germans felt after WWI? Doesn't it make more sense to offer the hopeless masses a way to a better life?”

“C-bat. I think Clark made it fairly clear in the article. It's a matter of prioritizing your strengths. He's saying that a lot of what we did in Iraq was a distraction from the mission in Afghanistan and also sapped some of our resources from the hunt over there. I know a lot of you think I am nuts for saying this. But, I have maintained that the U.N. efforts were not as impotent as a lot of pundits made us believe...”

“But that doesn't follow historical precedent. Terrorism wasn't nearly as established before Clinton's reign. It's the perception of the Americans being a Paper Tiger that gave rise to A.Q. et al. Make no mistake - the terrorist leadership is not in this for religious purposes. They are intent on creating a base of power, and religion is their tool of control. Sure, there will always be religious loonies. However, global-scale operations will wither if the average religious nut sees no purpose in fighting the West - afterlife reward notwithstanding. Global-scale operations will wither if the leadership and potential leadership face certain death, imprisonment, humiliation.”

“I would like to believe that there are some secret operations going on in Afganistan that aren't making the news.

The lack of news we see is the same lack of news OBL and others will see. Which maybe beneficial since any enemy can see/hear what is happening on CNN for the most part. It's possibly like the cat vs. mouse game. We televise that we are 'kinda' backing off the pressure and/or showing a lack of interest by focusing on Iraq and maybe the mouse will reappear. Just a thought, I don't believe we have giving up on the OBL network but we're just going about it more discreetly since we hardly have any 'friends' over there.

Clark would only be as good as his cabinet members. He wouldn't be calling any shots cuz that to much responsibility for a prez in matters like these. You need a fall man.”

“There's some truth to an extent with what you are saying, Mutt. But, you are underestimating the mind games that the bin Ladens of the world can play in recruiting the weaker masses for their purposes. Whether under the guise of religious purposes or what, they have managed to accomplish this sort of brainashing on a scarily large scale. The success of 9/11 is evidence of that. And anyone who thinks that what has been accomplished since then is enough to render that moot is disillusioning themsleves...”

“Why are we still in Bosnia?

... or Japan or Germany?...”

“Throwing resources at the mountains of Afghanistan would have created a carnage situation, and Clark knows it. With that kind of terrain and that level of support it would have been messy to continue throwing "strength" at rooting Osama out of the Afghani hills. I think it is being done at this point on a more covert level. Unless you think that Bush has truly done this bait and switch, and has blown Osama off? Dont think so.

Clark is just talking smack. They should give me your job tree, I would complete all your requirements before you have been doing it. I will make the company more money that you are. Not true no doubt, and not an exact analogy either, but its easy to say.”

“And anyone who thinks that what has been accomplished since then is enough to render that moot is disillusioning themsleves

Agreed, but we're only just beginning. It's imperitive that we shut down the extremist schools and mosques. Already, Saudi Arabia is much, much more accomodating on that front after the war - just as was predicted.”

“Doesn't it make more sense to offer the hopeless masses a way to a better life?

Yes, but unless you've a proven method of doing so, that remains a pipe-dream to a large extent in the kind of time-frame in which we're operating.”

“Is this the same Clark that lead us into Kosovo many years ago and still hasn't finished the job that was suppose to take less than a year, according to his commnader-in-chief? That Clark? The one that was sent home over some integrity issues.”

“I don't want to toot my own horn, c-bat, but my record here is pretty hard to beat if you look at my evaluations. Hey, I have a higher approval rating here than Bush has in the U.S.!!!! Ha!! lol”

“Mutt, Saudi Arabia is key here, I believe. We have been way too soft on that bunch, I would say. Much more pressure should have been applied there...”

“...and Iraq was the way to apply it.”

“To Saudi Arabia? Seems roundabout. Explain?”

“Point being Tree that all Clark is doing is spouting criticism, claiming he would have done it better. It would have been one thing for him to say "I think I could have done a better job there" but he is saying that he "would have had Osama by now". What an obviously REDICULOUS statement.”

“Who's the guarantor of SA's security? It sure as hell ain't the U.S. any more. Who's the most powerful military force in the region - the U.S. Who has a decidedly improved base from which to perform covert operations - the U.S. Who will control the world's 2nd largest proven oil reserves? The U.S.

SA, Syria, and Iran have been MUCH more accomodating to the US after the war. The invasion was about gaining real leverage over the terrorist states. We succeeded.”

“Ok, granted. Not one of those reasons, BTW, presented to the American people for going over there, correct?

c-bat, perhaps. But, you have to put campaigns into perspective. Think back to other political campaings, promises, pledges, etc. And include Bush's in there too. Did you ever think it was wise to sink your heart into any ONE statement made by a prospective candidate?”

“Yes, there are good reasons for having a military presence in Iraq.

Our methods for getting there, however, were terrible.”

“My point, exactly!”

“Not one of those reasons, BTW, presented to the American people for going over there, correct

Incorrect. Only the people intent on framing the debate on the war through government propaganda missed the real geopolitical strategy (hello, phaedrus?). Anybody could've gone online and read the plethora of analysis that illuminates the real reasons for the war.”