Reply #14: Here is what you need to think about [View All]

Whether or not you ever give a trace of support to Wes Clark for anything. You are upset about the war in Iraq, for Damn good reasons. I have no doubt that you, like I, on at least some level are still furious about the Democrats in Congress in 2002 who didn't do more to stop the U.S. from going to War with Iraq. I am not just talking about the actual IWR vote and who voted which way and why. I am talking about the way that Democrats that year, fearing opposing a "popular war time President" after 9/11, allowed George W. Bush to continually demonize Iraq and Saddam Husein for months even before the IWR vote. I am talking about the way that Democrats caved and let the pre mid term election cycle be dominated by Bush's war agenda, when they knew damn well that there was no urgent need to deal with Iraq right then no matter what Hussein might or might not have been up to. Bush steered the debate into why and how we needed to confront Iraq as a national priority, not whether it was wise to do so in the first place. He shoved us down that slippery slope and Democrats were there shoving right along side him

That is happening now with Iran. Do you need glasses? Why can't you see that? However deadly the military conflict with Iraq has been, an American attack on Iran, even if it is just a "surgical strike" with "smart" bombs to take out Iran's nuclear facillities, would open up a Pandoara's box 10 times larger than the one the U.S. opened by attacking Iraq. The time to organize against our drift into the next war in NOW damn it. Doesn't it frustrate you how hard it is to stop a war once it has already started? You want our troops home from Iraq yesterday, fine. How are you going to make that happen? I fought the Viet Nam War for 7 years and two Presidential elections before it ended. It's damn hard to turn off a war when the President of the United States is determined to continue it. We failed to elect a Democratic President in 1968 and 1972 and the Viet Nam war continued. We "failed" to elect a Democratic President in 2004 and the war in Iraq continues. Our next crack at the White House is in 2008.

It is much easier to stop a war in its tracks before it even gets started, which also happens to be healthier for birds and children and all living things if you are a fan of bumper sticker politics. So by all means keep fighting for "Out Now" from Iraq if that is what you believe, but at least pay attention out of the corner of your eye to the constant effort that Wes Clark has been engaged in for three years now, making the case in the face of the Chicken Hawks that the United States needs to negotiate directly with Iran. Whenever Clark is asked about Iraq he always manages to make the point that we must be willing to talk with Iran.

Do you think that's coincidental? I don't. I know Wes Clark is worried that the Bush Administration is setting the stage now for an attack on Iran. He uses every discussion about Iraq to talk about the need for a political and diplomatic, not military initiative, and he always stresses the need for direct diplomacy with Iran. The peace movement, as is too often the case, is behind the curve on this one, just like they were with Iraq. Clark was warning against ill founded U.S. military plans for the Middle East back in the Summer of 2002. Now he is warning against U.S. hostility toward Iran. To keep this post from getting to long I am going to follow this with a seperate post focused on Clark's warnings about war with Iran.

Diss Clark all you want, but for God's sake don't ignore his warnings this time.