You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #17: First, the article's been cherry picked without poster using "snips".... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. First, the article's been cherry picked without poster using "snips"....
The article was NOT supportive of the war but rather questioning the fact that many were, at that time, saying "Mission Accomplished".

Most journalists and columnists, at the point that Clark wrote the article in April of 2003, very shortly after the fall of Bagdad, were bragging up and down the media that Mission had been accomplished; that Bush was brave and bold to have persevered under so much pressure, etc., etc...
{read such articles... http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030410-25191517.htm , http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030407-usia07.htm , http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030410-whitehouse-2.htm, http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030410-usia13.htm , http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030410-usia09.htm ,

Clark's article was clearly stating ..... Sure, it may appear that we are victorious in Bagdad, but hold on for just a minute now! Maybe it will be said that said that Bush and Blair stuck to their guns in the face of much opposition, and maybe Baghdad has fallen, but winning this war would take a much more than this.
(Clark's article was reminiscent of this one.... http://www.counterpunch.org/grossman04102003.html dated the same day)

Clark warned about the looting, the mayhem and stated what needed to be done from a strategic point in order to keep Chaos from breaking out. He points out that the Weapons of Mass destructions had not been found, and any goals set by Bush and Blair, i.e., Democracy in Iraq; and stability of the ME hadn't yet happen...and basically stating that we were NOT to yet REJOICE, cause the shit wasn't over......

This article clearly was stating that .....just a minute now!

"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.

and here....same article (of which you quoted two sentences), he gives full credit to the military for the fall of bagdad....

It’s to the men and women who fought it out on the arid highways, teeming city streets and crowded skies that we owe the greatest gratitude. All volunteers, they risked their lives as free men and women, because they believed in their countries and answered their calls. They left families and friends behind for a mission uncertain. They didn’t do it for the glory or the pittance of combat pay. Sadly, some won’t return — and they, most of all, need to be honored and remembered.

In the following paragraph, he is providing possibilities as to what will occur.....(one happened; the strive by Al-Qaeda to mobilize their recruiting efforts, as well as the lasting humilitation of Iraq....the other options did not).....but does NOT give credit for the policy that got us into Iraq, nor does he paint the future as very rosy....

The real questions revolve around two issues: the War on Terror and the Arab-Israeli dispute. And these questions are still quite open. Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and others will strive to mobilize their recruiting to offset the Arab defeat in Baghdad. Whether they will succeed depends partly on whether what seems to be an intense surge of joy travels uncontaminated elsewhere in the Arab world. And it also depends on the dexterity of the occupation effort.

The following passage found at the end of same article summarizes the main point that Clark was articulating in this article written at a time when many thought that Iraq was a "mission accomplished"....

"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."--Wes Clark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC