Clark: "Don't break our forces trying to salvage a failed mission"

From this week's TIME magazine cover story, "Rules of Engagement"

WESLEY CLARK

If the Haditha reports are true, there can be no excuse. Not stress. Not anger. Not frustration. But this incident raises more disturbing questions. Have there been other such incidents? Does it indicate progressive decay in the standards of discipline in our forces? On top of Abu Ghraib, what moral authority do our forces retain? Can we recover our standing in the eyes of the Iraqis? And what will the ramifications of this incident be for U.S. power worldwide?

In war, terrible fears and passions are unleashed, with often unpredictable consequences. But military leaders know this--and they are charged with accomplishing the mission and protecting the troops, all without sacrificing our values. They'll do their best, even to accomplish the impossible. It's up to our political leaders to task them and give them the resources and to know and respect our limitations. And so Haditha must be a clear warning to the politicos: the window for effective U.S. action is almost closed; don't break our forces trying to salvage a failing mission when we've got more to do elsewhere.

Clark, a retired four-star general and former NATO commander, heads the political-action committee WesPAC

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1200742-2,00.html

he's a Rhodes Scholar with a good head on his shoulders and would make all Americans proud to be Americans
The measure of a good leader is keeping his cool under adverse condition. Good leadership doesn't start at the bottom and work its way to the top, it starts at the top and makes its way to the bottom. Lead by example and fear no one. imho he would make a great Secretary of State

He is my first choice to support for President in 2008.

His gravitas would ensure world leaders that he would listen as he has already worked with heads of state on various matters. I would be proud for him to lead this country in an American Renaissance.

there's no question that Clark would have been prominent in any Dem administration. He knows his stuff, and he seems to have a good moral compass as well.

Although this was not the central point of the article which I quote in part below, your post did remind me of just having read it a few minutes ago, and I thought it germane to the conversation here. In short, the Army War College warnings against invading Iraq have been proved accurate.



http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2006/06/08/haditha/


George Bush Sr. asked retired general to replace Rumsfeld

The former president's secret campaign to oust the secretary of defense was rebuffed by President Bush, a source says.

By Sidney Blumenthal

. . .

Before the Iraq war, the administration received and dismissed warnings of the dangers of a prolonged occupation from the State Department, the CIA and the military. A month before the invasion, in February 2003, the Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute published a paper by a team of its experts, "Reconstructing Iraq: Insights, Challenges, and Missions for Military Forces in a Post-Conflict Scenario." Civil war, sectarian militias, anarchy, suicide bombers and widespread insurgency -- if there was a lengthy occupation -- were predicted: "Ethnic, tribal, and religious schisms could produce civil war or fracture the state after Saddam is deposed ... The longer a U.S. occupation of Iraq continues, the more danger exists that elements of the Iraqi population will become impatient and take violent measures to hasten the departure of U.S. forces." But the Bush administration simply ignored this cautionary analysis. Among the report's cogent warnings was that insurgents could incite violence to provoke repression, forcing U.S. troops into an uncontrollable "action-reaction cycle." Nearly three years after the invasion, the Marines in Haditha were apparently caught up in that whirlwind.

I don't think there are that many 4-stars.

Somehow I don't think it was Clark.

Especially since it is my understanding that Clark cannot be SOD at this time because the SOD has to have been a civilian for a number of years prior (I believe it is 10 years).

but it has been done before, hasn't it? It seems to me that the rule was gotten around at some point in history; now I can't remember the specifics.

He gives it, at most, 18-20 months. That's the longest they can hold out without breaking down completely--and he said it would take a decade to restore the armed forces again.

What a frightening prospect! :-(

That this is exactly what "they" are doing...."break our forces trying to salvage a failed mission"