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 #5: According to Wes Clark, it was an effort started long ago by PNAC [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 Aug-27-06 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. According to Wes Clark, it was an effort started long ago by PNAC
that didn't turn out the way that they had envisioned (5 year campaign, starting with Iraq-establish bases there and move to other countries in the ME)...and so now, we're kind of stuck there....cause we've opened Pandora's box....and if we leave, it explodes.....and if we stay, we and the Iraqis keep dying.

EXCERPTS FROM HARDBALL INTERVIEW 12/17/04

CLARK: ...I think, you know, a guy like Bill Kristol, what he sees is that Secretary Rumsfelds plan is not unfolding the way that the neocons thought it should unfold in the Middle East. This was supposed to be like a scaffold. You know, you just go in there and carve out Saddam Hussein, boom, the people are liberated. And theyre all democratic. And then the Syrians jump on board and say, hey, by golly, come and save us too. And then the Iranians and the Lebanese.

It hasnt worked that way, because what the neocons didnt understand is, that you dont get the kind of Democratic reform you want in the Middle East at the barrel of a gun. And theyre holding Rumsfeld responsible for that. But really, its a flawed conception.

MATTHEWS: Thats interesting. Youre the first person Ive heard say that, general. Because a lot of people look at it much more narrowly and they say the reason were getting criticism of the general is there arent enough troops there. He said he had enough troops, when really in reality, it was the conception that justified the low troop level. Is that your point? That you did not need a lot of troops, because you werent going to face much of an insurgency.

CLARK: .....One is the point of the neocons, which is not military at all. It is the point of the operation and the fact that you could sort of go in there and lance the boil of Saddam Hussein, get him out of there and everything would turn out OK. And it hasnt."
http://securingamerica.com/node/60

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