Clark Wears Campaign Medals From Two Fronts

[DoveTurnedHawk]

<...>

First in his West Point class in 1966, Clark also won the U.S. Military Academy's only Rhodes scholarship that year. He earned Silver and Bronze stars in Vietnam, where he was wounded badly when the company he was leading on a patrol north of Saigon was ambushed and he was shot four times. After the war, Clark returned to West Point as an instructor in the academy's social sciences department.

He was a White House fellow and later commanding general of the 1st Cavalry Division. In a top staff post as director of strategy and policy for the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff, he worked with U.S. diplomatic troubleshooter Richard Holbrooke to help negotiate the Dayton peace accords that ended the three-way war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Clark's accomplishments as a hustling problem solver again and again drew the attention of top civilian policymakers, from Gen. Alexander M. Haig Jr. during the Nixon administration to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and national security advisor Samuel R. Berger during the Clinton administration.

In dealing with the Balkans crisis, Clark was "the best partner we could have had," Albright enthused in her autobiography. Top Clinton foreign policy officials continue to praise him.

<...>

Col. David Hackworth, a retired Army officer turned commentator, disparaged Clark in a 1999 column as "known to those who've served with him as the Ultimate Perfumed Prince." But in an e-mail exchange, Hackworth said he no longer believed that characterization of Clark to be accurate. "Withdrew it after I read his <Clark's> new book and did further research," Hackworth wrote, adding that he recently interviewed Clark, "and came away very impressed."

<...>

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-clark22sep22...

Prior discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

DTH

[roberthall10]

1. That's Great, But....

His military record should be something that is very much in the background. What we are fighting is an attempt by the repukes to militarize our presidency and society. If we push Clark as a strongman, primarily, then we are playing the repuke game.

[Kahuna]

6. Sure, we're playing their game. In case you haven't noticed...

they've had the ball for almost three years now. They are in charge of all of the rules. And, yes! We have to play by THEIR rules.

[Emillereid]

13. I totally disagree --

we should not be playing by their rules -- we need to provide a real alternate vision for the country besides the imperialistic, militaristic, global hog path we've been on ((whether with a relatively benign face (Clinton) or no holds barred, fascist face (Bush)) -- that's why I really believe that it is Kucinich and Dean who really do represent the democratic wing of the democratic party. We've got to get off this knee jerk idea that militarism equals strength -- a humane society with strong democratic values and ideals will ultimately be a stronger and a less hated/attacked nation in the long run. Real peace and security will only be arrived at through building peaceful, cooperative, and fair relationships with our fellow humans on this small wonderful planet. I hope Clark, because of his military background, can shed it like bad skin and project a different kind of strength if he indeed going to represent the democratic party.

[Donna Zen]

9. Agreed

That is why the Albright etc. endorsements are so important...Clark is a diplomat. What Hackworth discovered by reading Clark is that dealing with 19 governments at the same time without overwhelming complaint is not the action of a purfumed toadie.

[JPace]

2. Compare this resume to AWOLs.....

AWOL is a fake and it really shows up
when the real thing (Clark) presents
himself. I'd love to see a picture
of Clark wearing all his medals....
does anyone have one?

[Mz Pip]

3. Hackworth makes a good point.

Rather than jump on the anti-Clark bandwagon by taking what Clark has said out of context or judging him based on his detractor's spin machines, one might be pleasantly surprised after taking some time to check him out more thoroughly.

MzPip

[TryingToWarnYou]

12. Have you read the swill that Hackworth wrote?

Hackworth should issue a public apology after saying some of the stuff that he did. I had a neocon try to use the Hackworth article to discredit Clark...now, I guess he gets to eat a little crow.

Now, the cons are making a big deal about Clark posing for pics with some guy that was later convicted of war crimes..well, whoopie do...unless Clark knew about that stuff at the time, I dont see what the issue is. Of course, they dont bring up the fact that Reagan and Bush were hand in hand with Saddam...thats somehow... "different".

[Democrats unite]

4. I love Clark Bars!

eom

[Starpass]

5. We are not playing up "militarism"

we are playing up the fact that someone is willing to defend the country if it ever comes to that BUT that someone who was in the military can see shit being presented as fact to stir up a war for profit. Right now the American people want two things: they want to feel safe but they are sick of the Bush "stay scared" tactics. They want hope and they want someone who says I will go back to the world community to get help in the fight against terrorism so that we aren't going on this rediculous, no win journey by ourselves. If we can get cooperation among civilized countries, we can track, find, and eliminate these scum without having to blow up every goddamn country on planet earth to do so---which only spawns more of them. Let's wake up to the pulse of America and stop trying to shove stuff down their throats that means nothing to them and in fact, makes them angry. They don't need pontificators telling them they were wrong to support "the troops" (and that's the impression they get from some). They need someone who says it's okay to support the troops but we can not have people at the top using those troops. That's Clark's message.

[dfong63]

11. so when, in Clark's militarycombat career, did he ever "defend" the US

we are playing up the fact that someone is willing to defend the country if it ever comes to that BUT that someone who was in the military can see shit being presented as fact to stir up a war for profit.

so of all the military actions that Clark participated in, which one was "in defense of the US"?

none of them, as far as i can see.

[jumptheshadow]

7. My, my, my

So I guess we won't be reading The Perfumed Prince soundbite around here any more?

[disgruntella]

8. oh, i'm sure we'll be "treated" to it

as long as Clark is in the race

[DoveTurnedHawk]

10. I Have to Give Some Credit to Hackworth

At least he has the intellectual honesty to admit that he was wrong.

DTH