Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clark Wears Campaign Medals From Two Fronts

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 » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DoveTurnedHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:37 AM
Original message
Clark Wears Campaign Medals From Two Fronts
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 10:38 AM by 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
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
roberthall10 Donating Member (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #1
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emillereid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donna Zen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JPace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
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
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TryingToWarnYou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
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".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democrats unite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
4. I love Clark Bars!
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starpass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dfong63 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. so when, in Clark's militarycombat career, did he ever "defend" the US
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 02:18 PM by dfong63
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.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jumptheshadow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
7. My, my, my
So I guess we won't be reading The Perfumed Prince soundbite around here any more?

}(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
disgruntella Donating Member (983 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. oh, i'm sure we'll be "treated" to it
as long as Clark is in the race ;) :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoveTurnedHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. I Have to Give Some Credit to Hackworth
At least he has the intellectual honesty to admit that he was wrong.

DTH
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Nov 27th 2014, 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News 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