Ret. Gen. Wesley K. Clark urged members of Congress Tuesday to adopt an exit strategy for American f

[elleng]

Source: Wash. Times

Ret. Gen. Wesley K. Clark urged members of Congress Tuesday to adopt an exit strategy for American forces in Afghanistan.

Speaking to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Clark said American leaders should strengthen the national partnership with Pakistan -- including sharing intelligence regarding al Qaeda operations -- and promote economic development in Afghanistan to undercut the drug trade fueled by growing poppies.



Read more: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/17/retired-gen-clark-calls-exit-strategy-afghanistan/?feat=home_headlines

[David Zephyr]

1. Proud to be the first to K&R this story.

Now, THAT is leadership.

Gen. Clark, "It's particularly painful for me to see where we are in Afghanistan."

[clarence swinney]

70. GENERAL CLARK

what if he had been elected president?

No more Wall Street Teat Sucking in White House.

Middle Class ressurection

stop job outsourcing

Clark is smart. Honest. Knows leadership.

[Captain Hilts]

2. He's my guy. nt

[elleng]

5. You n' me, Cap'n.

[GoCubsGo]

13. Mine, too.

Glad to hear him speaking out on this matter, and as usual, I like what he has to say.

[renate]

72. mine three!

A proud supporter since 2003! :patriot:

[PSzymeczek]

21. Once again,

He's the smartest guy in the room.

[windbreeze]

53. AND me three...!! n/t

[tblue]

61. Mine, too! Long-time Clarkie here. nt

[elleng]

76. EVERYONE, PLEASE Check out his statement at the House subcommittee.

This contains his opening statement:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/18126#comment-352461

and questions for him, at part II, video:

http://armedservices.house.gov/hearing_information.shtml

[fascisthunter]

3. Obama, do the right thing

people are needlessly dying in foreign nations we tax payers have no business being there. Let the oil companies buy their own armies if they want a fucking pipeline.

[abelenkpe]

10. +1 nt

[Patchuli]

11. I wish I could K&R your response!

:thumbsup:

[Seldona]

4. K&R

He has more credibility on this issue than anyone else I can think of.

[Martin Eden]

6. The article really doesn't say much

Here is one of the paragraphs:
Gen. Clark, a former Democratic presidential candidate, praised President Barack Obama for taking his time in developing an Afghanistan strategy and said that any troop increase should wait until a firm endgame has been establsihed for U.S. Involvement in the country.

That doesn't sound like he's ruling out a troop increase -- he's just saying there must be an exit strategy.

This can be construed as an endgame based on McChrystal's strategy to wrest the countryside from the Taliban. On the other hand, if the exit strategy is a prompt withdrawal without a stepped-up counterinsirgency effort, how would economic development be promoted in Afghanistan? It seems likely that if we left now the Taliban would expand their control over the country. Is General Clark talking about an economic partnership with the Taliban?

[elleng]

15. Right, the article doesn't say much.

Transcript available somewhere. General Clark has said more recently. Searching for it.

[PSzymeczek]

23. If he's said anything,

it's probably on www.securingamerica.com

[elleng]

43. Been there, but haven't found everything.

Good idea, tho, PS.

[ShortnFiery]

16. Yes, I get the impression that if there's a hint of an exit strategy, the MIC will get their ...

WARM BODIES - at least 30,000 more of them. A YEAR from now there will be SOME OTHER excuse.

EXIT NOW!

[elleng]

18. 'Gen. Clark

emphasized that he wanted to focus on an exit strategy and a "minimalist" objective of routing terrorist activity from Afghanistan and that it would not be accomplished through military strategy alone.'

[ShortnFiery]

19. Believe that all you wish but I think he's part of "the con." BTW I've met dozens of

General Officers when I worked in "Protocol" of a Brigade Size Unit.

Newsflash: General Clark puts on his pants like the rest of us mere mortals. :eyes:

I stopped glorifying General Officers well before the time I was selected for O3, Captain.

If there were ONE General Officer whom I would follow into Hell it would be Gen (ret.) Anthony Zinni not Gen (ret.) Wesley Clark. You'd also be hard pressed to hear any enlisted Marine EVER speak ill of Zinni. He was a LEADER first and a POLITICIAN second. :thumbsup:



It required MORAL COURAGE for Zinni to retire his post from Sec of State Powell and speak out against the invasion of Iraq. That mentioned, Zinni is far too conservative for my liking but he has much more moral courage, IMO, than one each, POLITICIAN, Wesley Clark.

[fascisthunter]

22. did not know that... thanks

I love this place... everyday I learn something new.

[elleng]

25. Wes Clark and Zinni cut from the same cloth, imo.

and Wes Clark is in NO WAY part of anyone's Con.

[ShortnFiery]

29. Not even close. eom.

[ShortnFiery]

27. You're welcome.

I don't share in the respect for General Clark that many here do because he did not speak out against the Iraq Invasion.

Here's a speech where Zinni predicts much of would later go amiss in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What a tragedy that his advice was frozen out? :(

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/zinni.html

August 23, 2002

Attacking Iraq now will cause a lot of problems. I think the debate right now that's going on is very healthy. If you ask me my opinion, Gen. Scowcroft, Gen. Powell, Gen. Schwarzkopf, Gen. Zinni, maybe all see this the same way.

It might be interesting to wonder why all the generals see it the same way, and all those that never fired a shot in anger and really hell-bent to go to war see it a different way. That's usually the way it is in history. (Crowd laughter.)

But let me tell you what the problem is now as I see it. You need to weigh this: what are your priorities in the region? That's the first issue in my mind.

The Middle East peace process, in my mind, has to be a higher priority. Winning the war on terrorism has to be a higher priority. More directly, the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Central Asia need to be resolved, making sure Al Qaeda can't rise again from the ashes that are destroyed. Taliban cannot come back. That the warlords can't regain power over Kabul and Karzai, and destroy everything that has happened so far.

[elleng]

31. General Clark not only spoke out against, Iraq invasion,

he testified against it. You missed a lot. One example:

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1842

More: War didn't and doesn't bring democracy. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0505.clark.html

[ShortnFiery]

35. Do you have any inkling how ...

disappointing it is to watch a fellow DUer "slobber all over Wesley Clark" like he's some sort of God, instead of merely a retired general officer?

No, he did NOT testify AGAINST Iraq invasion although you are welcome to spin it that way. In fact, toward the run up to the invasion, he turned - kind of like he was known to do back in his active duty days.

Really, you're welcome to admire Wesley Clark, but, IMO, he's not the LEADER that Anthony Zinni was and nothing you type will MAKE IT SO. ;)

[elleng]

37. I have no desire to debate Clark v. Zinni, as you apparently do.

Slobber? MUST YOU?

TURN? Never has he. NOR is he "merely a retired general officer."

http://securingamerica.com/highlights

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/77

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/81

http://securingamerica.com/vision

I'm sure that General Zinni has been similarly decorated.

[ShortnFiery]

36. Hindsight is 20/20 for the average politician.

Anthony Zinni spoke out against the Iraqi Invasion BEFORE the fact. :thumbsup:

[elleng]

40. Very nice that General Zinni did that. So did General Clark.

2 wise and smart men, imo. Neither of them 'average' or particularly political.

http://www.factcheck.org/rncs_gillespie_gets_it_wrong_on_clark.html

Transcript, Sept. 2002 HASC Hearing:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/clark.perle.testimony.pdf

[ShortnFiery]

46. OMG! The depths that you will sink to in support of Clark? Richard Perle?

Quit while you are behind. Zinni didn't have to have "opinions" but he resigned his Middle East Envoy position under Secretary of State Colin Powell BECAUSE he did not support the Iraqi invasion.

Gosh that's just plain sad ... Richard Perle?!? You are using "The Prince of Darkness" as a resource? With respect, that's really sad. Please rethink the veracity of Clark?

He claims Clark's House testimony in 2002 shows he supported military action, but Richard Perle was there and he didn't think so. :wtf:

http://www.factcheck.org/rncs_gillespie_gets_it_wrong_on_clark.html

Further, his testimony is wishy-washy - and here's another fact check:

General Clark says he's been "very, very clear" about opposing the U.S. war with Iraq, but earlier statements show otherwise.

-----------------------------------------------------

Want to see what a true LEADER states right OUT of the Box?

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/zinni.html

Attacking Iraq now will cause a lot of problems. I think the debate right now that's going on is very healthy. If you ask me my opinion, Gen. Scowcroft, Gen. Powell, Gen. Schwarzkopf, Gen. Zinni, maybe all see this the same way.

It might be interesting to wonder why all the generals see it the same way, and all those that never fired a shot in anger and really hell-bent to go to war see it a different way. That's usually the way it is in history. (Crowd laughter.)

But let me tell you what the problem is now as I see it. You need to weigh this: what are your priorities in the region? That's the first issue in my mind.

---------------------------------------------

Retired Generals Zinni and Clark cut from the same cloth?

I don't think so.

[elleng]

55. Grow up, Shorty.

The House Armed Services Committee asked the 2 of them to participate. I am not relying on Perle. And General Clark's statements were consistent throughout; only INCONSISTENT to those who were not able or unwilling to understand.

As to the testimony, READ IT. and you're suggesting that Zinni didn't have to have opinions? General Clark was already retired in '02.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/clark.perle.testimony.pdf

[ShortnFiery]

57. Oh, that's rich. I served in the US Army, you didn't. But you did use Perle as a resource.

I don't know if that's immature, but it's less than sound.

Yes, you did use Richard Perle as a resource, and that one fact, in and of itself, speaks volumes about your faithfulness to the image of one each, Wesley Clark. :shrug:

[elleng]

59. You are sounding more foolish every minute.

I used the House Armed Services Committee hearing transcript as a resource. I don't have to have served in the US Army to recognize the distinction.

Incidentally, it was at that hearing that Representative Jones (NC) (Freedom Fries) recognized the lack of soundness of the Iraq action due to General Clark's discussion. Jones turned.

[ShortnFiery]

60. I read the transcript. Further, anyone else reading it would not think of Clark

as all that CLEAR on where he stands, i.e., please note "wishy-washy" comment above.

If that's all you have for me, it's time that I bid you best regards and good night. :-) :hi:

[pnorman]

30. Glad you had pointed that out, as I usually don't read the Moonie Times very deep.

Sound more like they're just trying to stir up some shit between Obama and Clark! (I've been very interested in whatever Clark had to say, ever since I learned that he was a serious reader of Noam Chomsky!)

pnorman

[elleng]

44. Spend some time at securingamerica dot com;

there's LOTS of info there. And let me know if there's something in particular you're interested in, pnorman.

[pnorman]

51. Thanks for that valuable website!

I'll go through it in detail tomorrow. Do you have any direct connection with it?

From my early youth, I've held strongly "ant-militarist" beliefs, and I thought I'd never see the day when I'd look at a 4 star general with favor. But old age is not only mellowing me, but melting many of my once rock-hard mindsets.

pnorman

[elleng]

52. I supported General Clark from the first time I heard him speak,

and followed securingamerica since it began. MANY of General Clark's supporters had and have the feelings you have about 'military,' and continue to support him.

[shadowknows69]

7. Thank you General Clark.

[annabanana]

8. Gen. Clark was about as far "right" as I went right after 9/11...

He's a good man.

[stevedeshazer]

9. This makes too much sense; recommended

[ShortnFiery]

17. It's a con game. We're being punked again and we will send more young people

to go KILL and DIE for NOTHING more than profits gleaned by the MIC.

There's a reason that there's more contractor personnel over in Afghanistan than military and it has NOTHING to do with keeping the country "stable" but much to do with WAR PROFITEERING.

But we, the American People are too damn docile to hold our representatives' feet to the fire.

Gee, WHAT could we do *over here* with the Pentagon's 700 BILLION for FY 2010?

Do you honestly believe occupying either Iraq and/or Afghanistan for one more day is keeping the American People any safer? REALLY?!? :eyes:

[emilyg]

12. I respect this man so much.

[Quixote1818]

14. K and R.

[IndianaGreen]

20. Obama must not listen to today's version of General Westmoreland

Wes Clark, on the other hand, sounds like those precious few that warned a previous Congress about the Vietnam quagmire.

[elleng]

24. Obama must learn from Vietnam:

Gen. Wesley Clark gives the President advice for Afghanistan
By Wesley Clark

Monday, August 17th 2009, 9:22 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/08/17/2009-08-17_obama_must_learn_from_vietnam_gen_wesley_clark_gives_the_president_advice_for_af.html


General Clark fought and was injured in Vietnam. He's written about it since. He warned against Iraq.

[David Zephyr]

28. He's giving Obama cover.

IG, I'm not sure what Obama will do, but who'd ever thought he would have held off this long?

By the way, long ago you said that it wouldn't be health-care, but Afghanistan that Obama would be remembered for. I now believe you were right.

[onehandle]

26. Next year Wes will be eligible to replace Gates. Please make it so, Mr. Commander in Chief. nt

[ShortnFiery]

32. OMG! Do you say this stuff out loud?

Do you know how jingoistic this sounds to observers? :shrug:

[elleng]

41. So?

[anonymous171]

50. Wut? nt

[karynnj]

65. You do realize that even if both wars ended tomorrow, we still need a Secretary of Defense (nt)

What is wrong with someone saying they would want Clark in that position? I would think that such a change would be met with a more universally positive reaction here than any appointment yet.

[elleng]

42. Has been on my mind ever since . . . .

:thumbsup:

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[elocs]

34. Don't confuse "exit strategy" with the ever popular DU get out "now"

because exit strategy is not get out now. An exit strategy is certainly a good first step in accomplishing a getting out eventually, sooner rather than later.

[elleng]

47. NO ONE's getting out without a strategy, first.

[ShortnFiery]

48. No, you quickly plan an exit and get the hell out of those two sovereign nations.

Congress has NOT declared war. It's beyond time that we FORCE Congress to do their damn job. There's a reason that only Congress can declare war - so we don't get and/or STAY mired in low level conflicts that will sooner rather than later BANKRUPT OUR COUNTRY.

The ONLY people who are being served are the War Profiteers. It's time to pull the plug ... beyond time.

If not now, we will inflame HATRED of the USA that will persist for generations.

We are LESS SAFE as long as our combat troops remain in those two countries.

GET. OUT. NOW.

[elleng]

54. Unfortunately Congress hasn't declared war anywhere since

???. And of course it is in the war profiteer's interest. What else is new? Pharma, insurance cos, the military/industrial complex.

Exits can't be planned quickly, as they involve complex logistical decisions, that's just the fact.

[ShortnFiery]

58. "Exits can't be planned quickly," That's the EXACT SAME LIE they used to keep us in Vietnam.

So, are we going to wait until we sacrifice over 58,000 troops and 2 Million foreign lives?

Yes, let's REPEAT HISTORY because we FAIL to learn.

[JohnnyLib2]

38. K & R

Not with much hope, though. Sigh.

[CLANG]

39. I agree with him except about the poppies

Let them grow the poppies and let's get the hell outta there!

[karynnj]

45. Here's a little audio clip of Clark speaking of this

http://talkradionews.com/2009/11/retired-general-wesley-clark-says-obama-administration-must-get-afghanistan-strategy-exactly-right/

[elleng]

49. Thanks, karynnj.

Transcript available to registered users:

http://www.fednews.com/transcript.htm?id=20091117t2335

[ShortnFiery]

56. We clearrly disagree.

It's just a stalling strategy so that the meat grinder can suck in another 30,000 of our youth into the "death and destruction intake."

Go ahead and wrap yourself in the flag and believe that these rulers truly give a damn about the troops.

Unfortunately, I believe in my heart and soul it's all about serving the Masters of War in the MIC.

The true tragedy is that you don't even realize that you are being USED and that more young soldiers and innocent civilians will die for CORPORATIONS within the MIC.

[karynnj]

64. You are assuming the decision is already made

This actually seems unlikely. Assume that the President has decided on 30,000 as reportedly, based on no public comment Gates and Clinton want. What does he gain by pausing. Very little as people believing as you do (a substantial group) will not criticize it less coming in mid or late November than in October or September.

What about the people who think McChrystal said 40,000 and 1 man less is too few - they will criticize that as doomed to failure AND they will criticize that he waited so long. They will make an issue of the time he "dithered". The fact that they all settled on one word, dithered, tells you that they are molding a negative image.

Now, what of the people who think that 30,000 is splitting the difference and think that prudent. Depending on how they like Obama, they will either herald the decision and the process or they will be ok with the decision and say that it took him too long and that was time wasted. (ignoring the prior 7 years wasted.)

From this examination, there is no gain from this period of waiting - unless he is doing exactly what he and others have said he is doing - examining all the options thoroughly.

The decision has to go beyond determining the number - they have to choose a policy that can be defended as having an exit strategy and being a policy that can achieve a goal worth fighting for. What seems clear is that they have changed part of the mission to something like a government that can provide services from a democracy, with western rights for all and a viable economy. The other parts are denying AQ a safe haven and not destabilizing Pakistan.

[ShortnFiery]

66. The DECISIONS have long been made by the Power Elite. Now the Waltz has begun ...

and that includes, "Look see!?! Dumb ass peons?!? We are going to incorporate an 'Exit Strategy' so you pissants shouldn't complain if we take 30,000 more of your sons and daughters?' Don't you dare BITCH because President Obama is taking more time before he SACRIFICES your children into the intake of the WAR MACHINE."

See how that works?

Do you HONESTLY believe that with all those BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS to be made by continuing low intensity conflicts all over the world, that President Obama would NOT submit to the Defense Contractors?

President Obama and our "illustrious" legislators KNOW exactly who they are working for ... and it's NOT The American People. :grr: :nuke:



Oh, just heard on C-SPAN that President Obama will NOT give a date when GITMO will be closed.

Yes, with GITMO and endless occupations of TWO MUSLIM countries, why should we not feel completely safe? :crazy:

But that's even a WIN-WIN for the war profiteers: If we are hit again, then FOR SURE we will occupy the Middle East for generations to come ... or until we go broke. :shrug:

[CLANG]

71. Talk about simplistic thinking!

I've been painfully aware of your posts in several threads today and you seem to make huge assumptions about what other people are thinking. You seem to think you are the smartest, most enlightened poster on DU. Am I off base?

[elocs]

62. Anyone who believes there will be a "bug-out" from Afghanistan rather than orderly exit strategy

and withdrawal is simply naive. President Obama will not be the one to preside over a hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan. However, there does need to be a timetable. If we were to wait until the Afghanis are absolutely ready they will never be ready. We can arm and supply them, but they need to fight to win and keep their own country. As much as many DUers would wish, there will not be any getting out "now" from Afghanistan under Obama.

[ShortnFiery]

63. What? We've invaded and occupied Afghanistan for TWICE as long as the last WORLD WAR.

Not being able to exit in a timely fashion (within 18 months) is BULLSHIT.

Again, WWII lasted FOUR (4x) YEARS. We've been sending our combat troops to KILL and DIE in Afghanistan for EIGHT (8x) YEARS.

Who's being punked? Yes, the large defense contractors run our Military and DOD.

[elocs]

69. Which is exactly my point because getting out 18 months is not "now" and requires an exit strategy.

For those who have kids and tell them they want something done "now" they do not mean that night or the next day or when it is convenient. "Now" implies a sense of immediacy and even 18 months does not fit with the get out "now" that I see used here on DU.
The reality is that our leaving Afghanistan will entail an exit strategy and there will be no getting out "now".

[Soylent Brice]

67. may he be the first of many in the days to come to speak out.

K&R

[Vidar]

68. K&R

[Divine Discontent]

73. my guy in '04!!! makes me proud. I liked John's platform in '08, but was SO hoping Wes would run

remove the troops by the end of next year Congress & Mr President!!!

[elleng]

75. According to Raw Story:

'If the US were to increase its forces in Afghanistan, Clark said, a exit strategy should be in place first.'

http://rawstory.com/2009/11/gen-wesley-clark-calls-exit-afghanistan/

[KakistocracyHater]

74. A. Berlin Food Drop for Afghans

B."and promote economic development in America(not just Afghanistan) to undercut the drug trade fueled by unemployment(growing poppies)."