"I'm not going to start the Third World War for you," he told Gen. Clark

[rabid_nerd]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/671495.stm

Amid fears that Russian aircraft were heading for Pristina, General Clark planned to order British tanks and armoured cars to block the runways to prevent any transport planes from landing.

General Clark said he believed it was ''an appropriate course of action''. But the plan was again vetoed by Britain.

Article dated March 9, 2000

...

Opinions?

[wyldwolf]

1. Here's an opinion...

...my opinion is many of us have already given an opinion on this story.

Many times...

[rabid_nerd]

2. I searched back a month in the archives before posting...

No thread about this story?

[wyldwolf]

7. here's one from today...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=359782

[rabid_nerd]

35. Hmm...

My bad..

I browsed the subject lines after searching for "World War Three", and didn't allow for III

[StopTheMorans]

3. welcome to the "your candidate is now a possibility" world

where people bring things up ad infinitum (Kerry's war vote is still a topic of discussion, and look how long ago that was)it won't end until he's either nominated or drops out, so get used to it:)

[Girlfriday]

4. Old News

I wouldn't place a whole lot of stock in Clark's detractors. I have never been in the military, but they say it is even more cut-throat than politics; and if I remember right, that was a 3 star general in that story...no? Just someone who is jealous bashing Clark....sigh...now it begins!

[rabid_nerd]

5. A story from 2000?

When nobody was even talking about him for President?

It is old news as you say, but it's relevant that his aggresion was checked by what looks like even minded Britians.

[bicentennial_baby]

6. Old news in the sense

that it has been hotly debated here at DU ad infinitum...guess you missed it...

[uptohere]

10. if so, why was he fired ?

maybe its BECAUSE he had to be kept in check by lower ranking officers that he was supposed to be the supreme commander of.

The guy embarrassed himself and his commander-in-chief.

[wyldwolf]

14. More repetition of rightwing lies...

..amazing what the far lefties here have been reduced to.

Ler's see. He gets fired then gets a medal.

hmmm...

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Clark was not fired

Now the british General was ahem, asked to retire.

[uptohere]

27. OK if thats what you chose to believe

.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Yes it is worst than in the civilian world,

In that you are correct.

Now here is what many are missing in that story.

Clark got orders from Xavier Solana, civilian head at the time.

He had CIVILIAN authorization. That is the way it works.. and
Solana had also consulted with the Allies including Clark's CiC.

Also the british officer who refused to obey his orders, was
severely disciplined by the Ministry of Defense and retired less
than a year later... anybody with military experience will tell
you he was asked to retire... his last post was K-FOR.

[Mairead]

49. Please do check your facts --when you invent things, you look silly

"He stepped down as head of K-For in October 1999 and has since been promoted to full general and made operational head of the British army."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/kosovo_profiles/jackson.stm

And in February of this year he was promoted Chief of the General Staff.

http://www.army.mod.uk/news/cgs/



If that's 'severely disciplined', I wonder what 'rewarded' looks like

[Cheswick2.0]

33. so these people wrote this article 3 years ago to bash your candidate?

D'oh

[Pepperbelly]

45. they leave out inconvenient facts ...

and I had hoped that the posters at DU would have more personal integrity than to continue to flail something like this.

So much for hope, eh?

[CentristDemocrat]

8. Thank you for continuing to bash Clark.

It makes me want to vote for him even more. If out-of-touch leftists want to bring him down, then he must be doing something right.

[Cheswick2.0]

36. oooh you get the Tucker Carlson award for meaningless labels

calling Rabid Nerd an out of touch leftist is funnier than you know.

[wyldwolf]

47. Oh, you have competititon for that award, cheswick?

"Generic Newbie Clark Supporter"

:eyes:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=361836&mesg_id=362296&page=

bwahahahaha!

[oasis]

9. Send a report to Bill, Hillary, Al Gore, and Micheal Moore before

they make fools of themselves by supporting this maniac.

[rabid_nerd]

13. Well only Moore has done that

The rest of your list haven't been glowing enough for anyone to consider any more supportive of him than of any of the other candidates

[wyldwolf]

16. Clinton called Clark "one of two stars of the democratic party..."

...and Clinton/Gore campaing heavyweights have flocked to Clark's campaign.

Sounds like glowing endorsements to me.

[rabid_nerd]

19. Clinton will sing about any Democrat

when asked.

[wyldwolf]

20. Really? He's been asked about the other nine...

..and hasn't rendered near the compliment he bestowed on Clark.

Try again.

[rabid_nerd]

24. He's said glowing things about

Dean and Kerry, at the very least. Probably more than half of them.

[CentristDemocrat]

26. He has said the most flattering things about Clark. Period.

[rabid_nerd]

37. Not So. Period.

Sorry, but you're grasping at straws.

Even Hillary's being on the committee was slapped down.

[wyldwolf]

51. Where's your proof?

talk about grasping at straws!

[wyldwolf]

50. Really? Where? Show us... prove it... c'mon!

Sources?

[jumptheshadow]

11. Dear Rabid,

Love your name.

Try DU search using the keyword "Pristina." You'll probably pull up dozens of threads. Also try Google search, it looks like there's some detailed stuff being written out in Blogland.

On edit: Don't know why the threads aren't coming up in DU search.

[starscape]

17. I think I can weigh in on this

This entire episode has turned into "Clark almost started World War III." Which is B.S.

Clark knew the Russians would have backed down (in my opinion), it was a pissing contest, and when you read Clark's quotes about it after the fact, they make a lot of sense. He explained that by the Russians even being there, by even presenting a force there, they were essentially giving themselves as much power as NATO without any attempts at coopoeration with the coalition.

And (now my words, not his) as avowed allies of the Serbs, they were basically arriving as a hostile force. Should we have just rolled out the red carpet for them?

Anyone who perpetuates this World War III crap has a short memory, realizing that the Russians really tried to throw weight around that they didn't have, and went out of their way to frustrate the coalition forces, both diplomatically and with some show of military presence. The way I see it, Clark was simply, effectively going to stand them down.

[rabid_nerd]

21. I disagree.

I see the britain as the person with the guts to stand up against a wrong deicision.

London's veto wouldn't be used against a non-aggresive maneuver. You don't call the police because your brother wants to go to Burger King, unless he just told you he was going to rob it.

[CentristDemocrat]

23. It's obvious you AREN'T going to vote for Clark

So why even continue the bashing?

[rabid_nerd]

38. For the same reason as pointing out what Lieberman has done

To show other's why I'm not voting for Lieberman or Clark.

[starscape]

28. that's something to consider, but...

...at this point we're both just speculating. But you know as well as I do that in military maneuvres involving multi-lateral action, and coalition forces, politics are played with much more in mind that just regard for the military situation. There really is no telling why the British commander did what he did, and now he is famous for his little "in your face, General" statement about World War III. It sure got his name in the papers, didn't it?

But now for detractors to blow his little slap into fact, that Clark almost started WW III, is wildy exaggerated in my mind - and if nothing else, paints the Russians as maniacs if they would have taken the so-called "bait" and engaged the NATO force. It just doesn't make sense. But nothing needs to make sense when people start tearing some down.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. It Has Nothing To Do With Burger King...

The Russian's totally ignored protocol and the chain of command...

I'm not a military man but I know if you don't have chain of command in the military you don't have anything...

I remember watching the event unfurl live on CNN... All the commentaors made it clear the Russians were grandstanding and coming to the aid of the Serbs ; their traditional allies...

[rabid_nerd]

39. Who cares?

We weren't exactly a saint over there by any stretch. When a country's involved and we're playing hardball, noone else is allowed to?

[Brian Sweat]

18. Wow, this is breaking news. How come no one told us about this before.

Next you'll be telling us that Clark was responsible for Waco.

[Pastiche423]

25. Why it keeps coming up

Not every DUer sits at their computer reading DU 24/7. The same goes for lurkers.

Plus this is an extremely important topic. It demonstrates clark's temper and judgement. People need to be aware of this.

Btw, he wasn't wholly responsible for Waco, but he certainly had a part in it.

Government vs citizens.

[Pepperbelly]

44. is there any right wing spin you will reject?

If so, we certainly haven't stumbled upon it, so long as it's anti-Clark. And you know, if your candidate pulls this off and gets the nomination, the hysterics exhibitied by his followers are certainly going to make it tough to support him without a bad, bad taste in the mouth.

[ieoeja]

22. What do you consider wrong?

The Russians, without consulting KFOR command, rushed in troops to capture the airport for their, not KFOR's, use. Afraid the Russians were planning to setup a client state that would likely keep the region inflamed for decades, Clark orders the nearest NATO forces to block the runways.

As gutsy moves go, I wouldn't quite rank it up there with Kennedy's actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The British commander's hyperbole aside, the Russians certainly were not going to start WW-III over this as the Soviets considered doing over Cuba.

And, of course, Clark ultimately got his way anyhow by having the neighboring countries block their airspace when the Brits were afraid to block the runways.

[moondust]

30. Classic overreaction overblown by the media.

A more appropriate thing for General Jackson to say would have been: "Do you have NATO/UN approval for this mission?"

He sensationalized and the media was quick to pick up on it because sensationalism SELLS!

[RobertFrancisK]

31. So sick of this story, needs to be cleared up

Russian troop unexpectadly came over after Clark had planned the battle, so he tried to keep them back, then some limey General said "I'm not going to start WW3 for you" and suddenly Clark was a bloodthirsty psycho. Just because some Brit General was overreacting and didn't like the idea of a foreigner telling him what to do. It's such a pathetic excuse for a story and the far right extremists have nothign else to go on, so they're using this.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. The Funny Thing

is the U S had to be brought in kicking and screaming into the Kosovo/Bosnia brouhaha...

I remember all the America Firsters led by the Father Coughlin of their day, Rush Limbaugh saying that America had no national interest in Kosovo/Bosnia and the Europeans should clean up the mess in their own back yard....


That operation sure turned out better than Iraq War2.. The Muslims in Kosovo got some form of autonomy and the Serbian people threw out Milosevic....

[RobertFrancisK]

34. And

No Americans died and we unity with Europe grew stronger.

[rabid_nerd]

40. What the $%!# are you talking about

Far Right Extremists?

This is a valid issue that hasn't been completely addressed by more than blaming the Brit.

Because the Brit thought Clark was being crazily aggresive, the Brit's automatically wrong?

The defense against this story sounds MUCH like the defense of W over Iraq!

[RobertFrancisK]

41. How?

"The defense against this story sounds MUCH like the defense of W over Iraq!"

How did my arguement sound anything like Bush's defense for Iraq?
You can take one mans word or anothers. I've researched Clark and he seems to be a man of honest and integrity, so I'll take his. And if the Russians came in wit their own plan, it would alter NATO's plan at the time and endanger troops. Clark made the right move in my opinion, but Rush is firmly behind you in this, so you're in good company.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. I Remember Rush

He was apopleptic...

I'll bet the tape or transcript exists where that fat tub of goo harumphed "We have no national interest in Bosnia"

Call me naive but that operation was the kind of humanitarian intervention I support....


on edit- The Pope's position was ambiguous... I inferred or implied he supported it....

[RobertFrancisK]

46. Huh, I didn't know that

Interesting.

[sangh0]

42. I'll...explain...it...slowly

...and...maybe...then...you...will...understand.

There...is...no...way...in...hell...the...Russians...were...going...to...start...WWIII...over...Serbia

[Unknown Known]

48. I see that it's more important to bash Clark than Bush

We could also talk about the problems with Kerry's elite connections, or how Bob Graham helped write the Patriot Act, or how Howard Dean is more conservative than Schwarzenegger, etc.

Yes, they ALL have problems, but by God in heaven, I for one, want Bush OUT in 2004. If that means voting for Daffy Duck - then I will!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

52. REBUTTAL

For the millionth time:

Stirling Newberry's double-barreled response:

http://www.theclarksphere.com/archives/000347.html#000347

Here is Eric Tam's moderate response:

http://antidotal.blogspot.com/2003_09_14_antidotal_archive.html#106364517252030920

My own response:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=335225

DTH

[Mairead]

53. Lt Gen Sir Mike is now Gen Sir Mike, Chief of the General Staff

Since his refusal to obey Clark, he has been promoted and successively given the top two Army jobs. He is now Chief of the General Staff.

The MOD must have thought he did the right thing.