General Clark steals Deans thunder...... - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-22-2003, 11:31 PM   #46
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:42 PM
[Q]Ironically, it was in the Balkans that Clark suffered one of his few embarrassments. While trying to build bridges with Serb leaders, Clark lunched with Serb commander and accused mass-murderer Ratko Mladic. Impulsively, the soft-spoken and ever-smiling Clark exchanged hats with Mladic and accepted an engraved service pistol, only to find the Serb press waiting, cameras ready, to record the apparent show of support as he emerged from the meeting.[/Q]


http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/kosovo/koso061.htm

1999 USA Today
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-22-2003, 11:53 PM   #47
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:42 PM
[Q]Retired Gen. Clark supports Swett, raises concerns about Iraq policy
By STEPHEN FROTHINGHAM

Associated Press Writer

MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — Retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley Clark said Wednesday he supports a congressional resolution that would give President Bush authority to use military force against Iraq, although he has reservations about the country’s move toward war.

Clark, who led the allied NATO forces in the Kosovo conflict, endorsed Democrat Katrina Swett in the 2nd District race.

He said if she were in Congress this week, he would advise her to vote for the resolution, but only after vigorous debate. The resolution is expected to pass the House overwhelmingly. Swett has said she supports it, as does her opponent, incumbent U.S. Rep. Charles Bass.[/Q]

Taken last November when General Clark was campaining for a friend running for Congress. Now what is it???Please help me out here? Just Friday you said you would not have voted for it. Last Wednesday you said you would, and now it turns out that in the NH papers, you very clearly supported the vote for the President.

http://www4.fosters.com/election_200...cong_1009a.asp
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 12:11 AM   #48
Refugee
 
Bunbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Close yet far from home \m/
Posts: 1,580
Local Time: 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
[Q]Gen. Clark, Who Fraternized With Mladic, To Lead NATO

"New Republic" - April 21, 1997

Title:Clark's Expedition

Bill Clinton last week nominated General Wesley Clark to lead NATO and America's forces in Europe. If the president was trying to remind the public about the lack of seriousness with which his administration has taken war crimes in Bosnia, this is a fine choice. On August 27, 1994, Clark, then director of strategy, plans and policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, went to Banja Luka - and met with Ratko Mladic, the bloodstained military leader of the Bosnian Serbs. (My note: everybody apparently forgets that before Serbia's the aggression in Bosnia the same Ratko Mladic was military commander of the Serbian army ("Yugoslav Peoples Army") in Croatia and conducted large scale massacres of Croatian civillians there, especially in the ethnically "cleansed of Croatian population "Krajina", another Serb-proclaimed "republic"). The State Departement had advised against the meeting, on account of Mladic's well-documented war crimes in Gorazde, Srebrenica and Sarajevo. Still, Clark and Mladic had a jolly time. Mladic gave Clark some plum brandy and a pistol with a Cyrillic inscription, and the two merrily swapped military hats. What do you do with a man with that kind of moral cluelessness? Promote him.[/Q]

http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~bosnia/a...sleyclark.html
He was a soldier who had to use diplomacy to get something done in the region.
Clark was top of his class in West Point. I'm pretty sure he had strategic reasons to meet with a suspected war criminal during that time of tension.
__________________
Bunbury is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 12:12 AM   #49
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:42 PM
Dread,

There are a lot of people who would not vote for it based on what we know now.


That is why Bush's numbers are down 25-30 points.

If the American people knew there would not be any WMDs found and the Atrica nuke story was bullshit the Nov 2000 election would not have been so good for the GOP.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 12:22 AM   #50
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:42 PM
In Nov. he supported the bill authorizing force. He said he supported it on Thursday. He changed his tune on Friday.

He has accused the White House of trying to get him fired from CNN without proof.

He has claimed the White House called him urging him to promote a link between Saddam and 9/11.

We have here a pattern of a man that makes sensational statements.........and then backtracks, changes his story ect.

To top it all off, he disobeyed the advice of our State Department, met with a war criminal, got caught on camera accepting gifts from the war criminal, ect.....

I have decided he is not my man.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 01:04 AM   #51
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:42 PM
Quote:
He has accused the White House of trying to get him fired from CNN without proof.

If someone tried to get you fired from your teaching job and you had no proof would you say it did not happen?
Quote:
He has claimed the White House called him urging him to promote a link between Saddam and 9/11.
You don't believe this. They constantly pushed this lie. 70% of the American people did not just all imagine this at the same time.


Quote:
In Nov. he supported the bill authorizing force. He said he supported it on Thursday. He changed his tune on Friday.
It really depends on how the question is asked.

Did you support it? Would you vote for it now? If this resolution passed with a competent President it would not be a problem.



Quote:
I have decided he is not my man.
Does it really mattter, both of our states will be "blue" again.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 04:00 AM   #52
Refugee
 
Bunbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Close yet far from home \m/
Posts: 1,580
Local Time: 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
In Nov. he supported the bill authorizing force. He said he supported it on Thursday. He changed his tune on Friday.

He has accused the White House of trying to get him fired from CNN without proof.

He has claimed the White House called him urging him to promote a link between Saddam and 9/11.

We have here a pattern of a man that makes sensational statements.........and then backtracks, changes his story ect.

To top it all off, he disobeyed the advice of our State Department, met with a war criminal, got caught on camera accepting gifts from the war criminal, ect.....

I have decided he is not my man.
Then don't vote for him there's 9 other hacks to vote for. Eh, Dean is ok.
__________________
Bunbury is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 06:38 AM   #53
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep



1)If someone tried to get you fired from your teaching job and you had no proof would you say it did not happen?


2)You don't believe this. They constantly pushed this lie. 70% of the American people did not just all imagine this at the same time.

3)It really depends on how the question is asked.

4)Did you support it? Would you vote for it now? If this resolution passed with a competent President it would not be a problem.

5)Does it really mattter, both of our states will be "blue" again.

1) am not running for President.
2) He has changed his story about htis one three times..
3 & 4) There was no quuestion last November. In NH he was campaigning ffor a candiate and he made his statements in support of the ressolution.
5) If McCain were runninng indeependant, MA would be RED.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 10:15 AM   #54
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
I have decided he is not my man.
I'm not shocked. The supposed "liberal media" is running overtime to discredit him. Where is this similar scrutiny on Dubya? This is precisely why I think the "liberal media" is a myth.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 11:22 AM   #55
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


I'm not shocked. The supposed "liberal media" is running overtime to discredit him. Where is this similar scrutiny on Dubya? This is precisely why I think the "liberal media" is a myth.

Melon
What is your standard for "lack of scrutiny"?

Is it a lack of scrutiny or a lack of response to the scrutiny?


The "liberal" media has balanced out significantly in the last 20 years. Sources such as the NY Times must now compete with cable news and talk radio.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 11:25 AM   #56
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The "liberal" media has balanced out significantly in the last 20 years. Sources such as the NY Times must now compete with cable news and talk radio.
"Talk radio" is not news, which is the saddest fact of them all, and stations like FOX News have more in common with talk radio than they do with news.

We need to bring back the "Fairness Doctrine." That is what will rebalance the media.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 01:49 PM   #57
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,185
Local Time: 10:42 PM
This Clark thing is ridiculous. There seem to be more articles about him meeting with Mladic than were ever devoted to the fact that Bush went AWOL and then deserted from his military service. Use some fucking common sense and realize that there was a reason that he met with him other than to have a "jolly old time" and exchange hats.

And the indecision about going to war with Iraq - I for one totally identify with. I was nowhere near decided on how I felt about it when it happened. At least he can look at the evidence now, or should I say lack there of, and say that it was gone about the wrong way.

It's hilarious that the Republicans are working over-time to find these stories and then blow them so far out of proportion. He's been in the military for 30 some odd years and they dig up 2 or 3 stories of mistakes that he made. Any of us should be so lucky.

Right now Bush is making world altering mistakes in front of our face and no one seems to question or care.

As for the CNN thing and the Saddam/Sept. 11th issue. I still believe that this is true and that he was pressured by the White House to make a connection and that he CNN was pressured to cut him and he just isn't going to name names, which I understand with the position that he is in.

______________________________
General Wesley Clark for President
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 01:56 PM   #58
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by womanfish
Right now Bush is making world altering mistakes in front of our face and no one seems to question or care.
There is quite a bit of questioning of Bush. However, not everyone sees current actions as "mistakes".

The latest news articles on Clark will have minimal impact. My guess is that Clark will generate his own bad press now that the cameras are on him.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 02:04 PM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,185
Local Time: 10:42 PM
I have to agree there is a vocal minority that is questioning Bush, I just don't see how more people can't take issue with some of his actions and policies, but hey that's me..

And I think that Clark should be judged more on his current record than old stories dug up about the past. I mean GW's military, drug/alcohol use, school record, etc... are all fun to make fun of, but it doesn't mean as much to me as what he said while campaigning for president. You can only hold a person's past against them so much, and then only if it makes sense to in the political arena.

I'm sure Clark will make his own mistakes in the coming months just like everyone else.
______________________________
General Wesley Clark for President
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 02:57 PM   #60
Refugee
 
Bunbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Close yet far from home \m/
Posts: 1,580
Local Time: 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


I'm not shocked. The supposed "liberal media" is running overtime to discredit him. Where is this similar scrutiny on Dubya? This is precisely why I think the "liberal media" is a myth.

Melon
Could not have said it better myself
__________________

__________________
Bunbury is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com