Andrew Sullivan: CLARK ON THE WAR

andrewsullivan.com ^ | 09/19/03 | Andrew Sullivan

[Pokey78]

Reading this essay by Wesley Clark, I have to say I'm not reassured that he has what it takes to wage a war on terror.

If he had been president, the war in Afghanistan would probably not have taken place, let alone the war against Saddam.

His first instinct after the deadliest act of war against the American heartland in history was to help the United Nations set up an International Criminal Tribunal on International Terrorism.

I'm not even making that up. Maybe Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia could head up the committee.

If I were to imagine a parody of what a Rhodes Scholar would come up with in such a moment, I'd be hard pressed to come up with something more perfect.

His insistence throughout the piece is on process, process, process. Everything is seen through the prism of NATO's Kosovo campaign, his one claim to military glory.

Can you imagine having to get every special ops target in Afghanistan approved by 19 different countries, including those who opposed any action against the Taliban? Can you even begin to imagine constructing a case for any action in Iraq under similar auspices?

It simply wouldn't have happened. Which is the point.

It's important to remember that under the last administration, almost nothing happened to address the genocide in the Balkans until the genocide had taken place.

Why? Because we needed a consensus from all the Europeans to even wipe our collective ass. And the Europeans couldn't agree on anything in the 1990s.

Have you noticed greater unanimity since?

There's also no sense in Clark's essay about other agendas from our allies. It's all very well to achieve maximum international consensus on every international action. But what if you cannot get it? What if you cannot get the U.N. even to live up to its own resolutions, let alone American priorities? What if a critical "ally", like France, has a firm policy of thwarting American power - wherever and whenever it is waged?

The notion that Bush created such a French policy is a fantasy. Clark's foreign policy strikes me as an abdication of foreign policy.

That was dangerous in the 1990s. It would be fatal now.

[Pokey78]

Sullivan ping.

[RangerHobbit]

What did Clark do in Kosovo that had any long-term significance? Nothing. The single Clinton White House foreign policy platform attempted in the Balkans (after the fact) was the gay rights march attached to our $2 billion aide package. Since the US military was no longer there, the marchers were beaten to a pulp by 2000 angry Serbs before they made it half a block.

The Balkans share with the Arab countries a long history of tasting their revenge cold. 9/11 was at least partial payback for the first Gulf War. I wonder what the Serbs have in store for when they decide to pay us back?

[RangerHobbit]

I like Sullivan too. It takes a lot of guts to be a gay conservative.

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[Consort]

Who was it that recently called Free Republic "hateful?"

[WOSG]

The wrold was less safe in 2000 than in 1992 .... that is CLINTON'S REAL LEGACY.

[Republic]

Dunno why....but the knocking off our 'exit' strategy really sets the hairs on the back of my neck sideways.

And dunno why this article on Clark (what a buffoon......process, process, process.....while our nation continues to be attacked! Uday ( Saddam's son ) said it all....when he was surprised at America's swift attack and compared President Bush to the cowardly clinton, whom they originally thought represented American resolve, oooops!

THANK GOD WE HAVE A REAL LEADER IN THESE TIMES!

BTW---Didn't billy klinton say we would be OUT of Bosnia in ONE YEAR???? I mean.....ONE YEAR?????? Geeeeeeeeeez. The Iraqi war was swift and it may take years to clean the place up....our President said it would take a long time....and it will. We gotta be SURE no dems take a leading role in this nation for a loooooooooong time.

[Shermy]

I see that "Cantabrigidian" no longer exists on FR. Adios to another waste of bandwidth!

[RangerHobbit]

"The wrold was less safe in 2000 than in 1992 .... that is CLINTON'S REAL LEGACY."

Truer words were never spoken. This is the price the left pays for the race-card locus of their political philosophy. It makes them provincial and afraid of the larger world beyond their sphere of intimidation and influence. Thus every exercise of foreign policy by Democratic Presidents since WWII has been an utter disaster.

[Eva]

You needn't have copied his post, once was enough.

[Maynerd]

Mom! I was only repeating what the bad man said.

[Mr. Silverback]

Dead on. My assessment of Clark is that he is the worst parts of General Jack D. Ripper from DR. Strangelove and Dennis Kucinich. If he ever sits in the big chair, he may get a whole bunch of us killed.

[freethinkingman]

"Because we needed a consensus from all the Europeans to even wipe our collective ass."

BAWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA, I loved that line..

But this one is questionable:

"almost nothing happened to address the genocide in the Balkans until the genocide had taken place".

I think we pretty much figured out the they twernt no gennycide!

Sorry could not help but lapse into the great unwashed majorities' mode of locution. You know those of us from flyover country that believe Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11.