Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SOME FACTS ABOUT GENERAL CLARK
Republican and Proud ^

Posted on 10/04/2003 6:08:08 PM PDT by Andy from Beaverton

SOME FACTS ABOUT GENERAL CLARK

 

      General Wesley Clark.  A hero.  Medal winner.  A born leader.  The man that has GW Bush ready to just give up and quit.  Really?  Not everyone thinks so.  Take, for instance,  General Sir Mike Jackson, commander of the international K-For peacekeeping force.  "I'm not going to start the third world war for you."  It seems Clark had given an order to send in troops to attack Russian troops who were in the process of taking over the airfield of Kosovo's provincial capital.  Fighting  and killing Russian troops was not part of the war plan to stop the killing in Kosovo and General Jackson refused to follow Clark's direct order.  One doesn't see allied Generals fighting with each other every day.  Patton wanted to take on the Russians.  He was ordered home. 

     Even wonder why there were NO American casualties in the Bosnia/Kosovo conflict?  Because Clark, knowing that his beloved President didn't want to have to deal with family members of those killed and the possible negative poll numbers, ordered very high, blind, bombings.  Human rights commissioner, Mary Robinson, stated, "NATO'S  bombing campaign had lost its "moral purpose". Referring to the cluster bomb attack on residential areas and market in the Serbian town of Nis, she described NATO'S  range of targets as "very broad" and "almost unfocused". There were too many mistakes; the bombing of the Serbian television station in Belgrade - which killed a make-up woman, among others - was "not acceptable".  Sure they were acceptable, if you were the Commanding General who wanted to stay in the good graces of his Commander in Chief.  Funny, I don't recall hearing the liberals complaining about the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas and towns when Bill was President.  There were no apologies and no compensation to the many innocents who died because of this sloppy bombing campaign.  One report stated Clark actually aimed at the CNN office in Belgrade.

     The Pentagon considered him a "horses ass" and then Secretary of Defense William Cohen, hated him and relieved him of his NATO command two months early. 

      Those who have worked under him, have no use for him or his leadership skills.  He abused his staff and seemed paranoid about them being out to ruin his career.  Non officers were subject to his tantrums if they and their families didn't get out of his way fast enough.  There was only thing on Clark's mind.  Rank.  He wanted it.  Whatever he had to do to get it was ok with him, apparently. 

       "The poster child for everything that is wrong with the GO (general officer) corps," exclaims one colonel, who has had occasion to observe Clark in action.  While Clark's biography heralds him as the man who transformed the 1st Horse Division into a rapid deployment division, one of his Officers described it as  "easily the worst division I have ever seen in 25 years of doing this stuff." 

       The above Colonel was not the only man who saw Clark as a menace to the military.  In the early 1980's, a major in the 3rd Brigade of the 4th Infantry Division at Fort Carson, Colorado when Clark was in command there  described him as a man who "regards each and every one of his subordinates as a potential threat to his
career".

     Not only does he seem a little paranoid and unstable, he seems to pick odd friends.  Hashim Thaci, leader of the KLA is shown having his picture taken with a proud NATO Supreme Commander Clark.  Who is he?  He is the man who ordered the murder and ethnic cleansing of thousands of Kosovo Serbs and had "destroyed more Orthodox Christian churches and monasteries than were destroyed in 500 years under the Ottoman Empire.   Also in the picture is Agim Ceku, who commanded the Croatian Army in "Operation Storm" that ethnically cleansed 250,000 Serbs from Krajina and murdered thousands and who now commands the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC), the thinly disguised successor to the KLA. It should be noted that the KLA, with whom we allied ourselves, at one time was designated by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization. Of course, this is the same KLA about whom Senator Joe Lieberman said: "The United States of America and the Kosovo Liberation Army stand for the same values and principles . . . Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and
American values." (Washington Post, Apr.28, 1999)."  Under Bill Clinton and Wesley Clark, America aligned itself with terrorists and mass murderers with the blessing of the likes of Joe Lieberman.

      How did Clark get to such a high rank if he is such an incompetent?  I'm glad you asked.  When you are a first in your class from West Point, you get political favor.  Clark had friends in high places.  They came to his aide when he had to get through the Battle Command Training Program.  He had to win in this mock battle against a formidable foe.  This commander was known for chewing up opponents and spitting them out.  To make it a fair fight, Clark's political allies cut the OPFOR (Opposing Force) Command in half.  Still concerned he might lose, the Commander of OPFOR was given a flat out order to throw the fight.  Their golden boy had to be protected at all costs.  A few weeks after his "amazing" win in the Training Program, he got his third star. 

      At the National Training Center, Clark was dubbed the "Section Leader Six" for his obsession with micro-managing everything to the point of insanity.  At the NTC, the constant training and mock battles that the group went through made them almost impossible to be beat by visiting "Blue Force" Generals.  To make sure that his fellow Generals stayed on his good side, to his men's disgust, he would send them on "suicide" missions, thus insuring his high ranking friends would leave with good thoughts of him and owing him a favor for allowing them to look good in battle, even if it was mock. 

      After he ascended to the Supreme Allied Commander-Europe, his entourage grew in proportion with his massive ego.  Aides would scurry around polishing his chair, testing the microphone, adjusting lights so he would look his best in front of Congress and thus on those TV sound bites.  Because of his inflated ego, he was given the name, with no respect, by his fellow NATO commanders of "the Supreme Being".

     The fact that he was a lousy General was never more apparent than in the aftermath of the main Kosovo war.  Serb Generals, when questioned, laughed at the total ineffectiveness of the NATO bombing.  After a count was done a total of 26 tanks and artillery pieces were all that was destroyed during the campaign.  Half way through the conflict our $2 billion B-2 stealth bombers, described by Clark as one of the "heroes" of the war, had to be pulled out due to rapid deterioration from lack of maintenance and it was making them unsafe to fly.  They were relegated to being props on the world stage for Clinton to stand in front of while making speeches about how he was beefing up the military.

     The truth is, once Clark got to NATO, the war in Kosovo became a disaster.  We destroyed the Serbian infrastructure and by NATO'S own figures of the 10,000 Kosovans killed,  8,000 of died AFTER  the war started.

     Clark not only made a total disaster of the Bosnia/Kosovo mess, he also had a hand in the disastrous Waco attack.  Yes indeed.  Clark was the military advisor to Janet Reno and is the one who planned that attack that eventually brought down the complex where so many kids died.  Not only was it a disaster, it was illegal.  It is illegal for the military to become involved in civilian situations for any reason.  Though the military denies any involvement it is rather hard to hide the troops and tanks that were there.  All total there were 9 Bradley fighting vehicles, 5 Combat Engineer Vehicles, 1 Tank Retrieval vehicle and 2 Abrams Tanks.  Reno tried to pass them off as "on loan" from the military.  "Operation Trojan Horse" was a dismal failure and the man in command was Wesley Clark.  I would like to point out that it was this disaster that Tim McVeigh used as his reason for punishing the Government in Oklahoma.  With Terry Nickols and, I believe the evidence shows, foreign assistance in the planning and money for needed supplies, McVeigh blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City where a 168 men, women and children died.  For every action, there is a re-action.

      Yugoslavia took 70 days to bring to it's knees.  Clark predicted it would take a few days.  He predicted that the people at Waco would surrender in the face of overwhelming force.  They held out for 50 days. 

       The bombings in Yugoslavia were planned and carried out with orders from General  Clark and it is documented that he purposely targeted hospitals, health care facilities and even old folks homes with cluster bombs.  When the bloodbath was caught by a fighter planes video camera and 87 innocent civilians died, he said the camera malfunctioned. 

      Clark's plans seem to be murder thousands of civilians, blame it on underlings and military incompetence and take it to a Commander in Chief who loves to hear about how the military screws up.  That man was an equally incompetent leader...Bill Clinton.

      You peace loving liberals still feel this man is a rose among the thorns?  As I always say, don't believe me, do some homework of your own.  Don't just believe his press releases.  This is the paranoid same man who claimed that "Bush" got him fired from CNN.  Even the wildly liberal CNN denied it.  They stated that his contract was up and since he appeared to be running for President, they felt it would be to large of a conflict for them to keep him on the payroll.  Wesley Clark is not only a risk as President, he is a danger to all of us.

Clark, center, shares a happy moment and hat trading photo op with Serb mass murdered and wanted for war crimes, Gen. Ratko Mladic (to Clark's right).  They shared wine and other gifts. Wanted by the U.N. and NATO, Mladic is still at large.

Sources:

http://www.zpub.com/un/clark.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/clark.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38331cb52099.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Kosovo/Story/0,2763,208056,00.html

http://www.brasscheck.com/clarkatwaco.html

http://www.brasscheck.com/yugoslavia/directory/61099a.html

http://www.brasscheck.com/yugoslavia/mil1.jpg

http://www.brasscheck.com/yugoslavia/mil2.jpg

http://www.brasscheck.com/yugoslavia/clarkatwaco.html


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; balkans; campaignfinance; icg; klark; perfumedprince; saceur; soros; waco; wacokid; wesleyclark
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last
I think this was written by Barbara Stock, but I'm not sure. One of the few authors to report of the ethnic cleansing of Serbs that we helped in Bosnia and Croatia.
1 posted on 10/04/2003 6:08:08 PM PDT by Andy from Beaverton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *balkans; Destro; joan; DTA; F-117A; Hoplite; NYC Republican; ABrit; Fusion
bump again
2 posted on 10/04/2003 6:09:10 PM PDT by Andy from Beaverton (I only vote Republican to stop the Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Hi mom!
3 posted on 10/04/2003 6:09:21 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton; Liz; Howlin; ALOHA RONNIE; RonDog
There were no apologies and no compensation to the many innocents who died because of this sloppy bombing campaign.

Was there ever a final count on the number of civilian casualties?

4 posted on 10/04/2003 6:12:04 PM PDT by Libloather (One of these days, the *Crintons will have to prove something. At this point, anything will do...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Good find, excellent article.

Sounds like a MacArthur wannabe.

The difference is that MacArthur was a pretty good General Officer and Clark is a disaster -- a man who advanced to high rank over the bodies of better men and women than he.

The world is full of people like that, and it is up to us to "out" them for the vermin they are.

Glad you posted this article.
5 posted on 10/04/2003 6:23:12 PM PDT by Taxman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
If Clark were my dream candidate, perfect in every way,
that incident at the airport would completely rule him out.

I would not want him near the "football".

NEXT!
6 posted on 10/04/2003 6:23:24 PM PDT by John Beresford Tipton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
More on Clark
7 posted on 10/04/2003 6:24:15 PM PDT by jmcclain19
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Not one published by Belgrade - HRW came out with 504, which was subsequently used by Milosevic's State Prosecutor in Belgrade's indictment of NATO's leaders, but it includes both Kosovar Albanian and Serb victims of our bombing, and since then Belgrade has been reluctant to quantify their civilian losses during Allied Force for some reason.
8 posted on 10/04/2003 6:26:17 PM PDT by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Saving for later!! Good article!!
9 posted on 10/04/2003 6:26:47 PM PDT by WestCoastGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Wes Clark is so bad he tarnishes the reputation of many institutions. Since he was a Rhodes Scholar, we must now take the Rhodes Scholars program down yet another step in our estimation. I knew it was usually a matter of finding people who would eventually make the right kind of waves politically, but really, now. A General should be more than merely a sweet-talking politiciam who tells whatever group he is speaking to exactly what they most want to hear.

He was first in his class at West Point. We now must wonder what that distinction means, if someone like him could do so well in that curriculum.

He gained four stars. This makes our military look bad.

I know there are countless good people in the military, but do the worst people have to rise to the top? Why should it be any different from the corporate world, I guess?

10 posted on 10/04/2003 6:29:23 PM PDT by Montfort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
bttt
11 posted on 10/04/2003 6:30:59 PM PDT by 2timothy3.16
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Even wonder why there were NO American casualties in the Bosnia/Kosovo conflict? Because Clark, knowing that his beloved President didn't want to have to deal with family members of those killed and the possible negative poll numbers, ordered very high, blind, bombings.

Number one, Kosovo was a flagrant episode of dog-wagging, the main item on American headlines the previous week having been the Juanita Broaddrick story, and there was basically no way Clark or anybody else could ask American fighting men to risk life and limb for so base a reason.

Two, the idea of no American casualties in Kosovo will not stand up to the light of day. Figure about 50 - 100 allied aircraft lost realistically.

Three, the precedent of Kosovo cannot be allowed to stand. The UN could and shortly will step in and demand that we hand Texas and California over to Mexico on the same stupid basis of ethnicity now being everything, and ownership nothing.

12 posted on 10/04/2003 6:33:51 PM PDT by judywillow (the supposed Kr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Good synopsis of a very real 'disater-waiting-to-happen'.

Lots of grammar errors.....needs an editor desperately.

Bump.

13 posted on 10/04/2003 6:34:50 PM PDT by DoctorMichael (Thats my story, and I'm sticking to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather; Birdsong Bay; Joy Angela; conservogirl; Ragtime Cowgirl; Alamo-Girl; kristinn; ...
NEVER FORGET


...Gen. WESLEY CLARK is but a Stand-In for HILLARY's 2004 Run for the Presidency and will step aside when she announces. HILLARY's Campaign Staff is already in place working for Gen. CLARK.

...Only a future Gov. ARNOLD's California Governorship stands in HILLARY's way and thus the last minute personal Democrat Attacks on him in the Media by HILLARY's Dirty Trickster BOB MULHOLLAND.

...Vote on October 7th in California like your very FREEDOM depends on it...

..'cause it does.


'JOIN ARNOLD = STOP HILLARY'

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=28992


NEVER FORGET
14 posted on 10/04/2003 6:47:48 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: judywillow
Two, the idea of no American casualties in Kosovo will not stand up to the light of day. Figure about 50 - 100 allied aircraft lost realistically.

Really?

Please provide either proof to back up your, um, assumption, or an explanation of why you consistently choose the side of mass murdering morons (Milosevic's minions).

Don't you just love alliteration?

15 posted on 10/04/2003 6:51:26 PM PDT by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
I keep hearing this little bell in the back of my mind......something about a connection between Clark and Richard Holbrook and making a lot of money in the Balkans.

Does this resonate with anybody else, or am confusing Clark with someone else?

16 posted on 10/04/2003 7:14:48 PM PDT by oldsalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Taxman
Clark is the incarnation of SNAFU.
17 posted on 10/04/2003 7:21:50 PM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Hoplite
NATO Losses during Dog-Wag III (Kosovo)

About four weeks into Dog-Wag III, a Houston television station did an interview with Milosevic and, in the course of the interview, one of the Houston guys asked Milosevic a question which amounted to a straight line which a guy like Clinton would have tried to hit out of the ballpark; Milosevic gave a perfectly straight-up honest answer.

The question was roughly (best possible from memory):

Mr. Milosevic, NATO is claiming to have lost only the one aircraft, an F117, during the Kosovo operation, and yet we read these eye-witness reports from all the surrounding countries of NATO aircraft crashing all over the place; some people are claiming that as many as 70 or 80 NATO planes may have been lost. Do you have any comments on this?

Again, a liar like Clinton would have tried to hit that one over the fence. Milosevic's response, again from memory:

You know, these planes are flying at 30,000' and when a missile scores a solid hit on a plane at that height it disintegrates, and when a less than solid hit is scored, the plane either makes it back to base in non-repairable condition or it crashes in some wooded area 25 miles away from here. Meanwhile, we're getting bombed around the clock and we just don't have the manpower to go combing the forests for downed aircraft. My GUESS would be that you could take these estimates you're hearing and divide by two or three, and you'd be somewhere ballpark.

That pretty much jibes with the estimate of 38 fixed-wing NATO aircraft lost from Strategic Studies of Alexandria, Va.

Some accounts maintain that several heavy bombers were lost.

From what I have been able to read, the only thing Milosevic is guilty of is trying to protect his country from barbarians.

The genesis of the recent problems in Kosovo was Milosevic's rescinding the autonomy of the province in 89

Basically, he had to; every other ethnic group in the province were being brutalized by the Albanians. Read it:

Typical highlights:

Ethnic Albanians in the Government have manipulated public funds and regulations to take over land belonging to Serbs. And politicians have exchanged vicious insults.

Slavic Orthodox churches have been attacked, and flags have been torn down. Wells have been poisoned and crops burned.

Slavic boys have been knifed, and some young ethnic Albanians have been told by their elders to rape Serbian girls.

I mean, that's from a NY Times article in 1987 before there was any axe to grind over Kosovo, at least in America.

I mean, calling the AKs barbarians is almost an unjustifiable insult to the memory of guys like Attilla the Hun, Genseric the Vandal, Ragnar Lothbrook...

18 posted on 10/04/2003 8:15:26 PM PDT by judywillow (the supposed Kr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton

Our Illegal War

19 posted on 10/04/2003 8:51:01 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Bump it again!!! I haven't read it all yet, is there anything about good ol' Wes and Thaci...the albanian-muslim terrorist of the balkins who Wes and Madeline Albright are so very fond of???We need to root out the terrorists in Kosovo along with the ones in Iraq...Oh, my I forgot, Clinton and Wes set them up, didn't they?? And why can't we disarm the Iraqi's...we disarmed the Serbs???

Note: All questions need not be answered...we KNOW the answers don't we???

Wesley Clark for president...he can kiss my white Irish a$$!!

20 posted on 10/04/2003 9:20:12 PM PDT by AuntB (Your rights stop where my nose starts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe; Andy from Beaverton
Ah, yes, there they are.......Thaci is bad news....probably has Ben Laden in his spare room.
21 posted on 10/04/2003 9:25:38 PM PDT by AuntB (Your rights stop where my nose starts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Taxman
MacArthur and Clark are of the same mental group. MacArthur had lots of people under him that hated his management and leadership ability. He was not the brightest general of the time.

As for Clark...put him into a scenario where he is president of the US, and in a high pressure situation...like the WTC bombing. He would have put the nuclear structure on high alert, and scared the Russians. He would have declared war on the Muslim religion instead of targeting only Ossama and the Taiban boys. Clark is a risky man to have in this position. But I see the democrats pushing his name and getting up as the persident or VP candidate.
22 posted on 10/04/2003 9:30:56 PM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head; redrock; carlo3b; SierraWasp; Grampa Dave; Carry_Okie; Republic; GrandmaC; farmfriend; ..
Hello, Good people!! We really need to let anyone we can know who the REAL Wesley Clark is...a CLINTON SHILL. Have a good evening!!
23 posted on 10/04/2003 9:31:56 PM PDT by AuntB (Your rights stop where my nose starts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
...Only a future Gov. ARNOLD's California Governorship stands in HILLARY's way and thus the last minute personal Democrat Attacks on him in the Media by HILLARY's Dirty Trickster BOB MULHOLLAND.

A Kennedy wannabe is NOT our best defense.

Karl Rove wanted Davis to stay in office. So where does that leave you?

24 posted on 10/04/2003 9:57:44 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Montfort
The Rhodes Scholarship program was set up for the purpose of One World Government or World domination. Clark and Clinton went under Senator J. William Fulbright's scholarship fund. Fulbright was a Rhodes scholar, pro-international, and anti-American.
25 posted on 10/04/2003 10:19:47 PM PDT by Travelgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
CLARITY:

...A Republican Governor in California affecting its Electoral College Votes after the 2004 Election for President in favor of a BUSH 2nd Term means HILLARY will not beat BUSH.

...A Democrat Governor in California doing the same for HILLARY in 2004 = A President HILLARY

Whichever Party controls the California Governorship in 2003 controls the White House in 2004.
26 posted on 10/04/2003 10:32:24 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
...Gen. WESLEY CLARK is but a Stand-In for HILLARY's 2004 Run for the Presidency and will step aside when she announces. HILLARY's Campaign Staff is already in place working for Gen. CLARK.

...Only a future Gov. ARNOLD's California Governorship stands in HILLARY's way and thus the last minute personal Democrat Attacks on him in the Media by HILLARY's Dirty Trickster BOB MULHOLLAND.

...Vote on October 7th in California like your very FREEDOM depends on it...

..'cause it does.

Very wise words.

Hillary Diane "The Divine One" Clinton
is waiting and watching for the timing to be just right.

Like a vampire at sunset...

27 posted on 10/04/2003 10:54:14 PM PDT by Joy Angela
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
CLARITY:

Whichever Party controls the California Governorship in 2003 controls the White House in 2004.

GROSS OVER-SIMPLIFICATION NOT BORNE OUT BY HISTORICAL FACT.

In all of these cases, the party affiliation of the governor of California did not deliver the state for the Presidential election:

1960 Pat Brown(D) governor, => Nixon(RINO) carried California.
1980 Jerry Brown(D) governor, => Reagan(R) carried California
1992 Pete Wilson(RINO) governor, => Clinton(D) carried California
1996 Pete Wilson(RINO) governor, => Clinton(D) carried California

28 posted on 10/04/2003 11:12:40 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Good find, Andy. Thanks.
29 posted on 10/04/2003 11:17:57 PM PDT by goody2shooz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Wesley Clark = George McClellan 2004.

too many similarities here.
30 posted on 10/04/2003 11:20:41 PM PDT by Blue Scourge (There are alot of loosers in this world...and alot of Liberals; coincidence....I think not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Bump for later reading!
31 posted on 10/04/2003 11:46:24 PM PDT by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
Please don't insult MacArthur with this idiot.

You know not what you speak.

MacArthur's landing at Inchon was brilliant, and his handling of the U.S. Army was amazing.

Yes... he should have done more to defend the Phillipines, and should have spread out the B-17s before the Japanese attack in early of 1941; but he had fewer U.S. casualties than anyone in Europe during WW2, and understood his enemy better than anyone out there could have at that time.

32 posted on 10/05/2003 4:08:51 AM PDT by Northern Yankee (Freedom.... needs a soldier !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
My apologies sir...

I see that you're retired Army, and for that I plead ignorance.

I have studied MacArthur much over the past 20 years, and like Joe McCarthy, he has become a favorite target for liberals.

He was mocked constantly during the televison syndication of MASH, and I just became fed up with it. I decided to study the man, and his tactics.

His heroics during World War 1 are profound, and he did wonders in the Rainbow Division. He also helped transform West Point out of the 19th Century into the 20th Century.

MacArthur understood the nature of battle.

To put him in the same mode as Wesley Clark just doesn't do his accomplishments justice.

33 posted on 10/05/2003 4:23:43 AM PDT by Northern Yankee (Freedom.... needs a soldier !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Travelgirl
I know about the One World Government stuff. But what I am saying is that for many people, there is an imprimatur of intellectual and oratorical quality attached to the Rhodes Scholar, anyway. The Rhodes Scholars tend to be folks like Clinton who are smooth talking bright people. There is a element of self-promotion to many of these people, and that is not always bad.

However, in Clark's case, he seems particularly inept. As a politician, he is about as inept as I would be if I ran for President today. Surrounded by experienced staffers, and he still seems as awkward as a crackpot candidate. I am beginning to think that he is not a place-holder for Hillary, intended to be her VP running mate. He is intended to show how weak the field is by taking the lead and then showing us how inept he is, so that the call for Hillary to save the Party becomes deafening.

34 posted on 10/05/2003 4:53:47 AM PDT by Montfort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
"I find him to be a guy who's very clever at determining which way the wind's blowing," said Gen. Paul Funk, who was General Clark's boss in the early 1990's. "Who knows, maybe in the political world that's a good thing."

"What do you think of General Wesley Clark and would you support him as a presidential candidate," was the question put to him by moderator Dick Henning, assuming that all military men stood in support of each other. General Shelton took a drink of water and Henning said, "I noticed you took a drink on that one!" "That question makes me wish it were vodka," said Shelton. "I've known Wes for a long time. I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart. I'm not going to say whether I'm a Republican or a Democrat. I'll just say Wes won't get my vote."

And remember the episode in Bosnia where Clark verbally ordered General Shinseki to take the radio station & Shinseki asked for the orders in writing? A likely interpretation of that event is that Shinseki was concerned about Clark leaving him hanging out to dry if the op went bad.

Shinseki, regardless of what people think of his decisions as Chief of Staff of the Army, was highly regarded in the Army as a man of honor & integrity & character. For a guy like that to feel he needed Clark's orders in writing seems to say something significant about Shinseki's view of Clark's trustworthiness.

35 posted on 10/05/2003 6:37:33 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Bump
36 posted on 10/05/2003 6:46:51 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AuntB
Good to see you AuntB!

We really need to let anyone we can know who the REAL Wesley Clark is...a CLINTON SHILL

BINGO!

My bet he's simply a place holder for Hitlery. If he does well...and if Bush's numbers make him look vulnerable to him...watch what happens at the DNC convention.

Fregards!

37 posted on 10/05/2003 6:50:29 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; Joy Angela; Birdsong Bay; conservogirl
...In this new Century,

...with a HILLARY running for President...

...the Political Realities have changed.

...HILLARY needs New York and California to beat BUSH in 2004.

...A Governor/Movie Star who is terminating the Democrats' stranglehold on the pursestrings in California will also terminate HILLARY's run in California.

.."It's the TV, Stupid, no matter WHO pays for it"..

...has always been the CLINTONS operating M.O.

...ARNOLD understands this just as well and is better at the CLINTON TV Game then HILLARY.

...And HILLARY knows it...

...so her Democrat Dirty Trickster BOB MULHOLLAND is out there Big Time doing all that he can do thru TV & Print Media to terminate ARNOLD now...

...before he can terminate HILLARY.
38 posted on 10/05/2003 7:42:02 AM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Clark was the military advisor to Janet Reno and is the one who planned that attack [Waco]that eventually brought down the complex where so many kids died... the man in command was Wesley Clark..

Andy, good post in that it shows the nature of Clark's character. He is as self-centered and self-serving as they come.

However, Clark was not Reno's military advisor, was not the planner for Waco, and was not in command. He was the 1st Cav Div commander at Fort Hood at the time. In fact, his boss at Fort Hood, Lieutenant General Funk, is the guy I quoted about Clark in post 35. At most, Clark's unit may have been tasked to provide DOJ some of the electronic warfare equipment that was used at Waco, but that request went from DOJ to the military & then down through normal military channels to the nearest military installation (Fort Hood) where, based on such things as availablity of equipment, deployments and training cycles, some unit was directed to give up some of its stuff--not even sure if that was the 1st Cav or one of the other units at Hood.

There was no military "commander" at Waco--and military involvement by the active duty was limited to a few soldiers who had trained the FBI agents on how to operate the jamming equipment and were present to maintain it. The Texas National Guard had more involvement--they provided the Bradleys & Combat Engineer Vehicles, etc.; but even those things were operated by the FBI.

BTW, one of the two special ops officers Reno consulted prior to the raid was BG Schoomaker, recently called out of retirement by Rumsfeld to take over as Chief of Staff of the Army. The other guy is still serving as a special ops officer on active duty. Bottom line, Clark had nothing to do with Waco.

39 posted on 10/05/2003 8:07:53 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
Karl Rove disagrees with you. According to Howard Kooligan, when he requested the White House assist the recall signature gathering effort, he was told, "Let Davis twist in the wind. It will help us in 2004." Rove was willing, no HOPING, to leave California with its criminal Democratic government.

Your thesis is an unsupported assertion. It is not borne out by historical fact. Given that Schwarzenegger has more in common with the Democrats than he does with his own Party, he could well betray Bush hoping to advance his own ambitions.
40 posted on 10/05/2003 8:10:32 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Northern Yankee
Please don't insult MacArthur with this idiot. MacArthur's landing at Inchon was brilliant..he had fewer U.S. casualties than anyone in Europe during WW2...His heroics during World War 1 are profound, and he did wonders in the Rainbow Division. He also helped transform West Point out of the 19th Century into the 20th Century...MacArthur understood the nature of battle

Exactly, his brilliant "island hopping" strategy was not so self-evident at the time--just about everyone else wanted to fight like in Europe--going forward sweeping everything before you, no enemy in the rear and so on. He was also personally brave--most have heard about his personal leadership under fire in WWI--his men idolized him--but few know that he was nominated for a Medal of Honor in 1914 during the Vera Cruz intervention. And unlike Clark, who would reverse course on a dime or bend like a pretzel to to ensure what he was doing was personally satisfactory to whoever could help him get ahead, MacArthur had convictions. MacArther was relieved for being true to his principles. Clark was relieved for not having any.

41 posted on 10/05/2003 9:18:46 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
It is illegal for the military to become involved in civilian situations for any reason.

Wrong. First, in general, the military can be used any time the President directs as part of his Constitutionally enumerated duties; that's been done numerous times-- suppressing riots and restoring order in Detroit & L.A. etc, enforcing desegregation orders in the south, shutting down the Mex-American border in 1916, and assisting states during natural disasters like Hurricane Andrew.

Second, in situations other than the Constitutional use of the military, the Posse Comitatus law prevents civil authorities from using the military to execute the laws; interpreted in general to mean make arrests, conduct search & seizures, and so on. Of note, it applies to federal forces, not the militias of the states, i.e. the National Guard.

Not only was [Waco] a disaster, it was illegal... it is rather hard to hide the troops and tanks that were there. All total there were 9 Bradley fighting vehicles, 5 Combat Engineer Vehicles, 1 Tank Retrieval vehicle and 2 Abrams Tanks. Reno tried to pass them off as "on loan" from the military.

Federal military forces at Waco were limited to a couple observers and some enlisted personnel who trained the FBI agents in how to use some electronic warfare equipment and helped to maintain it. They had been requested by DOJ through normal military channels. As for the armored vehicles, equipment is not covered by Posse Comitatus, but even then, they belonged to the Texas National Guard and were primarily operated by the FBI. The regular Army had nothing to do with them. This thing has been investigated to death--there was very little military involvement and what there was, was lawful.

Clark has major league "issues", as Oprah and my daughter would say, that in my view make him unqualified to be president. the article points that out. However, the author's crdibility is weakened by including so many inaccuracies and untruths.

42 posted on 10/05/2003 10:33:54 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: judywillow; Hoplite
Two, the idea of no American casualties in Kosovo will not stand up to the light of day. Figure about 50 - 100 allied aircraft lost realistically.

Wow. I compliment you Judy. Even by the somewhat liberal standards of the Balkans & Waco threads, this pushes the boundaries. Most people would hesitate to post something so patently untrue, so easily checked, so obviously illogical. Cannily, however, you realized there might be some out there who would have some doubt. So you decided to back up your post with a quote from the most trustworthy and reliable person you could think of--none other than Slobo himself!

[question]...as many as 70 or 80 NATO planes may have been lost...Milosevic's response: ...take these estimates you're hearing and divide by two or three

Not sure I follow your numbers, but hey what's a little math problem when we have 50-100 pilots who were blown up over Yugoslavia three years ago and THEY STILL DON'T KNOW IT! Who's gonna tell those guys what happened to them? Sure hope I don't get that job. And what about their families? I wonder if any of them realize their son or husband or father hasn't returned? And how about those forlorn ground crews, still hanging around the flight line at Aviano 40 months later waiting for good ol Major "Duke" to bring that baby in? And especially what about the poor Wing Property Book Officer? "Dammit, Captain. You graduated from the Academy. I know you can count. Judywillow says we are missing 50-100 planes. Get out there and count them again!" "YESSIR!"

43 posted on 10/05/2003 11:44:18 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: judywillow
So let's summarize, shall we?

1. You're putting stock into what Milosevic says, long after he's lost any claim to credibility.

2. You are referencing Venik's Aviation site, which is not a source of information, but simply a repeater site for the claims of Milosevic's regime as far as Allied Force goes.

3. It is now 4 years after Allied Force, and the only aircraft recovered by the Serbs are the F-16 and F-117 that NATO admitted to losing at the time - there were non-combat losses, and damaged aircraft, but no other aircraft besides the two who's wrecks were recovered by the Serbs were shot down.

4. You are a Serbian partisan when it comes to Kosovo - all you offer is a conversation with the dead, i.e., your side has been victimized, and you'll brook no acceptance of the fact that the Serbs were the biggest violaters of human rights in the Balkans in the 1990's (or 1980's in Kosovo, for that matter.)

So: you place a foreign interest, being Milosevic's now non-existent Serbia, over the interests of the United States of America, and will even go so far as to attack our military in your perverse quest to defend Milosevic and his crimes.

I have your measure now, shorty.

44 posted on 10/05/2003 11:50:13 AM PDT by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Hoplite
Strategic Studies Inc estimates of NATO losses during Kosovo

The nature of Albanian Kosovars

The nature of the Albanian claim to Kosovo

45 posted on 10/05/2003 12:07:02 PM PDT by judywillow (the supposed Kr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: judywillow
Serb Nationalist Nutjob

Get a clue already - your sources are garbage.

46 posted on 10/05/2003 12:13:49 PM PDT by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
Clark is running as a Democrat - it should be enough to take him to task for that egregious failing.

Trashing the campaign in Kosovo, and by extension the servicemen who carried it out, however, is beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned.

47 posted on 10/05/2003 12:19:56 PM PDT by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
Thanks for the heads up!
48 posted on 10/05/2003 12:28:07 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
Thank you!
49 posted on 10/05/2003 3:52:38 PM PDT by Northern Yankee (Freedom.... needs a soldier !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
I trained at NTC while Clark commanded it. We visiting troops were told we couldn't use the PX because Mrs Clark was upset that we tracked too much dirt into "her" PX. Also when stationed in Bosnia I was talking to someone who had visited the site where an APC had rolled down a mountainside, struck a mine and killed 3 US officers. He told me that his analysis was that the APC was leading a Humvee carrying Clark and Richard Holbrooke when someone in the Humvee got impatient about the pace and ordered the APC to pull over to let them pass. The edge of the road collapsed, the APC went careening down the mountainside and 3 people were killed. Both of these are examples of Clark's disrespecting anything that gets in his way or isn't to his benefit. No way should he ever get close to the White House.
50 posted on 12/30/2003 7:07:38 AM PST by blackknight77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson