Dean meltdown

by Seven 63 Replies latest social current

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine
    What is it they "have" on Clark?

    "They" don't have anything on Clark, Wednesday. General Shelton was his superior and played politics with Clark during the runup to and during the Kosovo war, and Clark came out on top and was very successful (and diplomatic, statesmanlike, and courageous) in leading the coalition of US and European allies as NATO Supreme Allied Commander. Shelton & (sec. defense) Cohen got back at him by forcing him to retire several months early, but of course, they only had glowing words about his performance at the time:

    obviously, this is a partisan attack and cannot be taken seriously. Here's an excerpt from a press conference held by Hugh Shelton and Sec. of Defense Cohen:

    "Q: This is General Clark's last visit to Kosovo today. Any word on how he has performed his job?

    Sec Def.: He has done an extraordinary job. General Clark is one of our most brilliant officers. He undertook a mission that is perhaps one the most complicated and complex and carried it out successfully. As I mentioned in my remarks, this air campaign was the most successful in the history of warfare. We had over 38,000 sorties that were flown. We had only two planes that were shot down and no pilots lost. That is a record that is unparalleled in the history of warfare. So, General Clark and his entire staff and subordinates and all who participated deserve great credit.

    Q: Why is he leaving office, then?

    Sec Def.: He is leaving because we have General Ralston who will become the new SACEUR. We are now replacing many of our CINCs throughout the world.

    Q: It is not a reflection on his performance?

    Sec Def: No reflection at all. He has done an outstanding job as the Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Southern Command, and he did an outstanding job here as EUCOM Commander and also as SACEUR"

    http://www.defenselink.mil/news/May2000/t05022000_t501koso.html

    whose got integrity issues?

    A couple months ago, asked about Clarks run for president, Shelton intimated that Clark was retired early for "character and integrity issues". He has since refused to back up that statement, and reportedly, when his words were used by Slobodan Milosovich to try and discredit Wes Clark's testimony (thank you Hugh Shelton) against him, Shelton told the War Crimes judge "it was just politics". Shelton, btw, is a paid "advisor" to John Edwards presidential campaign.

    John McCain, who thinks well of Clark, says that Shelton, having made such a derogatory statement, should explain what he means. Charles Rangel (congressman and veteran with a purple heart and bronze star), a strong supporter of Clark, has called Shelton's comment "character assassination."

    "I have watched him at close range for 35 years, in which I have looked at the allegation, and I found it totally unsupported," said retired Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, who taught with Clark at West Point in the 1970s. "That's not to say he isn't ambitious and quick. He is probably among the top five most talented I've met in my life. I think he is a national treasure who has a lot to offer the country."

    McCaffrey acknowledges that Clark was not the most popular four-star general in the Army leadership. "This is no insult to Army culture, a culture I love and admire," McCaffrey said, "but he was way too bright, way too articulate, way too good looking and perceived to be way too wired to fit in with our culture. He was not one of the good ol' boys."

  • bigboi
    bigboi
    He was not one of the good ol' boys."

    God damn! That's enough for him to get my vote right there!

  • crownboy
    crownboy

    SixofNine, what is it exactly about a Dean presidency that you would so fear? I can understand the sentiment that he isn't "electable" (though I obviously think it's wrong), but what exactly about Dean's platform makes you think that four years of him would make you feel "unsafe"?

  • gitasatsangha
    gitasatsangha
    Hitler and the Grand Mufti would be quite proud of you...have you been reading "The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion" again? Still worried about that world wide Jew Conspiracy?

    Let's see: Israel has one of the largest armed forces in existance, yet is in fact a tiny nation, and its military in large part is donated by the United States. Israel is able to take land at will from ethnic Palestinians (who were there first), send in helicopter gun ships (donated by the USA) to kill protesters in refugee camps. They remove Berbers from a nomadic lifestyle they've lived for centuries and force them into trailer parks. They put up gigantic walls as we speak to wall off what areas they want to contain the Palestinians with and whine about a few guerilla fighters using the only tactice they have left (suicide bombing). They don't do these things by pure chance, rather they do these things with the tacit support of a President who believes the Jews of Jerusalem will have to convert to Christianity for the end to come. That is the teaching of his sect of Christianity. A Zionist nut, and he is not alone. I know so called american patriots of the same bent who keep an Israeli flag on their wall, duped into thinking their religion requires they support the Israeli Jews. Who benefits from this? It's not hard to guess.

    Protocols of Zion has nothing to do with it, because the rest of the world fortunately has seen the Israelis for what they are: Fascist Throwbacks.

    No I don't feel sorry for Israeli Jews, not at all. They haven't even begun to reap what they've sown. Comparing me to Hitler was beneath you.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit