But you see, it’s symptomatic of Clarks’ general handling of monsters. It’s not “diplomatic” to call them what they are. All world leaders, no matter how despicable, are worthy of respect.
I want an alternative to the hypocrisy of American foreign policy, but not the consistency of supporting ALL dictators, as opposed to just supporting a few.
Unsubstantiated and weird.
Let’s see if we can go beyond half-assed preconceptions:
Clark consistently calls for the arrest of war criminals, unlike others in the Pentagon. Instead of using empty words, he advocates deeds.
When Milosevic decides to instigate another set of atrocities in Kosovo, Clark pushes for intervention. It’s a big humanitarian win, but leads to his ouster. Quoting from Power:
If Wesley Clark was so blindly ambitious, I seriously doubt whether he would have bucked consensus as boldly.
Now frankly, I happen sympathetic to Colin Powell-style diplomatic approaches. I just find it bizarre (but unsurprising, alas) that Clark would be accused of coddling dictators when his record shows the exact opposite.
His words since his campaign started are not consistent with his words as a general. He speaks of reaching understandings with men like Kim Jong Il, who is far worse than Milosevic ever was.
christ on a pogo stick, this is a train wreck. that said, it would be a lot better to at least try engage with Kim Il Jong than to call them an “Axis of Evil” and try to bomb them into the stone age. Bombing N Kor into the stone age may actually be necessary, but there are quite a few steps that ought to be tried first.
Hmmm, just maybe in retrospect, there should have been a few more efforts made in Iraq before eliminating those weapons of mass destruction or trying to bring democracy…
However bad Milosevic may have been, he didn’t have access to nukes, the North Koreans do. One nuke lobbed at South Korea will not only kill millions of Koreans, thousands of Americans, but also the global economy. Considering it’s just starting to wobble back on it’s feet after 9/11, I don’t think going after Jong by force is such a hot idea. (Mind you, I work for a supplier for several defense contractors, so a nasty hot war with NK would benefit me in the short run. However, it’d make things worse off for everyone and in the long run, I’d be in just as bad as shape as everyone else. Better we do everything we can to get NK to give up their nukes before going to war with them, than to just go in and wipe 'em out by force.)
Oh, and China Guy, if the news accounts are true about conditions in NK, then I’d say that living in the stone age would be an improvement for most of the folks there. (Since there are rumors that they’ve had to resort to cannibalism, amongst other things in order to survive.)
Sort of funny to watch Republicans wringing their hands over that terrible Milosevic now. Back in the day, it was the Democrats who wanted to put a stop to the atrocities, and it was the Republicans who not only didn’t want to lift a finger, but spent the better part of a decade sniping at Clinton for his efforts in the Balkans.
adeher: Others have responded to your remarks, but thanks for the clarification anyway.
spoke: Part of the problem is that memories (including my own) of the Balkan tragedy are rather fuzzy. But as I flip through Power’s book, I see that certain Republicans played a constructive role in pressing the US to take a more forceful stance against genocide.
Of course, Tom DeLay was highly critical of Clinton’s policy in Kosovo. My understanding is that he, Dennis Hastert, Bill Thomas, Duncan Hunter and Henry Hyde supported HR 2770, which was a, “prohibition of funds for deployment of Armed Forces in Bosnia.” This was in December, 1995, after the Srebrenica massacre.[sup]1[/sup] Well, we do what we must.
But then there was Bob Dole. An early advocate of arming the Bosnian Muslims, he pushed hard for a vote to lift the arms embargo in July 1995. Notwithstanding earlier massacres in Srebrenica, Clinton was nervous. If fighting intensified in the Balkans, the UN Peacekeepers would have to be pulled out, which would necessitate the use of US ground troops.
Dole’s position was that, “the stakes were sufficiently high in Bosnia that, if it came to that, he would support carefully planned U.S. military intervention”. Bob Dole was no phony: he was willing to address the consequences of his policy prescriptions.
Following advocacy by, among others, William Safire, George Soros, Margaret Thatcher, Anthony Lewis, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcraft, the Senate voted 69-29 to require the US to stop enforcing the arms embargo.
So there is a bright line between principled Republicans and the usual smear artists.
[sup]1[/sup][sub]Source: Not Power’s book, I googled and found a statement by Kucinich on his House webpage[/sub]
**christ on a pogo stick, this is a train wreck. that said, it would be a lot better to at least try engage with Kim Il Jong than to call them an “Axis of Evil” and try to bomb them into the stone age. Bombing N Kor into the stone age may actually be necessary, but there are quite a few steps that ought to be tried first.
**
You should call a spade a spade. And I don’t think we have to bomb North Korea. What we should do is ignore them.
What we should most definitely NOT do is give them legitimacy by treating Kim as a respectable head of state, and we should especially not give aid in return for them to just hide their nuclear program again.
Kim Il Jong is a head of state. That of an independant country. Myself personally, Chinese people in general, most of the world population, think he’s a complete loony.
I think it would be the height of irresponsibility to ignore the North Korean problem. NKor has the potential to destabilize N Asia and do all sorts of nasty stuff, not least of which is to shell Seoul into the stone age.
Invading Iraq was not a cakewalk, and trying to do the same in NKor would also be fraught with a lot of risk. IMHO, the lessons learned from Iraq are to at least try some dipolomatic solutions first.
This is a joke, right? I missed the story where anyone in the current administration suggests they’ve learned any lessons.
**I think it would be the height of irresponsibility to ignore the North Korean problem. NKor has the potential to destabilize N Asia and do all sorts of nasty stuff, not least of which is to shell Seoul into the stone age.
**
Well, speaking to you as a Chinaman, he’s your ally, he’s your neighbor, and he’s your problem. I’ve heard from Chinese all over the net how the US needs to stop meddling in other nations’ business. Now you want us to handle this problem you created? What’s up with that?
**Invading Iraq was not a cakewalk, and trying to do the same in NKor would also be fraught with a lot of risk. IMHO, the lessons learned from Iraq are to at least try some dipolomatic solutions first.
**
Ignoring the problem is a diplomatic solution after a fashion. It doesn’t involve war, and it doesn’t involve making agreements which we know will be broken.
Couple of things…
“Chinaman” is not a neutral appelation. It is considered offensive. Just FYI.
China Guy is not, IIRC, Chinese. He’s an American working in China.
Ignoring a problem is not a solution of any kind unless you’re using it against a total pissant of an opponent who can’t possibly hurt you. Kim Jong Il + nuclear weapons != pissant who can’t possibly hurt us. I can’t really imagine any worse road for the US to take in dealing with NK than to ignore the problem (other than declaring Operation: Free Korea).
At long last, have you no shred of decency Mr Fox News Anchor?
Randy what are you smoking?
Clark had a meltdown! The anchor is sitting there and just asks him about a quote from Clark, and out of nowhere Clark completely freakin freaks out!
I think today he showed that he has a hairtrigger temper, he’s quick to jump to conclusions and is a shoot-first-ask-questions-later type.
Let me tell you, Snoopy, perception can be a subjective thing.
Great clip, Randy.
SnoopyFan, I don’t think we were seeing a “hairtrigger temper” in action, I think Clark is trying to change the paradigm the right wing punditry has established over the past decade that’s sort of a slander-by-loaded-question through which the selected target is given a series of questions which force him to reestablish credentials that shouldn’t have been in question.
In this case, the quote from Clark was (paraphrasing) “the President has called Iraq the ‘centerpiece’ of the war against terrorism. It isn’t. It’s a sideshow. Iraq is only the easiest way right now to get access to attack our soldiers.”
Now, had the interviewer asked “What exactly did you mean by this, General?” that would’ve been “just asking him about a quote”, but that aint what happened. Instead, the question was “Do you really think it’s proper when our men and women are dying in Iraq to call it a ‘sideshow’?!”
That slur against a critic’s patriotism or support for the troops is the oldest canard in the right wing’s playbook. I think Clark has paid close attention to the demonization of both Clintons and the campaign of lies about Al Gore in 2000. And he’s watched veterans like triple amputee Max Cleland lose to draft-avoiders like Zaxby Chambliss on the basis of courage and patriotism (!), and he’s determined, I think, not to cooperate. I think Clark has decided to respond directly and forcefully to these dirty rhetorical traps.
Whether this works for him may depend not only on the intelligence of the American electorate, but also on getting some cooperation from mainstream media in their reportage of his responses. It would be easy to edit down his response in that Fox clip and make him look unhinged. But on the whole, I have to support and admire his strategy of shovelling the bullshit back at the punditry.
Clark getting interviewed on Fox News?
Sheesh, he might as well have gone 20 rounds with Karl Rove…
Well put, Xenophon. Fox was trying out its typical bullying, and Clark stood up to them. What the right did to Max Cleland was absolutely sickening; thank god we have someone who’s not just going to sit there and let Fox walk all over him. Patriotism is the last refuge of Fox News. That footage made me very proud. Clark’s got my primary vote.
I don’t seem to able to access the link for the clip – is there a transcript posted somewhere?