Wes Clark on Syria

[elleng]

http://soundcloud.com/bbc-world-service/former-nato-commander-gen?utm_source=soundcloud&utm_campaign=wtshare&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_content=https%3A%2F%2Fsoundcloud.com%2Fbbc-world-service%2Fformer-nato-commander-gen

[railsback]

1. Sound advice

but like he said, Russia and China will block any U.N. involvement beyond the inspections which, as he said, will probably have a hard time gathering hard evidence after Syria tampered with the site for 5 days. Which leads to NATO action, and that horrid term that brings up nightmares, the 'coalition of the willing'. There is a plan, just nothing like Kosovo, which was significantly different.

[karynnj]

8. This actually is not that different from anything coming out of the Obama administration

Clark is supporting at least as much response as the Obama administration is hinting at. In fact, Dempsey is right now with his peers from many nations working on options and Kerry has been in conversation with his peers. They are doing exactly what Clark is speaking of as the "coalition willing" - avoiding that phrase. He seems more supportive of actively helping the rebels - closer to what had been the Clinton - or even McCain or Graham plan.

As to a diplomatic piece, since becoming SoS Kerry with Lavrov did revive the completely dead Geneva II idea that had been dormant for at least 2 years. One problem has been the rebels are not one group and they have not supported the effort.

I agree that the Obama administration needs a plan -or more likely - a set of plans because we can not control everything. In fact, the ONLY way to control everything is to have an all in military effort that I think NO ONE wants.

Here's a link to an article that lays out the fact that there are no good options - and most ACTIONS make things worse than the war going on - a very depressing conclusion. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/opinion/sunday/in-syria-america-loses-if-either-side-wins.html

[pacalo]

2. It's interesting that he seems to know a lot about what's going on in the background

in the top levels of military strategy. And that he shares what he thinks the people should know, even if it's not-so-good news.

For instance, at the end when he explained the difference between Kosovo & Syria, he said the entire Kosovo operation had been planned before the first missile was cast -- even the aftermath projections had been thought-out. Not so, in the way the Syria issue is being handled.

I think he would have made an amazing Secretary of Defense.

[elleng]

3. Yes indeed, pacalo,

he would make an amazing Secretary of Defense.

He knows strategy, always has, and I wonder whether his thinking has made its way into the top levels. I hope so, but am concerned that the only way it occurs is when he has the opportunity to go public as here.

[pacalo]

4. I was a *big* Clarkie after I had read about him.

I cannot believe such a good candidate to lead this country wasn't able to make it. It's mind-blowing, particularly because the appetite for military action is only getting stronger. On the other hand, Wes Clark has been through war & he doesn't like war.

[elleng]

5. I was a big 'Clarkie' too,

after I saw a TV interview 'many moons' ago, and it was after his withdrawal, I went with Joe Biden. During that time, I found DU. As I recall, word was that DU was hostile to Wes. Many didn't recognize, I guess, that he was an anti-war General.

[karynnj]

6. I think the reaction here to Clark was pretty mixed

There was a large group of very articulate supporters - many of whom were here since before I joined in late 2004. I think in 2007, the attacks against him always seemed to be led by the Edwards supporters and went back to some nastiness circa 2004. Then he was an attack dog for Hillary and that offended some Obama supporters. (Just as many Hillary supporters began to dislike both Kerry and Kennedy.)

[Dawson Leery]

7. It seems Obama is being forced by the MIC to use force in Syria.