How do the veterans on DU feel about Clark?

[Generic Other]

I have come to respect the voices of the veterans on DU. You have insights and experience the rest of us lack when it comes to military brass.

Personally, I'd feel safer with Custer at the Little Big Horn than in Iraq under Rumsfeld. All I can think of is that old Pete Seeger song, "Waist deep in the Big Muddy and the old fool says to push on..."

How do you rate Clark in terms of trusting his leadership?

[Devil Dog Dem]

1. Based on what I know, I trust his leadership.

I just wish he was a Marine!

Semper fi!

[kaitykaity]

2. US Army, 1983-1986, SP4, Honorable

I want Clark for Dean's VP. I want to immunize
the Democratic ticket from the national security
buggaboo.

I'm listening to O'Really right now and he's making
me sick. "Who do you want fighting for your safety,
Kennedy or Bush?"

I noticed that he did not say "Clark or Bush".

That's why I want Clark.

[RobertSeattle]

3. 100%

21B O-3

And I don't even mind he was an armor/cav guy...

[atreides1]

4. US Army 1978-1991, Desert Storm

I haven't made up my mind, but I'm inclined to a Dean/Clark ticket.

Dean for a social agenda and Clark for security

[Aristus]

5. 1986-1993 Sergeant; Gulf War.

I'm very excited about Clark as a candidate. If he gets elected President, the Democrats could own the military vote for years to come. The fact that he declared his affiliation with the Democratic Party is proof that he has the guts to stay the course. Four stars or not, with a -D- after his name, the Repukes are going to savage him.

Ah, an Arkansas-bred Rhodes Scholar with a socially-minded agenda! Cool! I'm liking that.

[HawkerHurricane]

6. I like him so far

And I like the fact the right wing spin machine is working so hard to smear him.

However, I do wish he was Navy instead of Army...

(Navy Presidents: Kennedy, Johnson, Carter...and if you want to stretch it, FDR!)

[nono]

7. Can go with him

Navy 1953

[Nlighten1]

8. U.S. Army 1985-1991 SP4

I'm taking a wait-and-see approach to choosing my candidate. I like Clark and Dean.

[tabasco]

9. It takes a LOT of ability to become a general

There is some politics involved in the military but the main thing in being successful is getting the job done. For an officer, this means good leadership and excellent decision-making skills. As a captain in the army, I was volunteered to be an aide for a 2-star general on an emergency deployment. I learned a lot about the senior officer corps, and I came away from the experience with a lot of confidence in the generals. Not all senior officers are conservatives, despite what many believe (seems to be a self-propagating piece of conservative propaganda).
I support Clark and believe he is the right-wing's worst enemy. Let's do away with the propaganda that the Democrats are soft on defense. The Democrats are SMART on defense, and refuse to waste ungodly amounts of tax money on useless projects such as Star Wars.

[Generic Other]

10. Your responses are revealing

I suspect you'd say so loud and clear if you had doubts about his character.

I like how he defends his troops.

Here's an interesting quote from a Meet the Press transcript:

We’ve got a set of hearings that need to be conducted to look at what happened that caused 9/11. That really hasn’t been done yet. You know, a basic principle of military operations is you conduct an after-action review. When the action’s over you bring people together. The commander, the subordinates, the staff members. You ask yourself what happened, why, and how do we fix it the next time? As far as I know, this has never been done about the essential failure at 9/11. Then moving beyond that, it needs to be looked at in terms of the whole intelligence effort and how it’s connected to the policy effort. And these are matters that probably cannot be aired fully in public but I think that the American people and their representatives have to be involved in this. This is essential in terms of the legitimacy and trust in our elected leadership and our way of government.

http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/927000.asp

He sounds like he has an organized mind. He thinks before he acts. He analyzes his past actions in order to correct inadequacies. He takes responsibility for his actions. At least you know where he's coming from! It's such a vivid contrast to Bush!

[5thGenDemocrat]

11. I'm not saying I'll support him just because he's military

But I served long enough to know that anyone who grad'd first in his class at West Point is a honorable, reliable and trustworthy person. Too many people around here believe that the military is something to fear, but I'm still hokey enough to believe that service to the country is among the most altrustic of pursuits.
I also think that the fact Clark was mostly a staff and diplomatic officer, as opposed to a combat commander, for most of his career is a good thing. The carrot is always preferable to the stick ("I win, you win" is the best outcome of any negotiation). And General Clark lost exactly zero troops in Bosnia -- which is a mark of a good General.
I'll be happy to vote for him if he's the nominee. But I'd say that about any Dem -- even, in the final analysis, Joe Lieberman.
John
US Army (Signal Corps, 72E20)
1974-76
I doubt pResident Pinhead can beat Wesley Clark. But John McCain might be able to.

[Generic Other]

12. Who Would John McCain Vote For?

Now there's an interesting question.

It is true that I don't trust the military, but I have found many in the ranks to be trustworthy on an individual basis. Including my own family members.

I am shocked that I would even consider voting for a retired general, but this election is going to be a bloody battle, and we Dems need all the help we can get.

I may be the only hippie peacenik contemplating supporting Clark. Makes me think I should go sniff some patchouli oil and meditate on it for awhile. :)

[5thGenDemocrat]

15. Oh, I like hippie peaceniks

No hippie peacenik's gotten a soldier killed yet. It's the ANG second looey, coke-sniffing, brain-dead psychopathic killers I have a problem with.
John
But like I said, I was in the Signal Corps.

[cmd]

19. There is at least one other on the board. n/t

[jonnyblitz]

13. If he is the DEM nominee I will vote for him.

But he doesn't excite me any more or any less then the other candidates. I don't get all gushy just because he is military and I am a vet. Unlike most vets here on DU my 10 years in the navy pushed me way left so I tend to be less enamored of an ex-general than I might be otherwise. He does seem pretty progressive on lots of the issues which is always a surprise to me. I guess I am guilty of stereotyping most ex-military brass as the types to get gigs with right-wing think takes like Family Research Council or Heritage Foundation.

[ThomWV]

14. Vet for Clark

I served in the Army, 1966-1970, and of that 1967-1970 in Viet Nam (4th Infantry Division mostly). I have the Bronze Star and the Purple heart along with the ones they give you for simply being there. I have been a registered Democrat my entire voting life. I have never missed voting in an election since I came of age. I have voted for exactly two Republicans in my life. You've never heard of either of them because neither was running for national office. I am generally inclined toward the peace movement but at the same time I understand the need for a strong defense as well as grasping that at some extremely rare circumstance a strong offenseive capability is needed as well. We would not last long as a nation with leadership that said 'No' to the use of the military under almost any circumstance but at exactly the same time we need leadership that exhibits restraint. I have complete faith in General Clark in that reguard. I am certain that he he would use the terrible might of the US armed forces without hesitation if the need be, but at the same time I am certain that he would not lead us into military misadventure to satisify some unstated agenda and mislead the American public to support that misadventure.

And I want to say this too, and its something that I think is good and God Damned important. Let's say that next summer a major trumped up terrorist attack takes place in the country. And November rolls around and Bush puts the country under some sort of super alert and by decree cancels the elections, or if they had already taken place to declare them null and refuse to relinquish office. Now what do you suppose happens? Well, my guess is that the country would, that very same day, fall into a general strike and that everything would come to a halt immediately, but in the Government here is what I would immagine would happen. I think the Supreme Court would declair the edict unconstitutional and direct the military to arrest the President, Vice President, and the Cabinet. Yep, I think the Military and maybe the Secrete Service would be the ones to restore order by removing the President on the orders of the other two brances of Government. And so, because I believe that, I have a great deal of trust in the military. That is how I feel about General Clark as well. I only hope that he is the Democrat that I get to vote for next year, because out of the pack right now he is the only one I think can beat Bush.

Thom

[jonnyblitz]

17. welcome to DU ThomWV

:hi:

[cmd]

21. Another welcome, ThomWV

I've been following your posts and find that I am reading what I am thinking.

[VolcanoJen]

24. Welcome, ThomWV!!!

:hi: Welcome to DU!! :hi:

[WilliamPitt]

25. Well put

and welcome to DU!

[Birthmark]

16. I like him.

Seriously, can you imagine anything more entertaining than a Clark/Bush* debate? Clark wonn't even have to say anything! He *looks* infinitely more Presidential than monkeyboy.

[Bush sucks Dick]

18. Army 80' 83' 11b medic

I don't want him unless he's Dean's vice presidential candidate. Counterpunch came down hard on Clark yesterday. Worth a read.

[Generic Other]

20. I read the article

Still waiting for the specifics to support the assertions made.

[ewagner]

22. Clark isn't like the Generals I knew

Most of my experience came from SAC generals who were pretty much still from the Curtis Lemay generation.

Clark is more like some of the young Captains I knew in that:

They followed orders of the high commandbbecause it was their job.
Looked out for the safety of their crew
Took pride in their performance (because they believed that was the only way to end the damned war)
Tried not to start WWIII

[TacticalPeek]

23. Army, US 69-71, SP4

My dad was also Army, Dec 41-duration; and my son is career active duty in the operator community.

My hope was rewarded when Clark jumped in this week. I am impressed with almost all I learn about him, and would support him in practically any election.

In THIS election I'm for him as the best weapon to unseat aWol. Honestly, though, if he screws up his campaigning or whatever, and its clear another dem has a better chance of accomplishing this mission, that's where I go. I don't in the least expect this, but my eye remains on THE prize: Shrub booted down to the pig farm.

I think Clark's the real deal, and could help fix some of our military problems, particularly the Army.

It doesn't take a crystal ball to know the right thing to do, just a first class mind with experience and a good heart. To wit:

STATEMENT OF
GENERAL (RETIRED) WESLEY K. CLARK
U.S. ARMY


BEFORE THE
HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 26, 2002

snip

Force should not be used until the personnel and organizations to be involved in post-conflict Iraq are identified and readied to assume their responsibilities. This includes requirements for humanitarian assistance, police and judicial capabilities, emergency medical and reconstruction assistance, and preparations for a transitional governing body and eventual elections, perhaps including a new constitution. Ideally, international and multinational organizations will participate in the readying of such post-conflict operations, including the UN, NATO, and other regional and Islamic organizations.
...
If we proceed as outlined above, we may be able to minimize the disruption to the ongoing campaign against Al Qaeda, reduce the impact on friendly governments in the region, and even contribute to the resolution of other regional issues such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, Iranian efforts to develop nuclear capabilities, and Saudi funding for terrorism. But there are no guarantees. The war is unpredictable and could be difficult and costly. And what is at risk in the aftermath is an open-ended American ground commitment in Iraq and an even deeper sense of humiliation in the Arab world, which could intensify our problems in the region and elsewhere.
snip


How nice it will be to have a good President again.

[ignatius]

26. Thanks for this thread, it is interesting to

read the thoughts of those who have served our country in the military.

I,as do most people really, hate war but realize that there are sadly times when we have to defend ourselves or some nation too small and defenseless to do it themselves. A 4 star general, a Rhoades scholar with double majors in economics and engineering and #1 in his class at West Point seems to be a major positive for the dem side.

Thanks again and a kick.

[Generic Other]

27. More smart generals might mean dropping fewer dumb bombs

If DU vets are any indication, Clark could garner a great deal of support.

There ought to be a whole lot of troops lining up to fill out an absentee ballot over in Iraq. Those votes could determine key elections as we know.