There's an extremely well documented diary by "mariawells" which details General Clark's views on the war in Iraq from the fall of 2002 forward.
It never fails to baffle me how many people in the left-leaning blogoshpere have bought into the right-wing attack on Clark that he somehow waffled or flip-flopped on the war. The argument makes some modicum of sense from a GOP point of view.. If you're Karl Rove and pushing to re-elect a president on the single strength that he's resolute (Republicans like resolute a lot better than smart), it stands to reason your best attack against your opponents (like Clark, Kerry, and indeed all Democrats) is to portray them/us as weak, waffling, unwilling and unable to protect the nation.
But from the left? From people who in most cases admire Paul Wellstone and Ted Kennedy, both of whom attributed their votes against the war directly to Clark's testimony?
'Course, many of those who want to pretend Clark wasn't really against the war all along are pushing a presidential candidate who voted for the war. If they can convince others that someone of Clark's expertise couldn't make up his mind, it somehow forgives the poor judgment of their own guy or gal.
But whatever, I think it's helpful to see efforts like this one examine Clark's position from its earliest conception.
The only point not made as strongly as I would have liked is that no one, and I mean no one at all, on the right or the left, for or against, had any question whatsoever about where Wes Clark stood at the time he was standing.
Further down in Maria's thread is a post from "plant" which provides YouTube links to Clark's Senate testimony of Sept 23, 2003. My favorite has always been this one:
Can anyone watch General Clark take it back to Senator Jeff Session, banging the table (trying not to) when he talks about spilling the blood of young Americans, and doubt how he really felt?
