Soldiering on for Wesley Clark

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.

What's the big hurry?

Why was Saddam Hussein executed so quickly?

Let's see... here was a guy who murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people, who started two wars, one with Iran and one with Kuwait, resulting in the deaths of many hundreds of thousands more (to include at least 148 Americans and maybe more thanks to Gulf War Syndrome), and who provided support and encouragement to Palestinian terrorists responsible for the deaths of.hundreds of Israelis, most frequently targeting children, the elderly, the working poor.

Wouldn't you think it might be worth making him testify publicly about ALL of those crimes? Wouldn't you think ALL of the victims might deserve a day in court? Don't you suppose that those still loyal to Saddam could stand to hear a little more about why so many Iraqis, other Arabs, and people around the world are glad to see him dead?

source: http://www.icasualties.org

Just a quick note here. Published my first dKos diary, even tho I've been a registered member there since Jesus was a corporal. The subject is, "Flood the WH with letters; Tell Bush NO SURGE!" and it's a plea for Kossacks to respond to General Clark's letter campaign.

My dear friend Gordon Suber writes this insightful analysis of how the battlelines are being drawn over escalation in Iraq:

2007: It’s Clark versus McCain By Gordon Suber January 9, 2007

President George W. Bush will tell the American people why it is necessary to escalate the Iraq war, adding 20,000 American troops.

Writing in the Washington Post last Sunday, former presidential candidate (2000), Senator John McCain wrote that a small, short surge is a terrible idea. He advocates a larger number, for a longer period.

Writing in the Washington Post last Monday, former presidential candidate (2004) and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, Wesley K. Clark set forth why he believes a surge in troops in Baghdad is a terrible idea. He advocates diplomacy.

None of us knows who will be battling for the presidency in 2008, but what I know now is that when it comes to finding a solution in Iraq in 2007, it's Clark versus McCain.

Well, ok, so don't forget Iraq completely. We all need to write our Congress-critters and demand they stop the escalation while there's still time. This war needs a strategy -- I doubt it's ever had one -- or we need to get the hell out. I prefer the first option. But twenty-two thousand more troops is not strategy, folks; it's tactics. Probably not even good tactics, but that's not the point. Congress needs to hold the President's feet to the fire, make him do his job, and stop him from telling his generals how to do theirs.

So by all means, write your representative and senators about this insane escalation. Just be sure to tell them, Don't forget about Iran! This administration, driven by neo-conservative ideology, has always wanted to take on Iran. Seems likely they have done it already if everything had gone the way they planned in Iraq.

The two voting-age members of this household wrote a letter to our congressman just yesterday.

Sorry, couldn't resist. I heard the "Fried Rice" moniker after the Senate smacked her around on Friday, and thought it right on the money... so I had a yen to use it.

But on to the main course.

In her Congressional testimony of January 11, 2007, Condoleezza Rice said:

“It is bad policy to speculate on what you'll do if the strategy you are working on doesn't work”

OMG, OMG. Did she make that up on the spot, or is that what passes as planning philosophy in the Bush White House? I know she didn't learn if from anyone at State.

Just over a week ago, the White House announced the President would call for a "surge" in the number of troops in Baghdad. Since then, General Clark has been all over the airwaves, and in print on two sides of the ocean, trying to drum up resistance.

Our favorite Dead Messenger has compiled a directory of links to the General's most recent words in every medium. If you want to know where we are, and where we should be, follow the bread crumbs.
UPDATE: DM missed a link to The Stephanie Miller Show

Wes Clark was a guest on Hannity & Colmes the evening after Bush's State of the Union address. And soft pudgy too-good-to-enlist Sean Hannity presumes to lecture the four-star general and decorated combat veteran on military strategy?

Un-effin'-believable.

There's a video of the relevant piece at Crooks & Liars, or you can watch the whole interview at WesPAC's website. But here's what Hannity said:

Last weekend, the Democratic National Committee held its annual Winter Meeting and, as frequently happens in election years (even tho 2007 is not technically not), it included a "cattle call" of all the presidential candidates for 2008, to include, as party chairman Dean called him, the imminent candidate General Wesley Clark.

One by one, the presidential wannabes took the podium, in randomly assigned order, and extolled the audience as to why Democrats should nominate them to the highest office in the land (and a house worth I dare say more than even John Edwards').

But only one seized upon the platform as an opportunity to once again remind Democrats, as well as an expected TV audience (pre-empted by tornadoes in Florida), of those the aspirants would seek to lead, when he began the meat of his speech with:

But before I say anything else, I want you to take just a moment and reflect quietly, on the sacrifices that are being made by our troops in uniform and their families. [moment of silence]

You could have heard a pin drop in that room.

It's not the people trying to bring them home.

The front page of the local rag carried a large photo above the fold two days ago. It was taken by John Moore of Getty Images, and accompanied an article about our military manpower problems. Hard to believe, but I can't find the photo on-line. It's simple to describe though. On a blank wall outside a Marine Corps civil affairs office in Ramadi Iraq was scribbled these words, writ large in an easy blue script:

UPDATE: I found the photo.

(John Moore/Getty Images)

...before it starts?

We are on the verge of war with Iran, and most of America doesn't even know it.

But make no mistake. George W. Bush wants to attack Iran.

Yesterday I wrote,

There is no doubt at all that many many people who could have made a difference [during the Vietnam era], chose not to, and lived to regret it.
I only hope the generals in the Pentagon today won't look back in ten or twenty years and feel the same way.

How ironic that just this morning on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, I hear David Margolick, the author of a new article in Vanity Fair about the generals who spoke out to call for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation in April 2006.

Particularly striking is a quote from Lieutenant General Greg Newbold, who was the Director for Operations on the Joint Staff in 2002. Describing a pre-invasion planning meeting where Rumsfeld had "summarily dismissed [a 500,000 troop estimate because s]urely 125,000 would suffice," Newbold now says,

"I should have had the gumption to confront him. The right thing to do was to confront, and I didn't. It's something I'll have to live with for a long time."

Wes Clark is the last American general to win a war, one that was fought entirely within the framework of a true international alliance, and resulted in not a single allied combat casualty. He is also a veteran of counterinsurgency warfare in Vietnam, where he was wounded four times while commanding troops in battle, and awarded both the Silver Star and Purple Heart for his actions which saved the lives of his men under enemy attack.

Jon Soltz is a veteran and former captain, who completed a tour in Iraq, served with General Clark in Europe, and.returned from the Middle East to organize VoteVets.org, an organization dedicated to electing veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to Congress, and in helping candidates pledged to support the troops, both those deployed and the returning vets who are dependent upon military and VA medical care. VoteVets.org produced and aired a number of effective ads during the 2006 election cycle, probably the best known of which is the Body Armor ad which helped defeat Senators George Allen of Virginia, Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, and Jim Talent of Missouri.

Together, they have recorded this video where they tell us about the military implications of an attack on Iran, both from a general's strategic perspective, and a captain's tactical experience.

I hope you'll take a few minutes to watch.
Then sign up to help Stop the Iran War. While there's still time.

(Steve Sack/Minneapolis Star-Tribune)

When John McCain wants to find out how things are going over in Iraq, he flies over in a military aircraft on the taxpayers' dime, walks around the Green Zone with a maximum of US military protection, also on the taxpayers' dime, and talks to soldiers and marines hand-picked by the chain of command to answer his questions. One wonders what he expects to hear, and whether it isn't something like what he wants to hear, but I guess it's hard to fault him for not knowing any real GIs up close and personal.

Democratic congressman Patrick Murphy, on the other hand, can talk to the very real soldiers he served with in Iraq, some of whom are still there. According to an op/ed by Francis Clines in last Sunday's New York Times, one of those soldiers is Sergeant Juan Santiago of the 82nd Airborne. Hooah SGT Santiago.

Another "Fighting Dem," Congressman (and retired Colonel) Jack Murtha nails it:

Interesting to hear the gentleman say 'we,' 'we fight,' 'we aren't gonna give up,' 'we aren't gonna surrender.' Let me tell you something. We aren't fighting this war. It's the troops overseas... Don't tell me we're fighting in this air conditioned office. We're not fighting this war; they're fighting it! And I'm proud of every one of them!"

(C-SPAN, by way of BradBlog.com)

Sure, Americans would love to see their political leaders come together in a spirit of bipartisanship and compromise. BUT that doesn't mean we want you folks in Congress to roll over and give the President whatever he wants.

In a recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center, a whopping 70% of respondents, garnered from all political parties, as well as no party at all, said that Democratic leaders in Congress are either "not going far enough" or are "handling it about right" in "challenging George W.Bush’s policies in Iraq." This compares to a mere 23% who thought Reid and Pelosi are "going too far." Moreover, the same poll found that a full 78% think Congress should have "some" or "a lot" of influence over the direction of U.S. policy in Iraq, compared to only 18% who responded either "not much" or "none at all."

So hang in there, Democrats. Be strong, show some starch, and do what you know is right. That's all any of us can ask, and usually all we ever do.

Once more mega-kudos are in order to VoteVets, one of the few veterans organizations that puts the welfare of the troops ahead of partisan politics.

Jon Soltz -- Iraq War Veteran, Co-Founder and Chairman of VoteVets -- writes:

The first in the series of three ads features VoteVets.org Advisory Board Member, Major General (ret.) John Batiste, who was commanding general of the 1st Infantry Division from August 2002-June 2005. During this time frame, he conducted combat operations in Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Batiste twice voted for President Bush and is a lifelong Republican. If you like this ad, then you're going to love what we have coming up in about a week, from Major General Paul Eaton. And, then the ad featuring General Clark after that. That's fitting, because it is General Clark who paved the way for other retired brass to speak out.

Now watch the video....

A New York Times Op-Ed by troops from Iraq:

The War as We Saw It

by Staff Sergeants (E6) Jeremy A. Murphy and Yance T. Gray, Sergeants (E5) Wesley D. Smith, Jeremy Roebuck, Omar Mora, and Edward Sandmeier, and Specialist (E4) Buddhika Jayamaha
Published: August 19, 2007

Viewed from Iraq at the tail end of a 15-month deployment, the political debate in Washington is indeed surreal. Counterinsurgency is, by definition, a competition between insurgents and counterinsurgents for the control and support of a population. To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day. (Obviously, these are our personal views and should not be seen as official within our chain of command.)