Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Udie on September 22, 2003, 10:47:22 AM
-
(http://www.drudgereport.com/clark.jpg)
turns out that old saying was right all along....
-
not even a nibble?!?! :mad:
-
Who are they?
-
Wesley be stylin'!
Hmm, say isn't that the notorious Bosnian Serb commander and indicted war criminal, Gen. Ratko Mladic standing next to him?
-
Originally posted by Makarov9
Wesley be stylin'!
Hmm, say isn't that the notorious Bosnian Serb commander and indicted war criminal, Gen. Ratko Mladic standing next to him?
DING! Winner!
awwww and isn't that cute, they changed hats with each other.
-
Very nice.
-
OH OH! Me thinks the Savior of the Democrats might be in trouble...
-
pwn3d
-
Originally posted by Makarov9
OH OH! Me thinks the Savior of the Democrats might be in trouble...
Hehe, calling MrLars! :D
-
Still confused...must have missed another post.:confused:
-
September 22, 2003
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The important Democrats eager to run retired Gen. Wesley Clark for president might exercise due diligence about a military career that was nearly terminated before he got his fourth star and then came to a premature end. The trouble with the general is pointed out by a bizarre incident in Bosnia nearly a decade ago.
Clark was a three-star (lieutenant general) who directed strategic plans and policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Washington. On Aug. 26, 1994, in the northern Bosnian city of Banja Luka, he met and exchanged gifts with the notorious Bosnian Serb commander and indicted war criminal, Gen. Ratko Mladic. The meeting took place against the State Department's wishes and may have contributed to Clark's failure to be promoted until political pressure intervened. The shocking photo of Mladic and Clark wearing each other's military caps was distributed throughout Europe.
Last week on CNN's "Crossfire," I asked one of Clark's new supporters -- Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois -- about that indiscretion. "Well, I don't know about the photo," he replied. He and other Clark backers, led by Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, might want to dig more deeply into the general's turbulent military career before getting too deeply committed.
For Emanuel, Rangel and other well-connected Democrats, Wes Clark seems a dream come true. He is walking the liberal line on taxes, abortion, racial quotas and Iraq. But he has military credentials and decorations that George W. Bush lacks. Even before formally announcing last week, Clark had 10 percent in Gallup's first national listing of him among presidential candidates and was just 6 percentage points behind the front-runner. Clark comes over on television as a square-jawed straight-shooter, not the stormy petrel that the Army knew during 34 years active duty -- including his conduct in the Banja Luka incident.
U.S. diplomats warned Clark not to go to Bosnian Serb military headquarters to meet Mladic, considered by U.S. intelligence as the mastermind of the Srebrenica massacre of Muslim civilians (and still at large, sought by NATO peacekeeping forces). Besides the exchange of hats, they drank wine together, and Mladic gave Clark a bottle of brandy and a pistol.
This was what U.S. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke's team seeking peace in Yugoslavia tried to avoid by instituting the "Clark Rule": whenever the general is found talking alone to a Serb, Croat or Muslim, make sure an American civilian official rushes to his side. It produced some comic opera dashes by diplomats.
After Clark's meeting with Mladic, the State Department cabled embassies throughout Europe that there was no change in policy toward the Bosnian Serbs. The incident cost Victor Jackovich his job as U.S. ambassador to Bosnia, even though he protested Clark's course. The upshot came months later, when Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic, in bitter negotiations with Holbrooke, handed Clark back his Army hat.
After such behavior, Clark was never on the promotion list to full general until he appealed to Defense Secretary William Perry and Gen. John Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He got his fourth star and became commander in chief of the Southern Command. His last post, as NATO supreme commander, found this infantry officer leading an air war against the Serbs over Kosovo. Clark argued with NATO colleagues by insisting on a ground troops option and complaining about the slowly graduated bombing campaign. He was pushed out abruptly by Defense Secretary William Cohen.
Since retiring in 2000, Clark has not been less contentious. Secretary of State Colin Powell was furious that a fellow four-star general in his CNN commentary would criticize U.S. strategy in Iraq, without much information and with the war barely underway. Clark attributed one comment to a Middle East "think tank" in Canada, although there appears to be no such organization. After claiming that the White House pressured CNN to fire him, Clark later said, "I've only heard rumors about it."
Nevertheless, liberals who gathered Thursday night at the Manhattan home of historian Arthur Schlesinger agreed that a general is just the right kind of candidate to oppose President Bush and that they never had seen any general so liberal as Wes Clark. They chose to ignore past performance, which may be cause for regret.
-
sorry Curval :)
It's a picture of Wes Clark with a Bosnian war criminal. And they have exchanged hats for the picture.
-
They chose to ignore past performance, which may be cause for regret.
It will be very interesting to see how far the libs put on the blinders for this guy. That will make like 10 or 20 pairs of blinders they are wearing now :D
I mean come on, the guy said he would have been a Republican if they would have returned his calls. I don't understand that. I mean there is a pretty huge diference in the idiologies....
-
After graduating first in his class at West Point ('66) and finishing his master's at Oxford, Clark went to Southeast Asia. He won the Silver Star and a Purple Heart—he was wounded four times—in combat in Vietnam.
The "hat incident" was a diplomatic mission. I bet they had drinks together too. Go find something important.
-
Originally posted by Udie
They chose to ignore past performance, which may be cause for regret.
It will be very interesting to see how far the libs put on the blinders for this guy. That will make like 10 or 20 pairs of blinders they are wearing now :D
I mean come on, the guy said he would have been a Republican if they would have returned his calls. I don't understand that. I mean there is a pretty huge diference in the idiologies....
They have a KKK senator (shrugs). The Republican party would never be allowed *(by the media and dems) to have a KKK member (or ex-KKK member) as a senator.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
The "hat incident" was a diplomatic mission. I bet they had drinks together too. Go find something important.
U.S. diplomats warned Clark not to go to Bosnian Serb military headquarters to meet Mladic, considered by U.S. intelligence as the mastermind of the Srebrenica massacre of Muslim civilians (and still at large, sought by NATO peacekeeping forces). Besides the exchange of hats, they drank wine together, and Mladic gave Clark a bottle of brandy and a pistol.
This was what U.S. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke's team seeking peace in Yugoslavia tried to avoid by instituting the "Clark Rule": whenever the general is found talking alone to a Serb, Croat or Muslim, make sure an American civilian official rushes to his side. It produced some comic opera dashes by diplomats.
After Clark's meeting with Mladic, the State Department cabled embassies throughout Europe that there was no change in policy toward the Bosnian Serbs. The incident cost Victor Jackovich his job as U.S. ambassador to Bosnia, even though he protested Clark's course. The upshot came months later, when Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic, in bitter negotiations with Holbrooke, handed Clark back his Army hat.
After such behavior, Clark was never on the promotion list to full general until he appealed to Defense Secretary William Perry and Gen. John Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He got his fourth star and became commander in chief of the Southern Command. His last post, as NATO supreme commander, found this infantry officer leading an air war against the Serbs over Kosovo. Clark argued with NATO colleagues by insisting on a ground troops option and complaining about the slowly graduated bombing campaign. He was pushed out abruptly by Defense Secretary William Cohen.
It was? Then why did the Ambasador get fired for it? Why didn't Richard Holebrook want him to do it? Your blinders fit well :)
-
Anyone remember that picture of Micahel Bukakis in the Tank with the Helmet on?
Flashback, anyone?
-
The spiders from mars are eating my skin!
:rofl
-
So where were the spiders while the fly tried to break our balls?
-
After berating Clark for several minutes, Mladic abruptly changed tactics and began admiring the U.S. general's uniform. Before the meeting was over the two generals exchanged caps. Mladic also presented Clark with a gift -- a pistol engraved "From General Mladic."
This was, to say the least, a public relations blunder. Mladic was later indicted for wars crimes by the Hague Tribunal and the Washington Post reported, somewhat unfairly, that the cap exchange incident was "like cavorting with Hermann Goering."
Gen. Sir Michael Rose of Great Britain, then commander of the U.N. Protection Force in Bosnia, who was present at the meeting, thought Mladic had made a fool of Clark. "It was horrible to watch," Rose wrote in "Fighting for Peace," his book on Bosnia.
It was a PR blunder, but now please turn a critical eye to the rest of the article Rip posted.
1. Sir Michael Rose was there too. Rose was the NATO commander (over Clark) at the time. So who's idea was it to visit Mladic?
2. "U.S. diplomats warned Clark not to go to Bosnian Serb military headquarters" - I have searched and searched for these "diplomats"... who were they? Why would Rose not be the one warned?
3. The article makes it seem that Richard Holbrooke was trying like hell to hold this wild Clark guy back... read this interview with Holbrooke. What do you think? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/military/guys/holbrooke.html
There is more of course, just pointing out the ways a media report can be slanted and even contain lies.
-
How did they slant the Hat?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
They have a KKK senator (shrugs). The Republican party would never be allowed *(by the media and dems) to have a KKK member (or ex-KKK member) as a senator.
They even have Ted Kennedy. They should change their motto to "The end justifies the means."
-
One more little thing...
The meeting took place on Aug. 26, 1994. The Srebrenica massacre took place in July 1995. Yet the article is written:
U.S. diplomats warned Clark not to go to Bosnian Serb military headquarters to meet Mladic, considered by U.S. intelligence as the mastermind of the Srebrenica massacre of Muslim civilians
Makes it sound like Clark knowingly met with a war criminal. Clarks meeting came almost a year before the massacre.
Thats one way to slant the hat.
-
You got that right.
-
I think you're right about the slant in that article MT. However, I think Mladic was already known for being heavy handed prior to the massacre. One thing you can count on, especially if Clark gets the nomination, the facts, at least the dirty ones, will be revealed.