Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (214959)	8/8/2007 4:19:55 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793964

Wesley K. Clark is just so detestable. Here some other words from this "thank our lucky stars he didn't come close to the US Presidency" person: Clark in this article says: "Only as a last resort should we call on the military and label such activities “war.” The formula for defeating terrorism is well known and time-proven." Really. What is the "formula for defeating terrorism." Did Clinton know? Really. By exactly whom is it "well known and time proven." Maybe Clark should be asking himself why so many of his former Generals, and one of them his direct boss...why they would say such non-positive things about him...... For instance: zpub.com >>>>>>When at a forum in September, retired Gen. Hugh Shelton was asked if he would support retired Gen. Wesley Clark for president, Shelton, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, quickly took a drink of water. "That question makes me wish it were vodka," Shelton said. "I've known Wes for a long time. I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart. I'm not going to say whether I'm a Republican or a Democrat. I'll just say Wes won't get my vote." Which was bad enough, but on November 6, retired Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf appeared on CNBC's Capital Report, hosted by Gloria Borger and Alan Murray, who asked him what he thought of Clark. "I think the greatest condemnation against him . . . came from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when he was a NATO commander. I mean, he was fired as a NATO commander," Schwarzkopf replied, "and when Hugh Shelton said he was fired because of matters of character and integrity, that is a very, very damning statement, which says, `If that's the case, he's not the right man for president,' as far as I'm concerned." </b<<<<<< usnews.com ON WMD... Less than 18 months ago, Wesley Clark offered his testimony before the Committee On Armed Services at the U.S. House Of Representatives. "There's no requirement to have any doctrine here. I mean this is simply a long-standing right of the United States and other nations to take the actions they deem necessary in their self defense," Clark told Congress on September 26, 2002. "Every president has deployed forces as necessary to take action. He's done so without multilateral support if necessary. He's done so in advance of conflict if necessary. . . Clark continued: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001. . . More Clark: "And, I want to underscore that I think the United States should not categorize this action as preemptive. Preemptive and that doctrine has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem. As Richard Perle so eloquently pointed out, this is a problem that's longstanding. It's been a decade in the making. It needs to be dealt with and the clock is ticking on this."

To: LindyBill who wrote (214959)	8/8/2007 6:57:50 AM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793964

By Wesley Clark and the NYT, why read it?