Hello Everyone:

Gen. Clark was on CNN Larry King Live on Tuesday, November 24 in a panel dialogue discussing Afghanistan. Matthew Hoh (the first US official to have resigned in protest over US policy in Afghanistan) and Neocon Tom Cotton with Vets for Freedom (Neocon Pete Hegseth, the leader of Vets for Freedom, has debated Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org many times on the cable networks) were on this CNN panel with Gen. Clark.

Here is the CNN video link of this panel dialogue with Gen. Clark:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/11/25/lkl.afghan.debate.cnn

Debating Afghanistan strategy (6:12)

Added On November 25, 2009

Larry King and a panel of guests (Gen. Clark, Matthew Hoh, and Tom Cotton) discuss Pres. Obama's upcoming decision on the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/11/25/lkl.afghan.debate.cnn

Right below is the CNN transcript of this entire panel dialogue about Afghanistan.

Here is the portion of the transcript of everything that Gen. Clark said in this panel dialogue (where he emphasized that in addition to "more troops" in Afghanistan, there needs to be "more economic advisors there. They really need a political strategy. They need stronger diplomacy in the region. They need to work India as well as Pakistan in this," where he talked about "an exit strategy to get us out of there," and where he responded to Neocon Tom Cotton who said "I would focus more on a victory strategy than an exit strategy" at the end of the interview):

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0911/24/lkl.01.html

CNN LARRY KING LIVE

Inside President Obama's 1st State Dinner

Aired November 24, 2009 - 21:00 ET

LARRY KING, CNN ANCHOR: "Next Tuesday, the president will announce his decision on Afghanistan. Joining us to discuss it, in Washington, Matthew Hoh. He became the first US official to have resigned in protest over US policy there. In Memphis, Tennessee, General Wesley Clark, NATO supreme allied commander. And in Washington -- former NATO supreme allied commander. And in Washington, Tom Cotton, a member for Vets for Freedom, an organization of combat veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

General Clark, what should he do and what do you think he's going to do?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET), FMR. NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER: I think he's going to build an exit strategy to get us out of there, but I think it's going to entail more troops in the near term, a lot more assistance to the government of Pakistan, and pressure on the government of Pakistan to do even more in the northwest frontier provinces. And I think he's going to try to start showing signs of progress so we can can see an end in sight...

KING: General Clark, former Vice President Dick Cheney has accused the president of dithering and suggested that his actions toward Afghanistan are due to inexperience. How do you comment on that?

CLARK: I think it's been a very good process of the strategic review. I think they've worked it with the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan. I think it's been time very, very well spent. I have to say I'm in sympathy with General McChrystal's request for more troops. I would certainly request them if I were there.

But I also hear what Matthew is saying. I think that's the effort of the review, is to square those two concerns. They are both sets of concerns. McChrystal needs more troops. The government's not responsive. It's not as legitimate as probably we would like to make it.

And the other element is, of course, Pakistan has to do more, because we can't succeed in Afghanistan alone. It's not an isolated theater of war. All that is part of the review...

KING: General, other countries that have gone into Afghanistan have left, Russia most recently. Is this a no-win?

CLARK: I think it depends on how you define win, Larry. I do think that we are a foreign element in a country that doesn't tolerate diversity. I think we have to find a way to leave behind some kind of structure that we can work with that won't be a terrorist state, and we have to get our troops out of there. And I believe that's what the Obama administration is trying to do.

But you can't do this if you're being forced back on the battlefield, and you can't maintain some control over most of the population centers. So I see the increase in troops as an essential weigh station on getting out of the country successfully...

KING: General Clark, the great, late General Chappy James told me once that no one hates war more than the warrior. And I hear that. But did we ever have a general propose that we leave?

CLARK: It's very hard when you're in uniform to say something's not doable. And in this case what the military is saying is they need more troops. But they also need a lot of other things. They need more economic advisors there. They really need a political strategy. They need stronger diplomacy in the region. They need to work India as well as Pakistan in this. So the military is trying to do the best it can to do the mission they were given. You don't want to ask the military is it time to quit? That's the job of the president. He's got to look at the results, all the tools available. He has to listen to the best advice. These military guys are going to do the very best job they can. They are going to give it heart and soul. They're going to make incredible commitments to get the job done. It's up to the leaders, elected by the American people, to make sure the job they're given and strategy they're given is the right one.

KING: Tom, do you agree there has to be an exit strategy?

TOM COTTON, VETS FOR FREEDOM: I would focus more on a victory strategy than an exit strategy. I don't think we can set firm deadlines or timetables. You never know the course of evens in war. In Iraq, there was the debate about timetables. And again, that is really setting a deadline to let the enemy know when we would be leaving.

We do have to be prepared for this to be a long-term, two to three-year troop increase, as we restore some level of security to the country and work with the government to restore its legitimacy among the Afghan people. So, no, I don't agree.

KING: A victory would be -- and, Tom, we have a short time left. What would victory be, Tom?

COTTON: A legitimate government, viewed through the eyes of the people, that can come through elections, which they just had, but it can also come through the state having a relative monopoly on the use of violence inside its borders, control of the borders, the provision of basic social services, and the defeat of the Taliban and other anti-government forces inside of Afghanistan.

KING: In 20 seconds, general, do you think that's possible?

CLARK: I think something less is possible. I don't think this is unwinnable, if you define the objective as we don't want a terrorist state there. We want to help the people of Afghanistan as best we can. And I think we can do that. I think the president's team can put together a strategy that will give us a chance to do it.

KING: Matthew, we know where you stand. Matthew Hoh, General Wesley Clark, Tom Cotton, thank you all..."

My conclusions are that I wish more people would look beyond troop levels in Afghanistan and focus much more on what Gen. Clark mentioned in addition to "more troops" which are "more economic advisors there. They really need a political strategy. They need stronger diplomacy in the region. They need to work India as well as Pakistan in this" and I also wish that more people would understand how VERY dangerous that Neocons ideologues like Tom Cotton are who focus far more on military "victory strategy" as opposed to the comprehensive solutions that Gen. Clark talked about!

Mitch Dworkin

http://mitchdworkin.com/
Check out my political website!

http://www.securingamerica.com/

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16039
RESOURCES: Speeches, Articles, and Career Highlights to help define Gen. Clark!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on July 7, 2008 - 2:51pm.

http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!

--------------------

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0911/24/lkl.01.html

CNN LARRY KING LIVE

Inside President Obama's 1st State Dinner

Aired November 24, 2009 - 21:00 ET

LARRY KING, CNN ANCHOR: "Next Tuesday, the president will announce his decision on Afghanistan. Joining us to discuss it, in Washington, Matthew Hoh. He became the first US official to have resigned in protest over US policy there. In Memphis, Tennessee, General Wesley Clark, NATO supreme allied commander. And in Washington -- former NATO supreme allied commander. And in Washington, Tom Cotton, a member for Vets for Freedom, an organization of combat veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

General Clark, what should he do and what do you think he's going to do?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET), FMR. NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER: I think he's going to build an exit strategy to get us out of there, but I think it's going to entail more troops in the near term, a lot more assistance to the government of Pakistan, and pressure on the government of Pakistan to do even more in the northwest frontier provinces. And I think he's going to try to start showing signs of progress so we can can see an end in sight.

KING: Matthew, if that's the case, what do you think of it?

MATTHEW HOH, FMR. STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Thanks for having me here tonight, Larry. I think adding more troops is going in the wrong direction. Adding more troops does two things. It reinforces the Karzai government, a government that we're propping up, you know, on the backs of our young Marines and soldiers. By propping them up, that means the Karzai government will not negotiate with the other side.

The other thing this does by adding more troops is it only enforces or reinforces the Taliban's desire to end the foreign occupation of the country. They're only going to fight harder. So by adding more troops, you take away any incentive from the Karzai regime to negotiate, and you embolden the other side to continue fighting.

My recommendation, of course, is to -- go ahead?

KING: -- leave?

HOH: Oh, not leave. No, one of the things, Larry, is you can characterize it as all in or all out, and I don't believe that's the case. Reasonable people and rational people who are involved in the debate, I don't think anyone is saying all in or all out. I'm not advocating for washing our hands. I'm advocating for a political solution.

KING: Tom Cotton, where do you stand?

TOM COTTON, VETS FOR FREEDOM: I support General McChrystal's request for fully resourced counter-insurgent strategy. Reports of his still classified review released in August said he's requesting anywhere from 40,000 to 60,000 troops. I think 40,000 would be a reasonable but low-end figure; 60,000 would allow for a fully resourced strategy. And I hope the president next week will announce that he's going to support the general and give him all the troops he needs for that strategy.

KING: CNN is reporting that the Pentagon planners are expecting deployment of about 34,000 more troops. We'll ask General Clark and our other guests about that right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(NEWS BREAK)

KING: General Clark, former Vice President Dick Cheney has accused the president of dithering and suggested that his actions toward Afghanistan are due to inexperience. How do you comment on that?

CLARK: I think it's been a very good process of the strategic review. I think they've worked it with the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan. I think it's been time very, very well spent. I have to say I'm in sympathy with General McChrystal's request for more troops. I would certainly request them if I were there.

But I also hear what Matthew is saying. I think that's the effort of the review, is to square those two concerns. They are both sets of concerns. McChrystal needs more troops. The government's not responsive. It's not as legitimate as probably we would like to make it.

And the other element is, of course, Pakistan has to do more, because we can't succeed in Afghanistan alone. It's not an isolated theater of war. All that is part of the review.

KING: Tom, every public poll says a majority of Americans want us out. How do you respond to that?

COTTON: Well, the support for the war can ebb and flow based on the case that our leaders make for it. I think one draw back of the long and protracted review is that we haven't had the president and senior Congressional leaders making the case to the American people for why we need to send more troops to Afghanistan, what they're going to accomplish and how we can win. I think once that case is made, once the president explains that we have a victory strategy, not an exit strategy, the polls will begin to turn around, and the center of gravity in the war, which is really not the fight against al Qaeda terrorists or the fight against the Taliban, but maintaining American public support for our great fighting man, will begin to turn around, and the majority of Americans will see that this is an essential fight that we have to win.

KING: Matthew, why did you resign? Why not stay on and fight the fight inside?

HOH: Larry, I'd -- As I said in my resignation letter, I lost trust and confidence in what we were doing there, why we were in Afghanistan. I really came to find that a majority of the people that our young men are fighting and dying against are people who are fighting us only because they're occupied. I came to realize that we're taking one side in the civil war, and our participation there is only continuing this conflict. Our presence there is not doing anything to make the United States safer. Al Qaeda is not present in Afghanistan.

Finally, I had moral issues with us having our young men fight and die to support a regime like the Karzai regime, which is very corrupt and illegitimate.

KING: General, other countries that have gone into Afghanistan have left, Russia most recently. Is this a no-win?

CLARK: I think it depends on how you define win, Larry. I do think that we are a foreign element in a country that doesn't tolerate diversity. I think we have to find a way to leave behind some kind of structure that we can work with that won't be a terrorist state, and we have to get our troops out of there. And I believe that's what the Obama administration is trying to do.

But you can't do this if you're being forced back on the battlefield, and you can't maintain some control over most of the population centers. So I see the increase in troops as an essential weigh station on getting out of the country successfully.

KING: And we'll be back with more of Matthew Hoh, General Wesley Clark and Tom Cotton.

By the way, tomorrow night, Jack Hanna, on Thanksgiving eve, is back with his animals. You're not going to want to miss this one.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: The president's first state dinner as president going on at the White House right now. They're eating dinner. They'll be dancing. There will be great entertainment by the great Jennifer Hudson. It's really a state dinner, but not a state dinner, because the prime minister is not the head of state. But they're calling it a -- whatever the White House calls it is what it is.

Tom Cotton, you've been in both places. Did it get frustrating for you?

COTTON: There were days when it was frustrating. I can tell you, though, that Afghanistan in 2009 is nowhere near as bad or as dangerous as Baghdad in 2006 was, when I served there as a platoon leader. And as we learned over the last two years, difficult does not mean impossible and hard does not mean irredeemable. If we can pull back from the brink in Iraq, we can certainly do so in Afghanistan over the coming two to three years, with the proper number of troops and the proper strategy.

KING: Matthew, are you pessimistic about all this?

HOH: I am to a certain degree, Larry. You know, I'm very hopeful that what the president has done these last few months is that they've gone through a review of the strategy, as General Clark is referencing, and that we're going to see -- I know we're going to get a troop increase, which I'm disappointed about.

However, if we can get some type of withdraw date or exit strategy, the important thing with that is we get a political solution to the conflict in Afghanistan. Right now, our forces are fighting and they're fighting guys that are fighting us only because we're there. It is going to keep happening until we withdraw. But what we need to do is find a political solution that brings the two sides of the Afghan civil war to peace and stability.

KING: General Clark, the great, late General Chappy James told me once that no one hates war more than the warrior. And I hear that. But did we ever have a general propose that we leave?

CLARK: It's very hard when you're in uniform to say something's not doable. And in this case what the military is saying is they need more troops. But they also need a lot of other things. They need more economic advisors there. They really need a political strategy. They need stronger diplomacy in the region. They need to work India as well as Pakistan in this. So the military is trying to do the best it can to do the mission they were given. You don't want to ask the military is it time to quit? That's the job of the president. He's got to look at the results, all the tools available. He has to listen to the best advice. These military guys are going to do the very best job they can. They are going to give it heart and soul. They're going to make incredible commitments to get the job done. It's up to the leaders, elected by the American people, to make sure the job they're given and strategy they're given is the right one.

KING: Tom, do you agree there has to be an exit strategy?

COTTON: I would focus more on a victory strategy than an exit strategy. I don't think we can set firm deadlines or timetables. You never know the course of evens in war. In Iraq, there was the debate about timetables. And again, that is really setting a deadline to let the enemy know when we would be leaving.

We do have to be prepared for this to be a long-term, two to three-year troop increase, as we restore some level of security to the country and work with the government to restore its legitimacy among the Afghan people. So, no, I don't agree.

KING: A victory would be -- and, Tom, we have a short time left. What would victory be, Tom?

COTTON: A legitimate government, viewed through the eyes of the people, that can come through elections, which they just had, but it can also come through the state having a relative monopoly on the use of violence inside its borders, control of the borders, the provision of basic social services, and the defeat of the Taliban and other anti-government forces inside of Afghanistan.

KING: In 20 seconds, general, do you think that's possible?

CLARK: I think something less is possible. I don't think this is unwinnable, if you define the objective as we don't want a terrorist state there. We want to help the people of Afghanistan as best we can. And I think we can do that. I think the president's team can put together a strategy that will give us a chance to do it.

KING: Matthew, we know where you stand. Matthew Hoh, General Wesley Clark, Tom Cotton, thank you all..."