General Clark will be on Fox News Sunday January 8 @ 10:15AM CST
Submitted by Kat on January 7, 2006 - 7:08pm.
General Clark will be on Fox News Sunday January 8 at 10:15AM Central Time.
11:15AM EST | 10:15AM CST | 9:15AM MST | 8:15AM PST
All times of scheduled programs on Fox are subject to change. We recommend tuning in a little early.
Wow! They're really "using" him a LOT lately!!
Thanks Kat!! Thanks General!!
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right. - Hunter/Garcia
Thanks, Kat!
The General gets it right. Competence--What a concept!
.....to filter out the garbage while I'm waiting for the General :)
George Bush has had his day and he's bollixed it up.
"civil war?" "insurgency"..."We call it sectarianism." -- Wes
re: marines lacking proper body armor, Wes says they've invested in everything but...neglected appropriate troop protection for 25 years...grim
What would you do for a Klondike Bar?
they didn't have the proper body armour, Wes agrees. To paraphrase, he said we put a great deal of money into other things but not enough emphasis was placed on protecting the individual lives of the soldiers.
He looked very grave when the recent number of American troops deaths was mentioned, especially with regard to the blackhawk helicopter crash.
But it's what Wes has been saying all along. Republicans think the military is about weapons systems. Democrats know it's about people.
When asked his opinion on the Times article about the lack of body armor.....why didn't Wes lay the blame squarely at the feet of Rummy?????? WTF!!
Sometimes Wes is just TOO fair. I'm sure he's right that this has been a problem for 25 years but POLITICALLY it would have been smart to point out the failings of Rummy.
George Bush has had his day and he's bollixed it up.
I wondered that too, Maddy. I think Wes has to play to his audience and maybe he has chosen to get his point across without pointing fingers at specific members of this administration and thus causing people to tune his words out? Just a theory of mine.....fwiw.
Not only that but if WKC runs, then all of this video will be a matter of record...can't you just see selected sound bites taken out of context, made to sound outrageous and used against him by the opposition? Maybe there's something in his contract that prohibits use but how could it possibly be enforced? I think all of this becomes part of the public domain whether or not...
What would you do for a Klondike Bar?
Wes has to choose his words very carefully, especially with regard to how this particular network may use them in the future.
have you noticed how 'diplomatic' Wes has been lately? He's adopted a 'cool' manner, won't be spoken over, will make his point, won't let anyone misstate what he's said? This is GREAT practise for down the road. 'You know what' will never happen to HIM, again!
If he said its been a problem for 25 years, then that's what he knows. He is such a good and honest man that he won't play the soliders protection for cheap political gain. Perhaps he is too good (as in righteous) to be a politician.
but the admin would only have smacked him! If in fact it's been neglected for 25 years... and then blame it on Clinton, or hell, blame it on WKC?
What would you do for a Klondike Bar?
...he not only gave them cover, he opened up the possible defense that it's not just them.
Everyone knows Rummy tried to prosecute this war on the cheap. In the NYTimes article it said they have known for two years that the body armor is insufficient. So this is a Bu$h administration problem primarily. OK to say it's been a problem for 25 years IF he had added the failings of this particular administration OR mentioned that the fault lay with REPUBLICAN congresses going back 25 years.
George Bush has had his day and he's bollixed it up.
That's a given. Americans should know that - granted they don't think about it...but Wes can say that as a candidate if he runs.
What would you do for a Klondike Bar?
Unfortunately, the Republicans have controlled congress since 1994, before that it was a Democratic congress.
I bet he has been advocating helping the individual soldier rather than building exotic weapons for a long time. He probably has 25 years of memories about losing these fights.
Wes has been an advocate for soldiers safety his whole career. I'm sure he feels there is more than enough blame to go around.
GC is very good at laying out the argument. He is also very good at seeing the dangers of making a case that has holes which others can/will exploit to change the subject. IOW, to blame Rummy would leave room for the republicans to move the debate to "well, it's been a problem for years...so why is it rummy's problem?"
More Democrats should learn the lesson of making the weak case that can be turned against them. The public might be having a real debate on the issues instead of all the "he said--she said" crappola.
GC is always truthful. If protection of the forces is a 25 year old problem, then it is indeed a 25 year old problem. Although, I wished that he pointed out that rummy has taken NO action to solve that problem.
edited after pondering
You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.--J. V. Marley
Wes doesn't blame. He recognizes a problem and lets the audience draw their own conclusions. If asked well, isn't this rummy's fault, his 'hedge' will be to suggest that's where the responsibility/'blame' may be.
He won't be accused of calling W a liar, either.
I'm so glad they asked him about the body armour.
paraphrasing - This has been a problem since Vietnam. We didn't spend money to protect the individual soldiers.
for as long as it lasted. If you blinked, it would have been over! Wes did manage to get his point across, however. Just the look on his face said it all.
with the fact that the body armor wasn't designed to protect against IED's, which are a relatively new weapon being used against us. HOWEVER, since IED's are the "Insurgents" weapon of choice, and Rummy has known about this for quite some time, nothing seems to have been done about solving this "minor" oversight. Same way with the armor-less and under-armed HumVees. There is little if any sympathy for the individual trooper coming from these freaks. Another reason BushCo needs to go. Now there's 23 more reasons as that's the number of good Americans killed in the past two days; I hope Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld etc. rot in hell. However, this seems to be acceptable to the MSM and too many safe and comfy Americans only worried about paying their gas and fuel bills - and where to go out for lunch.
[red]W[/color]hy?
THANK YOU! I overslept! OMGOSH!
Wes could not have been more clear as to what we need to do right away. And the "25 years" comment is well-taken--he is doing an overview of the long term choices for military spending. This is the sort of thing that all need to understand--whereas, if he had just said "Blame Rumsfeld," it could have been dissed as pure politics. I think he answered with total candor, as he always does. And I agree that he looked very grim.
Ruth, thanks so much for capturing this.
The General gets it right. Competence--What a concept!
If he's trying to reach Fox's audience, he's best not to be too partisan. They'd just dismiss him if he did that. He's appealing to their humanity and reason first and letting them translate that to their political views on their own.
First point. WKC is correct, of course(!), that individual soldier protection has been a low priority for funding and development effort for a long time, essentially since Vietnam. Part of the reason is because we weren't supposed to "do" Vietnam again. It makes some sense to put a higher priority on turning out Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles when you're planning to fight the Soviets in Europe.
But another big part of the reason, imo, is that the big weapon systems bring a lot more money to the defense industry--some of it pure pork for the districts and states that traditionally benefit most from defense contracts. That goes for both sides of the aisle, altho the Repubs are probably worse about it, if only because they're more likely to represent those districts and states.
Second point. Bush sure likes to stretch his war powers in everything else, whether it's circumventing the 4th Amendment and FISA court, or calling up reserve components and extending enlistments, or ignoring US and international law on detention and torture. So when it finally became clear that the main threat to our troops would be IEDs and suicide bombers (setting aside the fact that he should have anticipated the insurgency--he's the one who's said all along Iraq is part the War on Terror, right?), why the hell why didn't he direct private industry to start making body armor to meet the need? Didn't the manufacturers claim no one had even asked 'em to for months after the shortage was identified? A war president could have had them working 'round the clock, hiring more people, opening new facilities (or retooling old ones) to get the equipment made. Body armor is just not that difficult to make, and the technology already exists, so there's no R&D required.
We have laws and standing contracts for industrial mobilization. FDR kicked the civilian sector into action in WWII. Heck, iirc, Bush41 had Raytheon working 24/7 to make Patriot missiles during Gulf War I. What's the problem now? Why isn't it a priority NOW?
Is it that this administration just doesn't care? Are they that incompetent? Or is this just another aspect of their hands-off approach to a business sector that shoves so much money into Repub coffers?
"Never underestimate what a determined soldier can accomplish when he's fighting for his country." -- General Wesley Clark
Another Wes-fix! My cup runneth over with Media Alerts!