General Wesley Clark on Larry King Live

November 2, 2009

General Wesley Clark on PBS's NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

May 12, 2009

JIM LEHRER: Next tonight, the command shake-up in Afghanistan raises the "What kind of Army?" question, and to Ray Suarez.

RAY SUAREZ: Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he needed new thinking and new approaches from the military when he shuffled Army commanders yesterday in Afghanistan.

Out was General David McKiernan, a one-time tank officer who headed the ground forces during the 2003 Iraq invasion. In were two generals with careers in counterinsurgency warfare, Stanley McChrystal and David Rodriguez.

But as far back as 2007, Gates told the Army it faced new challenges. "Current and future conflicts," he said, "will be fundamentally political in nature and require the application of all elements of national power."

He added, "The Army must learn how to incorporate the latest in technology without losing sight of the human and cultural dimensions of the irregular battlefield."

For more on the Army and its new wars, we turn to two retired generals. Wesley Clark was NATO commander during the Kosovo War in 1999. Like General Clark, Dan Christman began his Army career as a platoon leader in Vietnam. His final post was superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

General Wesley Clark on The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer

April 6, 2009
Transcript by Reg NYC

Wolf Blitzer: So, can the United States and its allies actually win the war in Afghanistan. Joining us now from Little Rock is the retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark, the former NATO Supreme Allied Commander. A lot of the experts who know Afghanistan well, General Clark as you well know, say this is really not a winnable situation.

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think that's right, and I think- I do- I think they do say that. I think it's a very tough situation, but our objectives are we're principally there to go after Osama Bin Laden and the international terrorist movement that he has led and inspired. And the rest of it is what we can do, the most we can do to help the people of Afghanistan, and of course we want to help stabilize the situation on Pakistan, a nation 170 million armed with nuclear weapons. So, there's a three-part effort, but the winning part is breaking the back of the terrorist organization.

General Wesley Clark on the Stephanie Miller Show

November 26, 2008
transcript by Reg NYC

Stephanie Miller: Let's get on with the important business of taking back America. If only someone-

(phone rings)

Stephanie Miller: Oh, it's-! Who is it Christopher?

Christopher: It's General Wesley Clark. Hey!

Stephanie Miller: Ooh, he's one of our-

Christopher: Our favorite.

Stephanie Miller: -our personal favorites

Christopher: About some- about time somebody classed up the joint.

Stephanie Miller: (laughs) Good morning, General Clark.

Click here to read General Clark's article in the New York Times.

New York Times | November 16, 2008

What's Good for G.M. Is Good for the Army

The following is an excerpt from Wes Clark's Op-Ed in the New York Times called "What's Good for G.M. Is Good for the Army.":

In a little more than a year, the Army has procured and fielded in Iraq more than a thousand so-called mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles. The lives of hundreds of soldiers and marines have been saved, and their tasks made more achievable, by the efforts of the American automotive industry. And unlike in World War II, America didn't have to divert much civilian capacity to meet these military needs. Without a vigorous automotive sector, those needs could not have been quickly met.

More challenges lie ahead for our military, and to meet them we need a strong industrial base. For years the military has sought better sources of electric power in its vehicles -- necessary to allow troops to monitor their radios with diesel engines off, to support increasingly high-powered communications technology, and eventually to support electric propulsion and innovative armaments like directed-energy weapons. In sum, this greater use of electricity will increase combat power while reducing our footprint. Much research and development spending has gone into these programs over the years, but nothing on the manufacturing scale we really need.

Now, though, as Detroit moves to plug-in hybrids and electric-drive technology, the scale problem can be remedied. Automakers are developing innovative electric motors, many with permanent magnet technology, that will have immediate military use. And only the auto industry, with its vast purchasing power, is able to establish a domestic advanced battery industry. Likewise, domestic fuel cell production -- which will undoubtedly have many critical military applications -- depends on a vibrant car industry.

[...]

This should be no giveaway. Instead, it is a historic opportunity to get it right in Detroit for the good of the country. But Americans must bear in mind that any federal assistance plan would not be just an economic measure. This is, fundamentally, about national security.

Click here to read the entire article. Once you've read the article, please be sure to forward the link to all of your friends and family.