Wesley Clark, Obama Shill
Last night, former NATO allied commander Wesley Clark gave irrefutable proof that his loyalties lie with the Obama administration, not with the military he formerly served in. Here’s the video of the interview (Be prepared to be sick to your stomach):
The first time I screamed at the television set came after O’Reilly asked about Gen. McChrystal’s request for more troops. Clark said that “When a general in the field asks for more troops, you’d better listen.” O’Reilly then tried saying that they were on the same page on that. Tried is the key word. Before O’Reilly could finish the sentence, Clark said this:
“But I think that the real issue is ‘What’s the right mission and what’s the right strategy and I don’t think it’s wrong for the administration to really do a gut check and see if we’ve got the right mission and the right strategy. If it were up to me, I’d be looking for Osama bin Laden because that’s why we went over there in the first place. We missed him the first time. He’s not in Afghanistan. He’s in Pakistan.”
Gen. Clark knows that conditions in Afghanistan are deteriorating quickly. He knows that Gen. McChrystal did a serious review of both the strategy and the logistics needed to carry out his strategy.
Also, Gen. Clark knows that we didn’t go over to Afghanistan solely to kill or capture bin Laden. While it’s true that killing or capturing bin laden would’ve boosted the troops’ morale, it’s also true that it was important that the NATO forces dismantled the Taliban’s training bases, kill their fighters, liberate the country from the Taliban’s and al Qa’ida’s tyrannical rule and to eliminate al Qa’ida’s planning sanctuary.
Gen. Clark knows that killing bin Laden was only part of the mission. He knows this because leaving Afghanistan in the Taliban’s control would let Ayman al-Zawahiri continue planning terrorist attacks. Gen. Clark knows that not liberating Afghanistan means that we wouldn’t have gained a major ally in the war against Islamic extremists.
Later in the interview, Gen. Clark says that doing a second review of strategy doesn’t make President Obama look weak or indecisive, that it’s better to get everything right before proceeding. Shame on him for saying that. His statement assumes that Gen. McChrystal didn’t do his due diligence before preparing his request for more troops.
Gen. Clark should know that delaying the decision while the Taliban are resurrecting themselves and while NATO casualties skyrocket is unacceptable. President Obama isn’t making a decision while soldiers are dying needlessly on the battlefield? That’s the type of indecision that a nation at war can’t afford from its commander-in-chief.
Here’s what President Obama told the VFW convention this August:
By moving forward in Iraq, we’re able to refocus on the war against al Qaeda and its extremist allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That’s why I announced a new, comprehensive strategy in March, a strategy that recognizes that al Qaeda and its allies had moved their base from the remote, tribal areas, to the remote, tribal areas of Pakistan. This strategy acknowledges that military power alone will not win this war, that we also need diplomacy and development and good governance. And our new strategy has a clear mission and defined goals: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies……
Why should we think that the mission and strategy have changed so dramatically since August that another review is in order? President Obama sounded like he knew exactly what he wanted to accomplish in Afghanistan and that he had the right priorities. Six weeks later, it’s time to reassess our goals, our strategy and our troop levels needed to accomplish our priorities?
I’m not buying it.
This sounds suspiciously like President Obama voting present again. It isn’t the commander-in-chief’s responsibility to vote present. It’s his responsibility to make timely, informed decisions that help protect our nation and that give our troops everything they need to win.
This administration should send a clear signal that they won’t be stopped in destroying what’s left of the terrorists’ infrastructure network. That’s vitally important to preventing another terrorist attack on US soil.
According to iCasualties.org, NATO casualties have skyrocketed since the start of summer. In April, 2009, there were 14 casualties. In July, that total jumped to 76, with August and September coming in with 77 casualties and 70 casualties respectively. Six days into October, we’ve already sustained 21 casualties.
Mr. President, your indecision is getting soldiers killed needlessly. Shame on you.
Technorati Tags: Military, Stanley McChrystal, NATO, President Obama, Casualties, Wesley Clark, Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, Taliban, Afghanistan, Islamic Extremists, Sharia Law
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
October 6th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Then if we are going to “look for Bin Laden”, hell of a lot of good that will do, and we are not going to committ ourselves to victory over terrorism, and/or the Taliban, and thereby throw Pakistan under the bus, then we need to get the hell out, and quite wasting American lives.
October 6th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Ah, but USN, Duh-1 stated in the presidential campaign he would be perfectly willing to invade Pakistan, and I’m sure that, with all the might of all 57 states behind him, he wouldn’t have been yanking everyone’s chains now, would he?
I’d say the guy is a mental slug and Olympics master at verbal contortions, but it would give slugs a bad name and devalue anything Olympics.
Come to think of it, maybe the Olympics thing is something he’d go for considering the embarrassment of Copenhagen.
October 6th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
I also watched this last night and came to the conclusion that Wesley Clark cannot get out of his own liberal way.
October 6th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Carlos, we have the worlds most ferocious Air Force.
In 12 short hours we could tell the world
#1 that the US is back,
#2 the ass kicking is herewith commenced.
All it would take is a little testosterone at 1600 Pennsylvania, and Capitol Hill.
Wesley Clarke should stay at the O Club buffet on Bingo Night.
October 6th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Ah, but testosterone is in very short supply in D.C., USN, and getting that way at the Pentagon. Except for who wears the pants at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, and it ain’t B. Hussein.
‘Course, she’s busy stopping traffic to go eat and shop, and when she’s out the testosterone level drops significantly. The only way Duh-1 will ever use the military might of the AF will be when he needs to show his peace-loving moonbats that he’s serious about rooting out religious, nazi, violent, conservative terrorists like the ones who showed up at the TEA parties.
And whether Clarke ever registered as a Repub is a moot question because the guy is so obviously in the socialist camp he makes even the liberal Repubs laugh!
October 7th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Funny thing, he’s got time for getting his ears clipped at the IOC, time for all the glitzy photo ops with his dictator buddies, and wannabe’s in Europe, and appearing at every rubber chicken lunch in Washington to push his agenda, he’s such a drama queen, but if McChrystal hadn’t risked being impertinent last week, he’d probably still be stiffing the troops.
Yeah your a real world leader now, Mr POTUS.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
If you are a Christian believer (as I am) and believe no one is in power of any nation on earth without God’s design behind it (as I do), you have to believe God’s got both a sense of humor putting such a narcissistic chump in charge, and that, because He put who He did in charge, we’re in deep trouble because obviously He ain’t real happy with the way this nation’s going.
October 7th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
I believe God is apolitical, He put us here to do what He knows we’ll do, but it is up to us to do what needs to be done morally.
But I also believe, there will come a time when if we collectively do not; then for the sake of those who are, He will say, “Enough!”