jamiroguy1 Posted January 27 Report Share Posted January 27 EXCLUSIVE: DEMOCRACY NOW! Confronts Wesley Clark Over His Bombing Of Civilians, Use Of Cluster Bombs And Depleted Uranium And The Bombing Of Serb Television.Listen to: Segment || ShowWatch 128 bitstream Watch 256 bitstreamIn a Democracy Now! exclusive, General Wesley Clark responds for the first time to in-depth questions about his targeting of civilian infrastructure in Yugoslavia, his bombing of Radio Television Serbia, the use of cluster bombs and depleted uranium, the speeding-up of the cockpit video of a bombing of a passenger train to make it appear as though it was an accident and other decisions he made and orders he gave as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander.Since the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, General Wesley Clark has not answered any in-depth questions about his targeting of civilian infrastructure in Yugoslavia, his bombing of Radio Television Serbia, the use of cluster bombs and depleted uranium, the speeding-up of the cockpit video of a bombing of a passenger train to make it appear as though it was an accident and other decisions he made and orders he gave as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander. With the New Hampshire primary just 24 hours away, the remaining Democratic candidates are in their final push to win votes in the key poll in the Granite state. Whether or not Howard Dean wins or loses, he set the tone very early for what has become a definitive issue in the race early on: opposition to the war in Iraq. Among the Democrats, Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley Braun held the most clear antiwar stances. But Braun has pulled out of the race, Al Sharpton is not in New Hampshire and Dennis Kucinich - well the media hardly gives him any airtime. With the exception of Senator Joseph Lieberman, all of the candidates have sought to portray themselves as opponents of the war. But only Kucinich has announced a concrete plan for withdrawing US forces from Iraq. The theme of Iraq is the main issue on which General Wesley Clark is running his campaign. Gen. Wesley Clark, speaking at a rally in Portsmouth, New Hampshire on January 24, 2004. *TRANSCRIPT*GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: We went to war with Iraq without an imminent threat from Iraq. Without any connection between Iraq and the events of 9-11. We went to war with Iraq before all diplomatic options were exhausted. We went to war with Iraq without our allies all on board. We went to war with Iraq without a clear understanding and a plan for what was going to happen when we did get to Baghdad, and we didn't have the forces on hand to handle the situation. In short, I don't consider the war with Iraq patriotic. It was simply bad leadership and deceptive practices. It was wrong, and I’m going to hold the president of the United States accountable. He didn't do the right thing for America. It's that simple. He didn't do it! Clark portrays himself as the antiwar warrior and his rhetoric against the war has escalated significantly over the past week of campaigning in New Hampshire. At his campaign stops, he has been saying regularly, "The war is wrong."Full transcripthttp://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/26/1632224 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghhhhhost Posted January 27 Report Share Posted January 27 if Clarke even gets close to being elected im moving back to Europe...he should be at the Hague with Milosevic right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted January 27 Report Share Posted January 27 Originally posted by ghhhhhost if Clarke even gets close to being elected im moving back to Europe...he should be at the Hague with Milosevic right now Do you think that NATO (or U.S.) should have stayed out of this, or intervened in a different way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
optapessimist Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 This was a NATO sanctioned action- all done in an attempt to end the genocide happening in Kosovo. While these 'military actions' never end well, I still respect the guy. In the end we did more good than harm.... just out of curiosity, who would you like to see win the Dem ticket?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattbateman Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 he is a nut looking for power.looking at him and seeing his views on everything you would thing he was a hippie protester not a military general he has changed most of his views to comply with the majority and win his ticket the most powerful position! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by optapessimist This was a NATO sanctioned action- all done in an attempt to end the genocide happening in Kosovo. While these 'military actions' never end well, I still respect the guy. In the end we did more good than harm.... just out of curiosity, who would you like to see win the Dem ticket?? I'm starting to sway towards Edwards and I'll tell you why....Edwards, is friendly to labor and the environment. He's a southern senator which is great, because you absolutely must have the southern vote. Southerners hate voting for yakees, so this guy might be the guy that can beat bush.He's also serves on four congressional commitees: Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Intelligence; Judiciary; and Small Business. Not to mention he's been one of the only dems to run a clean campaign without "mud slinging".The man's politics are clear and unabashed. You know exactly what you'll get from this guy. So considering all this, currently I'm leaning towards Sen. Edwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattbateman Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 he wants to tax people 70% answer me now do you think that is fare???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattbateman Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 and the estate tax (death tax)??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 I'm starting to sway towards Edwards and I'll tell you why....Edwards, is friendly to labor and the environment. He's a southern senator which is great, because you absolutely must have the southern vote. Southerners hate voting for yakees, so this guy might be the guy that can beat bush.He's also serves on four congressional commitees: Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Intelligence; Judiciary; and Small Business. Not to mention he's been one of the only dems to run a clean campaign without "mud slinging".The man's politics are clear and unabashed. You know exactly what you'll get from this guy. So considering all this, currently I'm leaning towards Sen. Edwards. How about the exageration of 35 million children go hungury every day?Do you believe in wealth redistribution?How about him being in the bag of trial lawyers that are the driving force behind sky high medical costs????I agree he has a JFK electability about him but wrong for the country in todays world landscape... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by mr mahs How about the exageration of 35 million children go hungury every day?Do you believe in wealth redistribution?How about him being in the bag of trial lawyers that are the driving force behind sky high medical costs????I agree he has a JFK electability about him but wrong for the country in todays world landscape... That's all politikin' my friend. So far he hasn't done anything that allows me to morally question him.Personally, I don't feel that trial lawyers are the only reason that medical costs are going up. There many other reasons as well so I'm not really interested in tort reform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 Personally, I don't feel that trial lawyers are the only reason that medical costs are going up. There many other reasons as well so I'm not really interested in tort reform. Are you for free health care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by mr mahs Are you for free health care? I'm for a comprimise to free healthcare. It's probably not feasible at this time in United States for a total reversal in our healthcare policy as in Europe and Canada but we could at least take steps in making healthcare available for more people by making it cheaper. Who cares if those other rich cock suckers are getting taxed more as a result. Just my opinion.It's funny you ask me about this... I got in an arguement with my right wing girlfriend of mine about this last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by pattbateman he wants to tax people 70% answer me now do you think that is fare???? Not everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 I'm for a comprimise to free healthcare. It's probably not feasible at this time in United States for a total reversal in our healthcare policy as in Europe and Canada but we could at least take steps in making healthcare available for more people by making it cheaper. Who cares if those other rich cock suckers are getting taxed more as a result. Just my opinion.It's funny you ask me about this... I got in an arguement with my right wing girlfriend of mine about this last night. You do realise that the awarding of multimillion dollar settlements for punitive damages drive up health care right?Your girl is smart listen to her... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 Not everyone. It's funny how you are against the Patriot act for it being a "Violation of our Civil Liberties" but would like to impose a higher tax on a wealthy individual because they're successful?Isn't that discrimination? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmatas2277 Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 I got in an arguement with my right wing girlfriend of mine about this last night. u better watch out then, u might be just ANOTHER single liberal....the only cand. that i like from the Dem. party are Kerry and Edwards...Dean is just a NUT, plain and simple... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by mr mahs It's funny how you are against the Patriot act for it being a "Violation of our Civil Liberties" but would like to impose a higher tax on a wealthy individual because they're successful?Isn't that discrimination? No, I'd say the poor are discriminated against because they bare the burden of most taxes not the rich. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by mrmatas2277 u better watch out then, u might be just ANOTHER single liberal.... Yeah I know. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 28 Report Share Posted January 28 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 No, I'd say the poor are discriminated against because they bare the burden of most taxes not the rich. JESUS CHRIST!!!!How many times does it have to be written in front of you to stop believing that fallacy????The poor don't pay income taxes, please educate yourself....http://www.smartmoney.com/taxmatters/index.cfm?story=20030527http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes.guest.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 28 Author Report Share Posted January 28 Your link shows that the majority of the tax cut goes to the rich. I've read your link. We've already gone over this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.