As a follow up to my post Saturday about the Democrats and genocide, I’ve found some quotes from Clark.
From the Meet the Press transcript that von just linked to:
“But I’d been on the Joint Staff, Tim, when we sat by and we let happen the slaughter of 800,000 people in Rwanda, hacked to death by machetes. We talked about it, we puttered, we came up with plans, we briefed them at the White House, but nothing happened, and at the end, 800,000 people died. And I thought to myself, “You know, that’s a terrible thing.” And as I begin to—I didn’t know it at the time, it took a while to seep in. I realized I had done my duty, but just sort of doing your duty and preparing these plans, that’s not enough. I hadn’t done my obligation. When I got into the Balkans…” (Russert cuts him off at this point to ask him about his character and integrity. Ah, Tim.)
It was a great interview.
From this USA Today article:
“He noted that the United States didn’t act to stop a bloody civil war in Rwanda. “We dillied and we dallied,” he said. “I said I never would let something like that happen again.”
I’ll do some research on Gephardt a little later, since he’s the third person who seems to have a plausible shot at the nomination.
Trip on over to SLATE for a good Fred Kaplan article re Clark. (Paraphrased title: Clark Was Right re Bosnia and That’s Why The Army Hates Him.)
Gen. Shelton’s “integrity and character” remarks are pretty damning. Clark did well to sidestep the Russ’ questions on the point by stating the disagreements were those of policy–but it leaves the lingering notion that there is something more there.
I like Clark, but for a JC chairman to call him out on character and integrity without elaborating troubles me.
if there is a story here, I’m sure it will come out eventually.
Harley:
Read it. My perception is that the truth is probably somewhere between the two views – it usually is.
There is no doubt Madelaine pushed for the Kosovo operation; nor is there any doubt she wanted harsher measures taken against Iraq from the moment she went to the UN, much less got sworn in as SecState.
Still, one is confronted with the fact that Clark appears to be opportunistic and very adept and facile at stating what seems to need to be heard.
For whatever it’s worth, he had a really bad reputation in the Army for shooting messengers,flaying subordinates and never being at fault.
I have no doubt you’ll vote judiciosly in accordance with your conscience and that’s great. Just be careful of the hype and backstage brokering.
Remember,such brokering is what put Cheney into make sure W. didn’t stray too far…
Big coteries of big donors have big clout…
Breechclouts are better (:
No breechclouts are better yet [:
I like Clark, but for a JC chairman to call him out on character and integrity without elaborating troubles me.
I agree, Bjurk. Shelton’s comment reminded me of the “and, so, General Clark, exactly when did you stop hitting your wife?” line of questioning. Being coy about a charge of wrongdoing ain’t fair to either the public, or to Clark.
Harley: Trip on over to last week’s New Yorker: better reported, and makes clear that the Clark’s record in Kosovo is, well, far from clear. Seems that there’s a bit of truth to what Ken White‘s pushing — and, like Ken says, the truth is usually in the middle.
Remember, too, that is coming from someone who’s currently inclined to vote for Clark.
von
A second follow up to the post on the Democrats and genocide–
I was curious to see what Samantha Power herself said about Iraq. This is the only quotation I could find, from a NY Times interview last February:
“But Ms. Power questions the legitimacy of the Bush administration’s approach. “Because it adheres to international law in such a selective way, it lacks the legitimacy to stand as the military guardian of human rights,” she said. “A unilateral attack would make Iraq a more humane place, but the world a more dangerous place.”
Link here: http://www.genocidewatch.org/SamanthaPowerFebruary5.htm
I know she said unilateral, and we did not technically go in unilaterally. But by February I think it was clear that Britain would be on our side, so I would argue that it’s reasonably clear she did not mean the technical definition.