Defending Wes Clark

The controversy over my colleague General Wesley Clark's comments on John McCain have generated a lot of media comment, much of it negative. I have known General Clark for many years: we served in the same Army and for the same country. He's a patriot. So to suppose that somehow Wesley Clark would denigrate John McCain's service to his country, while praising his bravery during the time that Senator McCain spent in an enemy prison, is absolutely ludicrous. So let's check the facts.

On CBS's Face the Nation, General Clark said that he believed John McCain was "untried and untested." Journalist Bob Schieffer asked him to explain what he meant. How could Clark make such a claim when "you're talking about somebody who was a prisoner of war? He was a squadron commander of the largest squadron in the Navy. He's been on the Senate Armed Services Committee for many years. How can you say that John McCain is un-untested and untried?" And here's General Clark's answer:

Because in the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk. It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility.

As a retired military officer and a soldier who served his country for over thirty years, I can tell you that there's nothing in what Wes Clark said with which I disagree. He has not only stated the facts, he knows something about them. John McCain was a prisoner of war, an officer who served as a squadron commander, and has been and is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. John McCain can put his service to country up against anyone's. But General Clark has served also -- and with great courage: he was wounded four times in Vietnam -- and like John McCain, he has met and seen the enemy.

Is what Wesley Clark said true? Let's check some other facts: John McCain made claims about progress in security by walking through the streets of Baghdad. But as I recall, he was protected by at least a platoon of American soldiers and helicopters lying overhead. In matters of national security, as General Clark pointed out, "it's a matter of understanding risk," and it's "gauging your opponents;" and it's also a "matter of being held accountable."

So I too honor John McCain. And, like General Clark, I acknowledge his sacrifice for his country. But being a prisoner of the Vietnamese and serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee does not automatically qualify one for the position of Commander-in-Chief -- understanding risks, gauging your opponents and being held accountable does. We must end this glib obeisance to sacrifice and ask deeper questions: is a man who sings "bomb, bomb, bomb ... bomb, bomb Iran" a man who understands risks? Is a man who says that we must keep our troops in Iraq until we achieve an ill-defined "victory" really know how to gauge America's opponents. If we want to hold people accountable, then let's stand behind my friend Wes Clark -- and hold John McCain accountable for what he's said.

Oh, and one more thing: today President Bush signed the GI Bill -- which Senator Barack Obama has unstintingly supported. The bill will spend $63 billion over ten years for increased college aid for military service members and veterans who served after September 11, 2001. Good judgment?

John McCain opposed it.

Lt. General Robert G. Gard Jr. (USA, Ret.) is the steering committee chairman of Vets for Obama. Visit their official site or join them on Facebook.

Comments

[live by the golden rule]

General Clark was right. Whenever anyone tells the truth, the Republicans have to attack him personally so that no one actually listens to what he said, because the truth always hurts the Republicans.

[AzRealProgressive]

Well, Clark said what he said. Obama washed his hands of it because it backfired. The truth if it is ,just handed McCain another 100,000 votes. So the truth hurt Republicans by making Obama disown Clark publicly ?

That is a bit twisted.

[Totto]

Exactly.

[TellitLikeItIs]

Obama is free to distance himself from remarks made by others. However, if you think this handed McCain another 100,000 votes----- keep dreaming!

[mommasigma]

I agree whole heartedly. Let's stand up for the truth. Talking about straight talk!

[saami]

Thank you general for defending General Clark, who really needs no defense. Both of you have told the truth. John McCain has made being a war hero his life's work. The life of a jet pilot during Vietnam was a far cry from being a grunt; you can't even compare them. Being a prisoner of war doesn't make you an expert on war or defense any more than being a patient in a mental hospital makes you an expert on insanity. McCain has milked this for all it's worth and I for one, the daughter of an army NCO, am sick of it. I'm voting for Obama and the future.

[carmelcat]

The real problem is why has Obama disassociated himself from Gen. Clark's comments? Where is Obama's courage?

[truesoccermom]

Most of the public are uniformed idiots being spoon-fed sound bites by Fox news. Obama did what he did to get him self out of a non-story so that his own words on patriotism (which were given in a very important speech) aren't completely drowned out by the Clark "controver­sy."

[Totto]

We are going to lose an excellent President if what is actually going on here is not recognized for what it is: a constant stream of criticism from those who will benefit if Obama loses. Who was Clark energetically supporting?

[Soothsayer08]

I agree with this post, it was a good one. General Clark just told the absolute truth. John Mc Cain uses his military service and POW status as a shield to insulate him from any form of close examination. If anyone dares to criticize him, no matter what the issue, his campaign acts as though his military service record is being questioned. He is the darling of the MSM which is another reason he should be more fully scrutinized. Why wasn't the press allowed to review his medical records for longer and why haven't they been released in their entire form?

[hellboundtrain]

Yes, exactly. Being totally removed from the real world for 5 1/2 years is not good on-the-job training for anything. This type of treatment is a real limiter. It would stunt one psychologically.

We don't need another compassionless war-monger attempting to steer the US.

[AzRealProgressive]

So, what you are saying is that anyone who has endured stress is unfit to lead. In fact according to your beliefs anyone who has endured this type of treatment is mental and unfit .

Several dictators and racists in the 30s and 40s held that certain members of society were unfit for their own personal reasons. Just like you.

Laws have been passed to deal with people who espouse your hatred and lack of compassion towards the more unfortunate among us.

I suppose a guy in a wheelchair with bad legs from polio who had nearly died and was scarred for life both physically and mentally was unfit to lead as well, right? Democrat Franklin Roosevelt did well for 3 and on half presidential terms.

You should be ashamed of yourself for posting an attack on a person who has perservered through trauma.

[oafishcad]

If there ever was any question that we now have a conservative corporate media, this should answer that question. The Republican spin, basically a lie about what Clark said, is reported as fact.

[AtTheMoon]

exactly, the corporate whores of the MSM are at it again
lying liars lie and we're shocked

[AzRealProgressive]

Do you even know what you wrote?

Obama himself walked away from what Clark said because it backfired so badly. How is Obama and his remarks a Republican spin?

The MSM is not the friends of the Republicans. They were hopeful

[claudiam]

Thank you General for speaking out. It is the truth and we should all acknowledge it ~ even my man Barack.

[TellitLikeItIs]

claudiam: Hopefully, Barack is getting an earful about his distancing himself from Gen. Clark. Distancing oneself from the truth is not why I support Obama! I hope enough people have let him know that his position on Clarks' remarks and on the "compromise" FISA bill are unacceptable. Playing to the wishy-washy fence-sitters isn't going to win this election if history is any indication!

[marksiet]

The media loves to give McCain a pass due to his exemplery military service. It saves them from asking the tough questions. In a way they feel sorry for him, guilty about their lack of service and therefore turn a blind eye to what McCain is all about. McCain served his country in Vietnam. What has he done for his country lately? No on finance reform reversing himself, no on immigration again a reversal, no on the GI bill, Yes on FISA, Yes on drilling, Yes on keeping Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy; all of this serves only John McCain and not the people. Listen is McCain is running on his Vietnam war record someone should clue him in that ship has passed. It is so sixties. No what we have with America's Prophet of Doom is someone who has been bought and paid for along the way which is why he will do exactly as he is told. The old maverick McCain? He is just old no longer has any fight in him to stand up for America like he used to. They say old war horses never die they just fade away. Poor John McCain. I wonder if there is any of the American he used to be. Boy I sure miss that guy. For now he is simply a major disappointment to his party and his country.

[jlgcox]

I agree with Wesley Clark - Stand your ground!!!

[rjcrane]

What's missing in all of these discussions about McCain's service to the country is what happened to him while he was there and how did this affect not only his judgment but his mental acuteness and/or mental/emotional stability? I really doubt anyone could have dealt with the same conditions as McCain and not suffered serious and long lasting mental problems requiring long term therapy. I have not heard anything about him receiving proper treatment for stress issues related to his service. Veterans are still suffering from the effects of having been in that war. We all know that McCain has a horrible temper. and enough of a hair trigger temper that even his fellow GOP Senators fear McCain having his finger on the bomb. There's something enough wrong with the man that reporters heard him call his wife Cindy a "cunt" who wears her makeup like a Trollop in their presence. It is my belief McCain is not very bright and has some serious emotional problems that aren't being discussed enough and/or is showing signs of serious senility. I remember how others covered up the same for Reagan. We must make sure this won't happen now with McCain. McCain's mental makeup is a real topic for discussion and I am almost certain his time in Vietnam plays a role in this.

RJ Crane, topplebush.com

[thismachinekillsfascists]

Exactly. It's pretty clear from listening to him speak that his mental capacities are questionable at best. How does sitting in a cage for 5 years qualify a person to be president?

I would say that teaching constitutional law trumps being a POW any day.

We don't need to bomb everyone into oblivion John!

[AzRealProgressive]

You miss the point. Being a POW was only part of the deal. McCain was also a trained Navy combat pilot in the days when the life span of a Navy pilot was measured in months or weeks. And McCain has served in the senate for a couple of decades.

Obama was a community organizer and a law professor. Tell me how you sell millions of people on your idea that Obama has better experience because he sat in a classroom and McCain was a combat navy pilot.

McCain has his faults and has something for everyone to dislike about him. You know who he is and what you are in for.

[Rockerbabe]

Everytime I have ever heard or seen retired General Wes Clark speak, I have been impressed with his intellect, reasonableness, well-thought opinions and analysis, civility and congenial demeanor. The audicity of him (Gen. Clark is an American and entitled to hold a difference of opinion)to question Dubya is what amazes me about him. Often retired general and admirals seem to support this administration full of chickenhawks without question; I just don't understand it.
General Clark is a true patriot in my estimation; he thinks first of what is best for the country and its citizens, not what seem to be best for big oil and the rest of corporate America. While I don't know his opinion of the Blackwater group of killers, I doubt he would approve and I doubt most military personnel approve of this group.
General Clark is the best man for the job of questioning Senator McCain on his beliefs; he know better than most what war is all about and I doubt McCain would be able to justify his comments on torture.
I hope Generals Clark and Gard, both find positions in the new government next year; we need professionally trained, honorable, soldiers, not political hacks to restore the honor and dignity the US military has lost in all this upheavel and just plain nonsense.

[navalflightofficer]

Interesting General Gard.
As a former Naval aviator who served both before and after September 11, 2001, I am eligible for that odious GI bill you mentioned.
It sickens me to hear an honorable servicemember's duty is deemed less worthy than anothers. The hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, marines, (and yes, airmen) who retired or left the service prior to Sept 11, 2001 are less solders, sailors...­.I think you get the point.
That GI Bill is a slap in their collected faces. Senator Obama supported it because he doesn't know any better. You should.
Again, as a former Naval aviator who served in squadrons and was asked by my Commanding Officer to fly into harms way, I think your and General Clark's dismissal of John McCain's executive experience and decision making sound a little too political, or motivated by some good old service rivalry. Maybe tinged with the flag officer's bravado - I made it and he didn't.
I honor General Clark's service. His comments, to me, sound like political posturing and not good evaluation of another man's experience and ability.

[Lanark]

Also keep in mind that Clark was fired from his NATO position and forced into early retirement for the poor job he did. During his tenure he almost got us into a military battle with the Soviets and only the cool heads of nearby British commanders and their challenge to what he was doing saved the day. Seems like Clerk's executive experience and decision making abilities were a disaster. Ask Gen Shelton who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1997 to 2001. He stated: "I will tell you the reason [Clark] came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart.…,"

[BlackWidowPilot]

Thank you for your service to our country.

"It sickens me to hear an honorable servicemember's duty is deemed less worthy than anothers. The hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, marines, (and yes, airmen) who retired or left the service prior to Sept 11, 2001 are less solders, sailors...­.I think you get the point.
That GI Bill is a slap in their collected faces."

An interesting perspective for me to encounter considering that in the run-up to the vote, those who opposed this bill here on the HuffPo fora repeatedly attacked it as being too favorable for the "short timers." Following your own line of reasoning, everyone who served in the Armed forces but left prior to Pearl Harbour should have been eligible for the original G.I. Bill. Of course, my Dad (USMC, 1942-46) and two of his brothers (USA, USAAF) were mere "short timers" by the definition of the McCain supporters here on HuffPo as I mentioned previously.

Personally, I happen to be an independent who believes that there exists a covenant between We The People and those who sacrifice their time, comfort, and even their lives serving in uniform (as long as they do so honourably and in good faith). To my perspective, the new GI Bill is a good start on fulfilling this covenants.

BTW, have you reviewed Senator McCain's actual voting record on veteran's issues? Veterans groups rate him a D-minus.

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

[navalflightofficer]

I'm not that interested in what those who do not know what they are talking about say against the new GI bill. Your reference to the WWII GI bill (My dad, and Uncle Morry, USA, European theater, Uncle Harry, USMC, Pacific theater - all used GI bill post WWII) is a little non-sequiter. The number of military and veterans benefiting from WWII GI Bill was enourmous. The number who will benefit from this GI bill pales in comparison.
I will agree that a comprehensive GI Bill will help veterans. My main point is our veterans (and active duty) health care system is broken. However, to fix that would take courage and hard work by our representa­tives.The current military has no covenant with a GI Bill. There was no gaurantee for a college education. Do not obscure the argument with that type of language. There are some very real promises made to servicemen and veterans. Keep those. To make up a new one dilutes and delays those true promises. No one told me I would get a college education out of my service.

[navalflightofficer]

Veterans do need strong advocates in Congress. I do not know Senator McCain's voting record on veteran's issues. I'll take your word for it Veteran's groups grade him low. I'll bet I agree with his positions more than with the veteran's groups. I am a member of MOAA and ROA and the VFW. I get updates all the time on their legislative agenda and I disagree with most of it. If those veterans support groups would stop nibbling at the corners and go straight and hard at the real problems, there might be room in budgets and legislator's calendars and hearts (if they actually have one) to push real reform.
I'll get off my soap box. I know I am in the minority, but I am proud of my service, was only gauranteed a paycheck, medical care and a place to sleep. Fix the medical care. That is what we deserve.

[BlueZoo]

General Clark needs no defense from anyone! His comments and all of those here on this site are what this country and its magnificient democratic experiment is all about. I applaud General Clark in his plain-speaking comments re McCain's service being honorable but simply not a qualification for POTUS. I'm tired of McCain bringing his service up at ever opportunity. It's as if he believes it's the only accomplishment in his life and, just maybe, it might be!

[rcozad]

I find it somewhat disgusting that IF WE DARE diminish John McCain service in any way we are deemed unfit to live in America but when his fellow NEOCONS attacked Max Cleland he was alright with that. Until someone from McCains' ranks steps up and admits that there is simply NO ROOM in America for the type of slander and sludge that The Swift Boaters spewed out and fires them along with Charlie Black than he has nothing at all to complain about!!

[AzRealProgressive]

The swift boat people served with, and alongside John Kerry. Their criticisms of him come from their experiences with him in that point in time, and they are entitled to their opinion of the manner in which Kerry served with them.

they stated their opinon,and Kerry rebutted it. The other vets side seemed to hold water with the Americanpeople while John Kerry was not convincing.

It was viewed in the same light as the duck hunting trip Kerry took. Too much to believe.

Clark/Gard did not serve with McCain. That is why this backfired.

[Kane]

It's important to note that Gen Wes Clark originally made the statement that John McCain is "untested and untried" while he was a supporter of Hillary Clinton. At the time, he wasn't called out for making that statement, nor was there a demand for Clinton to reject his statement. And there certainly wasn't a three-day outcry by the Republican party.

Clark didn't raise the issue on Sunday's Face the Nation, rather Bob Schieffer decided to make it the topic of discussion. And through the magic of the MSM, Clark's statement is now considered "controversial", and Barack Obama is somehow responsible.

The Republican party, with the help of the MSM, are attempting the same tricks they used in the elections of 2000, 2004, and 2006. The public caught on to the shell game in 2006, and they wont buy into the game in 2008.

[oafishcad]

It's an attempt to keep Clark from being Obama's VP.

[Soothsayer08]

Yes I remember that he made this statement before, but now that the McCain camp feels people might be listening, and believe Clark's statements have validity, they are upset.

[spyda]

Thank you Gen.Wes Clark for being courageous enough to bring to light what so many have been waiting for someone to do1You spoke the truth and it was misenterpreted by the MSM to keep the bull going.And thank you for not backing down.Last but not least I saw James Carville on CNN last night and I agree with him when he said there was no reason why Gen.Clark or the Obama camp should have to apolize for anything and I hope Sen.Obama doesn't get caught up in having to apolize for everything that a supporter says for political points either! Obama'08