A Good Read On Clark’s Foreign Policy
I know it seems like I’m unfairly focusing on this guy but I just can’t help it…there are so many weird things to focus on. It is like driving past a train wreck…it is bad to look but you just can’t help it…
Bandow has a bead on Clark’s foolish foreign policy on NRO. Read the whole thing but here are some highlights:
Milosevic was a nasty character, but Clark’s claim that there was “an imminent threat” of war is just plain silly. Milosevic’s regime was bankrupt and isolated. It made no pretense of developing weapons of mass destruction. It wasn’t capable of conquering its neighbors. It had no means of or interest in hurting the U.S.
Ironically, Milosevic’s policy of a greater Serbia had consistently led to a smaller Serbia. Getting rid of him meant good riddance to bad rubbish, but was irrelevant to American security.
Nor was war a last resort after diplomacy had failed, as Clark claimed. The U.S. tried to impose its own settlement, which neither the Albanians nor the Serbs supported. Washington offered an ultimatum, not diplomacy. And no country, including America, would have accepted an “agreement” which, among other things, allowed NATO forces free transit through Yugoslavia proper.
Iraq was completely different. Saddam Hussein had engaged in a policy of domestic brutality on a massive scale, killing tens, and probably hundreds, of thousands of people. He ran a police state, attacked two of his neighbors, killing hundreds of thousands more, and, it seemed, was developing weapons of mass destruction. He was capable of cooperating with terrorists, though those connections remain unproved.
Of the two, Wesley Clark thinks Yugoslavia posed the greatest danger? And warranted war without international sanction?
Such passes for foreign-policy analysis from a leading presidential candidate.
Winning the presidency will require that the Democratic nominee be taken seriously on foreign policy. Wesley Clark is not that candidate.
A good point that should have been obvious is that Clark, in claiming it was more urgent to put troops in harms way in Yugoslavia than it was in Iraq, is either a fool…or a liar. I think the guy is probably not a fool…
1 Comment »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I saw a comerciasl of his. He sounded like a jerk.
Comment by Michael — January 24, 2004 @ 7:31 am