12:11 PM, May 11, 2006 • By DANIEL MCKIVERGAN
General Wesley Clark's presidential aspirations peaked the day he announced his candidacy for the 2004 Democratic nomination. Smart and articulate and armed with the perfect resume for the Commander-in-Chief's job post-9/11, Clark has managed to transform himself from soldier-statesman to just another politician. According to the Union Leader, Clark told a group of firefighters the following:
It's unclear if Clark addressed the question of whether we should just live with a nuclear-armed Iran if the only remaining alternative to stop or curtail the program is military action. There are strong arguments on both sides -- those who say "yes" we can contain a nuclear-armed Iran like we did the Soviets and those who counter that it would be a huge strategic blow to U.S. security interests -- but instead of engaging his audience on this question Clark trotted out the latest Democratic talking point on Iran and added in a conspiracy theory worthy of Howard Dean.
Evidently, America's repeated "rebuffs" to Iranian efforts to "dialogue" forced the regime to repeatedly break the promises made to the European Union that it would cease enrichment activity. Of course, it was not too long ago that Democrats were encouraging the White House to let the Europeans take the lead. But when that path hit a roadblock they changed their tune. And on Clark's memo nonsense, what can you say. Apparently, working with France to get the Syrian dictatorship out of Lebanon, especially following the regime's role in the assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister, isn't something the U.S. should be doing. Why? Because it gets in the way of constructively "talking to people" -- Assad in this case -- "even if we disagree with them" -- we disagree with Assad's green light to car bomb Hariri.
The fire fighters deserved better than what the general served up.