Clark promises the impossible
Last week, retired General Wesley Clark disqualified himself for the job he now seeks, and for which he incessantly claims he is the most prepared of any Democratic presidential candidate: commander-in-chief.
In a meeting last Thursday with the editorial board of New Hampshire's Concord Monitor, the would-be president made statements that no one staking a serious claim on the office, let alone anyone who claimed to be an expert about national security, could make. Referring to the murderous 9/11 attacks, he declared: "If I'm president of the United States, I'm going to take care of the American people. We are not going to have one of these incidents."
But anyone who pledges that, if elected, he will ensure the American people are never exposed to future terrorist incidents — including ones vastly more destructive than those that befell us 27 months ago — is sufficiently delusional or dishonest, or both, to be disqualified for the Oval Office.
No one who held the sorts of senior positions in the U.S. military that General Clark did could be ignorant of an unpleasant truth: Even if America were a far less free and open society than it is today, we would still be vulnerable to murderous attacks by determined people willing to kill themselves in order to do us harm.
Clinton couldn't prevent the first trade center bombing, the attacks on our embassies or the U.S.S. Cole attack. Clark is the candidate that has mostly attached himself to Clinton. Maybe Clark should explain why his political hero had so much trouble doing what he can easily promise.
And how would Clark prevent something like this.
No comments:
Post a Comment