Does anyone know if Wesley Clark was ever a pilot?

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:52:33 -0600 "Dan Luke" wrote:

"R.Hubbell" wrote:
BTW Clark seems like a very solid guy.

Clark is a squirrel, according to more than one officer who served with
him.


I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.


R. Hubbell

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

In article ,
"R.Hubbell" wrote:
"R.Hubbell" wrote:
BTW Clark seems like a very solid guy.

Clark is a squirrel, according to more than one officer who served with
him.


I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.


The upper ranks of the military are at least as rife with politics as
the upper ranks of most large corporations--in other words, actual
talent and qualification is often not considered criteria for promotion.



JKG

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 01:22:12 GMT Jonathan Goodish wrote:

In article ,
"R.Hubbell" wrote:
"R.Hubbell" wrote:
BTW Clark seems like a very solid guy.

Clark is a squirrel, according to more than one officer who served with
him.


I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.


The upper ranks of the military are at least as rife with politics as
the upper ranks of most large corporations--in other words, actual
talent and qualification is often not considered criteria for promotion.

Does not apply to Wesley Clark.

He's got the talent and the qualifications.


From Wesley Clark:

"You can't build a strong Army just with great generals;
you have to have great people at every rank. You have to
give everyone a chance to be all you can be.' It's true for
the United States Army, and it's true for the United States."


R. Hubbell




JKG

"R.Hubbell" wrote in message
Does not apply to Wesley Clark.

He's got the talent and the qualifications.


From Wesley Clark:

"You can't build a strong Army just with great generals;
you have to have great people at every rank. You have to
give everyone a chance to be all you can be.' It's true for
the United States Army, and it's true for the United States."

It is easy to put fine words to paper. But the fact remains that Wes Clark
spent 30+ years in the Army, and there probably aren't half a dozen men who
served with him who would give him a drink from a water hose. That fact
alone speaks louder than any position paper.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:23:36 -0500 "John Gaquin" wrote:


"R.Hubbell" wrote in message
Does not apply to Wesley Clark.

He's got the talent and the qualifications.


From Wesley Clark:

"You can't build a strong Army just with great generals;
you have to have great people at every rank. You have to
give everyone a chance to be all you can be.' It's true for
the United States Army, and it's true for the United States."

It is easy to put fine words to paper. But the fact remains that Wes Clark
spent 30+ years in the Army, and there probably aren't half a dozen men who
served with him who would give him a drink from a water hose. That fact
alone speaks louder than any position paper.



Is it a fact? What fact book did you get that from? Is that from the CIA
fact book? Didn't know they kept track of innuendo as well.


R. Hubbell

I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.



What, like the part about him being removed from command for reasons having to
do with personal integrity?

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

On 17 Jan 2004 01:26:09 GMT ackatyu (Wdtabor) wrote:


I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.



What, like the part about him being removed from command for reasons having to
do with personal integrity?

You're still expecting us to take your word for it? His exemplary service
in the military speaks for itself.

Just more vacuous vitriol.



R. Hubbell


Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

"R.Hubbell" wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004 01:26:09 GMT ackatyu (Wdtabor) wrote:


I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.



What, like the part about him being removed from command for reasons having to
do with personal integrity?

You're still expecting us to take your word for it? His exemplary service
in the military speaks for itself.

History has shown clearly that generals don't make good Presidents. Why would
somebody whose occupation is a soldier be better/worse than anybody else for
President?

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:33:48 -0500 Lisa Hughes wrote:



"R.Hubbell" wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004 01:26:09 GMT ackatyu (Wdtabor) wrote:


I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.



What, like the part about him being removed from command for reasons having to
do with personal integrity?

You're still expecting us to take your word for it? His exemplary service
in the military speaks for itself.

History has shown clearly that generals don't make good Presidents. Why would
somebody whose occupation is a soldier be better/worse than anybody else for
President?


Not sure what you're talking about, did you post to the wrong message?

In regards to Wesley Clark's integrity his exemplary service in the military
speaks for itself.

R. Hubbell

"R.Hubbell" wrote:

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:33:48 -0500 Lisa Hughes wrote:



"R.Hubbell" wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004 01:26:09 GMT ackatyu (Wdtabor) wrote:


I'd say his military record serves to discount your theory.



What, like the part about him being removed from command for reasons having to
do with personal integrity?

You're still expecting us to take your word for it? His exemplary service
in the military speaks for itself.

History has shown clearly that generals don't make good Presidents. Why would
somebody whose occupation is a soldier be better/worse than anybody else for
President?


Not sure what you're talking about, did you post to the wrong message?

In regards to Wesley Clark's integrity his exemplary service in the military
speaks for itself.

No I posted to the right message. Read what I said again.

With regards to Wesley Clark's integrity and his "exemplary service in the military,"
could you please expain exactly why Clark was relieved as NATO commander months before
his tour was finished? Why did he suddenly retire? Why didn't he serve out his
tour???

How many civilian casualties were there in Serbia? Why were trains full of civilians
decimated and then Clark claimed that the "train was moving to fast" to avoid
targeting? Gosh I had no idea that Serbia had invented such fast trains.

Finally, why did Clark change his positions so radically? I hope we would make a
better President and I hope he wouldn't mysteriously disappear from the White House
three (3) years into the job, like his disappearing act before his tour was finished,
if he were to be elected.