Wesley Clark era favorevole alla guerra in Irak

Non solo il candidato democratico alla Presidenza degli Stati Uniti Wesley Clark era favorevole alla guerra, ma era anche assolutamente convinto della presenza di armi di distruzione di massa nel Paese tiranneggiato da Saddam Hussein, tanto da testimoniare in questo senso davanti al Congresso degli Stati Uniti.



Lo rivela il Drudge Report:

Two months ago Democratic hopeful Wesley Clark declared in a debate that he has always been firmly against the current Iraq War.



"I've been very consistent... I've been against this war from the beginning", the former general said in Detroit on October 26.



"I was against it last summer, I was against it in the fall, I was against it in the winter, I was against it in the spring. And I'm against it now."



But just six month prior in an op-ed in the LONDON TIMES Clark offered praise for the courage of President Bush's action.



"President Bush and Tony Blair should be proud of their resolve in the face of so much doubt," Clark wrote on April 10, 2003. "Can anything be more moving than the joyous throngs swarming the streets of Baghdad? Memories of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the defeat of Milosevic in Belgrade flood back. Statues and images of Saddam are smashed and defiled."



(...)



Even the most ardent Clark supporter will question if Clark's current and past stand on the Iraq war -- is confusion or deception, after the DRUDGE REPORT reveals:



TWO WEEKS BEFORE CONGRESS PASSED THE IRAQ CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION WESLEY CLARK MADE THE CASE FOR WAR; TESTIFIED THAT SADDAM HAD 'CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS'



(...)



Clark continued: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.""

Segue una dichiarazione di Joe Lieberman:

"Yesterday, Wesley Clark attacked me for pointing out his multiple positions on the war in Iraq. It is no longer credible for Wesley Clark to assert that he has always had only one position on the war - being against it. His own testimony before Congress shows otherwise.



He may think it is 'old-style politics' to point this out, but the only thing old here is a candidate not leveling with the American people. If we want to begin anew and replace George Bush, we need to level with the American people, which is what I have done in this campaign and throughout my career. You may not always agree with me but you will always know where I stand."

Insomma, il "pacifista" Clark è stato beccato con le dita nel vasetto della marmellata - altro che opposizione ferma e incrollabile alla guerra, altro che coerenza e chiarezza nelle posizioni: ha ragione Lieberman, qui siamo veramente dalle parti della peggiore "vecchia politica".