Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Video: The Wesley Clark Mute Button

posted at 10:25 am on July 24, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view

This clip from Morning Joe has two remarkable events.  First, an MS-NBC show talks about the facetiousness of the recent pushback on the surge, including the spurious “McCain gaffe”.  But perhaps even better, one of the guests admitted that he reaches for the mute button whenever he sees NBC’s own military analyst appear:

The Anbar Awakening only preceded the “surge” if one defines it strictly as an increase in troops. But the “surge” was much more than that, and it long preceded the troop increase. The troop increase intended to fully support the change in tactics and strategy that had been adopted with success by local American commanders in Anbar to a true counterinsurgency effort, which coincided with Sunnis in the region switching sides and opposing the insurgents.

Barack Obama reveals a lack of understanding by harping on this point. He doesn’t grasp — and he never has — the difference between merely increasing troop levels and laying out a comprehensive strategy for attacking insurgents. That’s what led him to assert in January 2007 that adding 20,000 or more troops would not reduce violence in Iraq, and might in fact provoke worse violence. As events proved, the counterinsurgency strategies employed in the fall of 2006 and expanded into theater-wide doctrine as more troops arrived succeeded, and exposed Obama as not terribly adept at military strategy.

What makes this even more odd is that Obama at once refuses to acknowledge the success of these changes in Iraq and yet insists on increasing troop levels in Afghanistan. He doesn’t explain how he would use these extra troops, although John McCain has laid out a comprehensive plan for integrating command and adapting the counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan. If more troops didn’t bring the security that Iraq now has, why increase the troops in Afghanistan? And if it will work in Afghanistan, why won’t Obama acknowledge that it worked in Iraq and that he had it wrong all along?

Military strategy has more layers to it than just troop levels, but Obama still doesn’t grasp that. As one commentator at the end says, Obama would be better off dropping the subject. And MS-NBC would do well to create that Wesley Clark Mute Button on the broadcasting end.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

The Surge would not have suceeded without the Awakening. The Awakening would not have suceeded without the Surge.

BohicaTwentyTwo on July 24, 2008 at 10:34 AM

I don’t understand how Weasley became weasley? Is he looking to be Secretary of State or something. What a Weasel.

kirkill on July 24, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Isn’t Roger Waters’ song “The Bravery of Staying Out of Range” written about Wesley Clark? A military “expert” whose claim to fame is bombing Serbia back to the stone age without a second thought about all that messy collateral damage.

Clark’s continued employment as an apologist for the Defeatocrats says all you need to know about his employers.

miles on July 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM

We WANT Wesley to keep speaking for Obama and we WANT Obama to keep talking military strategy.. Fools both.

originalpechanga on July 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM

If more troops didn’t bring the security that Iraq now has, why increase the troops in Afghanistan?

Because He sayeth so!

This is good work here, Ed. Written in such a way that even a Lefty could might understand.

The only thing missing is a mention of another important ingredient of the surge: the introduction of the COUGAR armored vehicle into the battlefield.

Tony737 on July 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM

As they said, to argue this point is useless…but keep at it Obama, it shows you how weak you really are, and how little you know, and the quality of men you are surrounded by…keep it up Obama, keep telling the American people the surge didn’t work.
Meanwhile, I am getting gassed up the *ss.

right2bright on July 24, 2008 at 10:38 AM

I guess Clark & Obama have never heard of Capt. Travis Patriquin.

KelliD on July 24, 2008 at 10:38 AM

Here’s a link if your memory needs refreshing.

KelliD on July 24, 2008 at 10:41 AM

How dare anyone question the Great and Glorious Leader! Didn’t you see his picture on the poster in Germany? Haven’t you heard him speak? Haven’t you been listening to Chris Matthews? C’mon! Get with the program! The oceans will stop rising, he shall save all the children, poverty shall cease, the lame shall leap the blind shall see… You are dawdling on small details and are missing the big picture painted for you by the Saviour of Mankind!

sabbott on July 24, 2008 at 10:43 AM

He doesn’t grasp — and he never has — the difference between merely increasing troop levels and laying out a comprehensive strategy for attacking insurgents.

Yet another reason why, during war time, we need a war time president with war time experience. I don’t mean shooting yourself in the foot to get sent home with a Purple Heart and then throwing (somebody else’s) medals over the fence and testi-lying before congress.

As much as I don’t like Mac on many issues, he IS the man for this war time election.

Tony737 on July 24, 2008 at 10:45 AM

As events proved, the counterinsurgency strategies employed in the fall of 2006 and expanded into theater-wide doctrine as more troops arrived succeeded, and exposed Obama as not terribly adept at military strategy.

I’m racking my brain, trying to come up with an example which shows that he is even a teeny weeny bit adept at military strategy.

Buy Danish on July 24, 2008 at 10:50 AM

I don’t understand how Weasley became weasley? Is he looking to be Secretary of State or something. What a Weasel.

kirkill on July 24, 2008 at 10:36 AM

If you listened to the video above carefully, “the commenter” wonders if Wesley Clark is running for Postmaster General. Dog-catchers, time to update your resume`s.

Rovin on July 24, 2008 at 10:52 AM

The other notable part was Scarborough indicating that he wasn’t speaking of Olberdope.

It was someone on CBS, but I am not sure who.

drjohn on July 24, 2008 at 10:54 AM

Thanks for the link, Ms. Kelli.

Tony737 on July 24, 2008 at 10:56 AM

I’m racking my brain, trying to come up with an example which shows that he is even a teeny weeny bit adept at military strategy.

Buy Danish

Why, how about the time honored strategy of surrender? That does seem to be the only strategy they will use today. I miss the days when the dems believed in fighting to win a war.

thekingtut on July 24, 2008 at 10:57 AM

There is no guarantee the same tactics will work in Afghanistan. It is a whole different set of circumstances than Iraq,..different cultures, level of education, tribal patterns, terrain. Obama’s copycat approach will probably not yield the same results but he doesn’t have enough experience to be aware of that. Remember, he thinks Afghanis speak Arabic.

a capella on July 24, 2008 at 11:06 AM

This is probably the definitive article on the beginning of the Anbar awakening, written by COL Sean MacFarland, who commanded the 1st BCT, 1st Armored Div in Ramadi.

KelliD, you’ll be happy to note that half way in, COL MacFarland recognizes CPT Patriquin.

Yes, the Awakening started in Ramadi in September 2006, but if it wasn’t for the surge, its effects would have been localized and never spread throughout Anbar in 2007 or throughout all of Iraq in 2008.

BohicaTwentyTwo on July 24, 2008 at 11:10 AM

What Barry has said he wants to do, at least this time, is ratchet up the war in AFG and PAK.

So how does he plan on doing that, will the Keyboard Nutbag Warriors be over there helping win the war in their incredibly ANTI-CHICKENHAWK way?

Come on you Nutroots! FIGHT THE WAR YOU WANTED ALL ALONG!

Or will they still oppose the war, well, sort of, but kind of not really unless they can find a way to blame it on McCain…

This crap is really effing irritating.

benrand on July 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM

the difference between merely increasing troop levels and laying out a comprehensive strategy for attacking insurgents

‘I’m B. O. and I’m not really into actual Policies. I’m here for ‘lookin gooooood!’

Branch Rickey on July 24, 2008 at 11:12 AM

Barry’s selection of slacks and sunglasses was so awesome.

He looked so cool.

benrand on July 24, 2008 at 11:15 AM

As events proved, the counterinsurgency strategies employed in the fall of 2006 and expanded into theater-wide doctrine as more troops arrived succeeded, and exposed Obama as not terribly adept at military strategy.

And just where would a “community organizer” who spent his time in the library at Columbia and Harvard gain any knowledge of military strategy? It’s no wonder he can’t tell a Predator from a Paladin.

Ask him about arugula though. He knows about that.

Cicero43 on July 24, 2008 at 11:20 AM

We are seeing that Obama lies as much or more than Hillary. Weasely lies as much or more than Obama. Will the circle be unbroken. The press says no as long as the truth is irrelevant.

volsense on July 24, 2008 at 11:21 AM

That Clark thinks he can say such outrageous things and get away with them, says more about the complicity of the Left Stream Media than it does his fabrications. The LSM is clearly his enabler here.

Bacchus on July 24, 2008 at 11:31 AM

The Surge would not have suceeded without the Awakening. The Awakening would not have suceeded without was caused by the Surge.

fixed

MarkTheGreat on July 24, 2008 at 11:39 AM

I don’t need a mute button for Wesley, my mute button works for the entire MSNBC.

TooTall on July 24, 2008 at 11:46 AM

And if it will work in Afghanistan, why won’t Obama acknowledge that it worked in Iraq and that he had it wrong all along?

Because Barack Obama is never wrong. He’s like the Pope, in this regard. The sooner you get that through your bitter, religious, gun-clinging, xenophobic head, the better off you will be.

gridlock2 on July 24, 2008 at 11:51 AM

The troop increase intended to fully support the change in tactics and strategy that had been adopted with success by local American commanders in Anbar to a true counterinsurgency effort, which coincided with Sunnis in the region switching sides and opposing the insurgents

The Sunnis did not want to be on the loosing side.

Johan Klaus on July 24, 2008 at 12:30 PM

The only thing missing is a mention of another important ingredient of the surge: the introduction of the COUGAR armored vehicle into the battlefield.

What we’re really looking forward to is the introduction of the Tumbler from the Batman films. Now that is a badass fighting machine.

John the Libertarian on July 24, 2008 at 12:38 PM

Whos Joe’s co-host? She looks like shes gonna throw a hissy fit.

Rbastid on July 24, 2008 at 12:40 PM

Weaseley as my Postmaster General? No thank you.

bikermailman on July 24, 2008 at 12:47 PM

Just sending troops somewhere without a broad, well-thought-out strategy and a specific plan in place to use them is dangerous: it will get troops killed.

Obama is dangerous to our country and our troops.

landlines on July 24, 2008 at 12:58 PM

It is called a Surge because it is short for counterinSURGEncy not because of a surge of troops. As we know, a counterinSURGEncy has many parts, one of which may be adding additional troops. The planning stage started way before the implementation. Obama’s minions either know this or they don’t but either way they have prooven themselves, once again, to be a classless bunch of incompetent liars!

Vince on July 24, 2008 at 1:12 PM

Mute button? Hell, hit the OFF switch.

whitetop on July 24, 2008 at 2:06 PM

When will the Democrats wake up and realize that we are winning and that our troops are the good guys?

Chakra Hammer on July 24, 2008 at 4:02 PM

Speaks volumes about anyone who is so invested in American defeat….Clark should be tried, convicted, and hung for treason. Anyone object to that?????

adamsmith on July 24, 2008 at 4:34 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.