Military Hero?

I was reading an article in the CSM about Wesley Clark’s expected entry in the Democratic Primary race, and I came across this quote:

While a Clark candidacy might draw some comparisons to that of Dwight Eisenhower, observers point out that Ike was far more of a national hero – and that the Kosovo campaign, which Clark led, was not exactly World War II.

“Clark has the “general” in front of his name, but he’s not a military hero, exactly,” says Stephen Wayne, a political scientist at Georgetown University.

I agree that Kosovo was not in the same league as World War II by any stretch of the imagination, but I think belittling Clark’s service and leadership is a bit out of line. What exactly makes a “military hero”, then, Mr. Wayne?

2 thoughts on “Military Hero?

  1. I have to admit that I’ve been waiting for Clark to enter the race. With the heightened state of world conflict I think his candidacy could make the election very interesting. I’m not settled on anyone yet, there is a lot of time left and lots of reading to do.

    Accomplished General vs. Texas Air National Guard deserter…hmm ;)

  2. While I don’t agree with belittling his career I think the historian is putting things into perspective. Being Supreme Allied Commander of all NATO forces has really lost its gravitas over the last 15 years. As a result the best of the best now tend to take commands in Central Command, where the action is, like Norman Schwarzkopf. He moved from Europe to the Middle East AOR. Additionally, Clark has had a checkered career both in the military and out that is worthy of serious analysis not mud slinging. Things like getting fired from CNN because he was skewing his military analysis to bolster his own political agenda, lying about the Bush Administration calling him up wanting him to say stuff about Iraq, which never happened and he later admitted it was a think tank out of Canada.

    He has on several occasions displayed a pretty high persecution complex which reminds me of Ross Perot.

Leave a Reply