I know that this has been a sore point for a lot of people --- that Clark has not been for timelines.
Clark on the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health, and Iraq Accountability Act (which includes timelines):
House Democrats have offered a responsible approach that protects our Armed Forces, the troops and their families, and encourages both the Iraqis and the Bush Administration to work more effectively to salvage some success in ending what has been a tragically mistaken and failing mission. This conflict must be resolved politically - military efforts alone are insufficient – and this legislation strongly promotes that political solution. This legislation is the product of the kind of responsible legislative leadership that the American people voted for in 2006, and I wholeheartedly support this bill.
In truth, Clark still doesn't believe that timelines are the smartest strategy for preventing chaos in the region, but he is pragmatic. He knows that timelines are popular within the Democratic party, and uniting Democrats in Congress to pressure the Administration on Iraq is our only hope for any improvement over the current strategy.
The Angry Rakkasan blogged on Dailykos on Thursday of his experience with VoteVets this week. Clark is on the Board of Directors of VoteVets and I believe shares the following view.
Some of the guys I was with weren’t too keen on lobbying for a bill that included a timeline, but after hashing it out on Monday morning, we decided that supporting this bill was the best option. It’s not the best (and not nearly as clean as Murtha’s plan last month), but it’s the best chance we have at this point to really do damage to the Bush administration. We figured that by our own measurements, in an ideal world, this bill would be Plan E or Plan F. But we also knew that that was irrelevant at this point. We need a plan, and we need one now. An old Army saying is, "A good plan now, is better than a great plan later,"—and that’s where we are at this point.
The results that we'd like are to see our troops home with the fewest US and Iraqi deaths now and in the aftermath.
If Clark were currently president, he would do this by first meeting with Iraq's neighbors in the region and hashing out an agreement where he would promise to withdraw troops on a timetable in exchange for some concessions on the part of Iran, Syria and others.
The timelines would come as a result of the diplomatic negotiation.
But Clark isn't president today.
And this Administration isn't willing to listen to the considered strategic advice of retired four-star generals.
Sometimes you have to work with what's possible, not best, and Clark can do that.