Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
Mon May 25, 2015, 02:29 PM May 2015

Cluster Bombs Are Not Good For Children, Hillary

An important post from 2008:

Cluster bombs are not good for children, Hillary.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x345179

RECOMMEND THE WHOLE ARTICLE AT: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/13/7655 /

....

On September 6, 2006, a Senate bill–a simple amendment to ban the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas–presented Senator Clinton with a timely opportunity to protect the lives of children throughout the world.

The cluster bomb is one of the most hated and heinous weapons in modern war, and its primary victims are children.

Senator Obama voted for the amendment to ban cluster bombs. Senator Clinton, however, voted with the Republicans to kill the humanitarian bill, an amendment in accord with the Geneva Conventions, which already prohibit the use of indiscriminate weapons in populated areas.

117 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Cluster Bombs Are Not Good For Children, Hillary (Original Post) woo me with science May 2015 OP
What's More Important - Profits For Bomb Makers - Or The Safety Of Children cantbeserious May 2015 #1
Maybe the polls will tell her to "evolve".....again. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #2
Thats why Hillary's hired hundreds of advisors & pollsters, to tell her what positions will give her the best chance to win these nomination. It's just smart politics. InAbLuEsTaTe May 2015 #8
It also means you can't believe a word out of her mouth... Oktober May 2015 #48
People have to tell her what to believe? AgingAmerican May 2015 #106
Remember, she's still "Listening" mostly. This is inexcusable. libdem4life May 2015 #3
Hillary wants to prove a woman can be president (as long as her husband is president first). NYC_SKP May 2015 #4
I still think Elizabeth is gonna jump in the race. (Got my fingas crossed.) Watch, you'll see. InAbLuEsTaTe May 2015 #7
Sanders/Warren '16 ? O'Malley / Warren '16 ? nt kristopher May 2015 #15
I like the way you think. 840high May 2015 #18
I still say we need Bernie. woo me with science May 2015 #21
+1 Scuba May 2015 #41
yep reddread May 2015 #91
Luv yer sig line L0oniX May 2015 #14
You of course, have objective evidence, yes? LanternWaste May 2015 #61
Could she have become NY Senator if not for her name recognition? NYC_SKP May 2015 #65
mind you, if you wrote a thesis disrespecting a seminal community organizer... reddread May 2015 #101
"I think that is a very hard choice, but the price, we think, the price is worth it." nationalize the fed May 2015 #5
+1 nt. polly7 May 2015 #6
Thank you. woo me with science May 2015 #17
Did you post a 20-year-old video of Madeleine Albright by mistake? R B Garr May 2015 #20
There is a theory that a a female candidate must appear very, very tough and hawkish Dragonfli May 2015 #9
it takes an army to raze a village reddread May 2015 #10
Where's the pro cluster bomb contingent? JEB May 2015 #11
Cluster Bombs, Depleted Uranium swilton May 2015 #12
Don't forget white phosphorus munitions. nm rhett o rick May 2015 #29
K & R !!! Thespian2 May 2015 #13
I will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee, Still In Wisconsin May 2015 #16
thank you woo. How easy it is to forget that which is morally repugnant. bbgrunt May 2015 #19
American made cluster bombs are currently being dropped Jesus Malverde May 2015 #22
+1 woo me with science May 2015 #23
Just another FOX NEWS link, no doubt! Bonobo May 2015 #24
And the truly heinous ones awoke_in_2003 May 2015 #25
Guns aren't good for kids either. NuclearDem May 2015 #26
Since Common dreams doesn't have many facts... here is some more information. Agschmid May 2015 #27
As amendments go, that's pretty clear. cali May 2015 #42
Yes. Agschmid May 2015 #57
Common Dreams... isn't always such a good source. Agschmid May 2015 #28
And what are good sources? nm rhett o rick May 2015 #30
One that when talking about a specific Senate bill, mentions which Senate bill it is. Agschmid May 2015 #33
Seriously, which sources are on your "approved" list? NBC, ABC, CNN ?? nm rhett o rick May 2015 #89
Don't know, don't keep one. Agschmid May 2015 #90
maybe they knew about google, etc? reddread May 2015 #98
I don't have an approved sources list. And there isn't one so cut the BS. Agschmid May 2015 #100
post partum editor wanted reddread May 2015 #102
At least I'm willing to ask the question and challenge assertions. Agschmid May 2015 #104
are you suggesting Hillary's support for cluster bomb freedom was nuanced? reddread May 2015 #108
I'll just repost my previous post as it appears maybe you didn't read it... Agschmid May 2015 #110
sounds like I did reddread May 2015 #112
Nah, but clearly this conversation is about to devolve. I'm out. Agschmid May 2015 #113
Lame deflection. The underlying facts are uncontested. nt Romulox May 2015 #31
It's not a deflection I'm a Bernie supporter but Common Dreams doesn't even tell you which bill. Agschmid May 2015 #32
LOL at all the "I'm a Bernie supporter, but..." posters. Thanks for your concern. nt Romulox May 2015 #34
LOL at the people okay with a source which lacks any citations, and real information. Agschmid May 2015 #35
*Still* deflecting, *still* not contesting underlying facts. nt Romulox May 2015 #36
It's not a deflection. Agschmid May 2015 #37
What makes you say that? Got any specific cases to illustrate your claim? cali May 2015 #45
I posted it above. Agschmid May 2015 #55
Should we give up our nukes too? MaggieD May 2015 #38
holy truthiness, batman! Talk about crude conflation. cali May 2015 #46
Conflation of what? MaggieD May 2015 #56
You're the world's 'police'? polly7 May 2015 #58
WE - The U.S. - are the world's police MaggieD May 2015 #59
WRONG. polly7 May 2015 #62
Well the world and NATO and the UN would MaggieD May 2015 #63
LMAO. polly7 May 2015 #64
Go to google and search the phrase MaggieD May 2015 #66
Nah ........ I just have to look at histories of wars around the world and who started them polly7 May 2015 #67
Ok stay in denial - whatever MaggieD May 2015 #69
LOL. WEAK. nt. polly7 May 2015 #70
. Bonobo May 2015 #80
I agree with your analogy reddread May 2015 #68
I didn't make an analogy MaggieD May 2015 #71
where did they get them? reddread May 2015 #72
Good question! And why would anyone sell such horrible bombs to anyone in the polly7 May 2015 #75
same answer to both questions reddread May 2015 #76
+100000000000000000 nt. polly7 May 2015 #92
They are made in China, South Korea, Singapore, and the U.S. MaggieD May 2015 #81
follow the money reddread May 2015 #82
Is that your new gambit MaggieD May 2015 #84
. reddread May 2015 #87
Your 'gambit' is so fucking pathetic it's laughable. nt. polly7 May 2015 #93
How dare I live in reality land, huh? MaggieD May 2015 #94
Reality in 'your' mind isn't reality for anyone but you. polly7 May 2015 #95
Not upset at all MaggieD May 2015 #96
No, you just really enjoy posting right-wing shit and ignoring the effects of ugly war polly7 May 2015 #103
Reality has a liberal bias - usually MaggieD May 2015 #107
Your reality is far from liberal. It's right wing bullshit. GRAPHIC. polly7 May 2015 #111
62 countries have cluster bombs MaggieD May 2015 #114
well, on the bright side reddread May 2015 #105
When is the last time another country used cluster bombs in the U.S.????? nt. polly7 May 2015 #73
Who are your 'enemies'? polly7 May 2015 #74
no, you're not. YOU are posting more false shit. cali May 2015 #86
So they HAVE them - a few just promise not to use them? MaggieD May 2015 #88
what part of those countries no longer have stocks of them, don't you grasp, maggs? cali May 2015 #97
62 countries have them MaggieD May 2015 #99
Considering our record as the "world's police" we should be fired. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #83
Hey, I didn't say it's a good thing MaggieD May 2015 #85
Why not? nt. polly7 May 2015 #47
yes reddread May 2015 #49
is that really your pro-cluster bomb argument? Scootaloo May 2015 #54
Should we give up the Death Star? L0oniX May 2015 #77
fueling nightmares reddread May 2015 #79
From the article Oilwellian May 2015 #39
So you were Pro Iraq having nukes???? MaggieD May 2015 #40
Is that you Judith? Scuba May 2015 #43
I'm against the U.S. having nukes. polly7 May 2015 #44
Your post makes no sense whatsoever. morningfog May 2015 #50
Get used to that. L0oniX May 2015 #78
Snark. I think. leveymg May 2015 #53
They aren't good for adults either treestar May 2015 #51
The children aren't a 'distraction'. polly7 May 2015 #60
The Truth has an Anti-Clinton Bias n/t n2doc May 2015 #52
Assault Rifles Are Not Good For Children, Bernie workinclasszero May 2015 #109
Oh noes - not reality again!!! MaggieD May 2015 #115
cluster bombs are totally awesome for children Man from Pickens May 2015 #116
and 401k's reddread May 2015 #117

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,094 posts)
8. Thats why Hillary's hired hundreds of advisors & pollsters, to tell her what positions will give her the best chance to win these nomination. It's just smart politics.
Mon May 25, 2015, 03:33 PM
May 2015
 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
106. People have to tell her what to believe?
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:14 AM
May 2015

It took hundreds of people to tell her that cluster bombs are bad for children? Hmmm. Does she need a focus group to decide whether plutonium is radioactive?

She should be guided by principles, not polls.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
4. Hillary wants to prove a woman can be president (as long as her husband is president first).
Mon May 25, 2015, 03:24 PM
May 2015

If, and it's unlikely, Hillary becomes president it will be kind of a shallow victory.

Her win would, if it happened, be largely because of her visibility and name recognition, not because of her merits.

Now a Warren win, that would be quite another matter.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
21. I still say we need Bernie.
Mon May 25, 2015, 06:55 PM
May 2015

He is the only candidate telling the truth about the oligarchy.

That is why I believe the PTB would stop at nothing, and I mean nothing, to marginalize and if necessary end his candidacy.

Elizabeth Warren's message on economics is important and welcome. But even her policy agenda does not clearly challenge the wars and the secret government/surveillance state/police state that are dismantling democracy in this nation.

We don't just need to be more economically comfortable within an authoritarian state. We need restoration of our democracy and our Bill of Rights.

We need reform of our elections. We need restoration of our civil liberties. We need an end to the surveillance state and the militarization of our police forces, and the private prison industry, and the endless wars for profit.

And we don't need splitting of the vote for these things.






 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
61. You of course, have objective evidence, yes?
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:00 AM
May 2015

"Her win would, if it happened, be largely because of her visibility and name recognition, not because of her merits...."

You of course, have relevant and objective evidence to support that conclusion, yes?

Or was that merely another bit of melodrama added as a place-filler until something of substance may be found...?

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
65. Could she have become NY Senator if not for her name recognition?
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:08 AM
May 2015

Is First Lady a qualification other than being famous for having been one?

You want relevant and objective evidence?

Were I to conduct a study, write a book, or anything else you would not accept it.

The thing speaks for itself.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
101. mind you, if you wrote a thesis disrespecting a seminal community organizer...
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:09 AM
May 2015

it would be unspeakable.

nationalize the fed

(2,169 posts)
5. "I think that is a very hard choice, but the price, we think, the price is worth it."
Mon May 25, 2015, 03:25 PM
May 2015

Leslie Stahl: "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that is more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"

Rodham-Clinton's mentor, the First Female Secretary of State Madeleine Albright then said:

"I think that is a very hard choice, but the price, we think, the price is worth it."



The United States has been involved in and assisted in the overthrow of foreign governments (more recently termed "regime change&quot without the overt use of U.S. military force. Often, such operations are tasked to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

1 During the Cold War

1.1 Syria 1949
1.2 Iran 1953
1.3 Guatemala 1954
1.4 Tibet 1955–70s
1.5 Indonesia 1958
1.6 Cuba 1959
1.7 Iraq 1960–63
1.8 Democratic Republic of the Congo 1960–65
1.9 Dominican Republic 1961
1.10 South Vietnam 1963
1.11 Brazil 1964
1.12 Chile 1970–73
1.13 Afghanistan 1979–89
1.14 Turkey 1980
1.15 Poland 1980–89
1.16 Nicaragua 1981–90
1.16.1 Destablization through CIA assets
1.16.2 Arming the Contras

2 Since the end of the Cold War

2.1 Iraq 1992–96
2.2 Venezuela 2002
2.3 Iran 2005–present



US Secretaries of State finish burying the latest victim of "Regime Change"

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
17. Thank you.
Mon May 25, 2015, 05:24 PM
May 2015


There is too much papering over, minimization, of what her candidacy *really* represents.

We can't afford more of this. Humanity can't afford more of this.

Enough is enough.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
9. There is a theory that a a female candidate must appear very, very tough and hawkish
Mon May 25, 2015, 03:55 PM
May 2015

to be able to ascent in politics at the national level. So you see, she HAS to do things and vote for things to prove her toughness in order to help all those children she wants to help.

She has to promote things that kill the children in order to save them.
There is also one important thing that we often forget, in the end such things don't really matter, there is only one thing that matters and it's all about...

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
10. it takes an army to raze a village
Mon May 25, 2015, 04:00 PM
May 2015

this is just another very good explanation for the lopsided support she lacks.

Thespian2

(2,741 posts)
13. K & R !!!
Mon May 25, 2015, 04:35 PM
May 2015

Excellent article. If people read the article from Common Dreams, they will understand why I have never liked either Clinton...and yes, I did have to vote for him...lesser of two evils, I thought...

 

awoke_in_2003

(34,582 posts)
25. And the truly heinous ones
Mon May 25, 2015, 10:52 PM
May 2015

are the ones that are set up to have half the clusters explode on contact, and half on a time delay. That way, when people come to treat the wounded they get hit in the second blast. America is a barbaric nation.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
27. Since Common dreams doesn't have many facts... here is some more information.
Mon May 25, 2015, 11:09 PM
May 2015

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---30
Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE) Conrad (D-ND) Dayton (D-MN) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA) Harkin (D-IA) Jeffords (I-VT) Johnson (D-SD) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Sarbanes (D-MD) Stabenow (D-MI) Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---70
Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Biden (D-DE)
Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Burr (R-NC) Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA) Clinton (D-NY) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK) Inouye (D-HI) Isakson (R-GA) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) Martinez (R-FL) McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY) Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Pryor (D-AR) Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Santorum (R-PA) Schumer (D-NY) Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO) Thomas (R-WY) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA)


And the information on the bills & amendments:

https://www.congress.gov/amendment/109th-congress/senate-amendment/4882/text

Amendment in question:

SA 4882. Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. LEAHY) submitted an amend- ment intended to be proposed by her to the bill H.R. 5631, making appropria- tions for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes; as follows:
At the end of title VIII, add the following:
SEC. 8109. No funds appropriated or other- wise made available by this Act my be obli- gated or expended to acquire, utilize, sell, or transfer any cluster munition unless the rules of engagement applicable to the cluster munition ensure that the cluster munition will not be used in or near any concentrated population of civilians, whether permanent or temporary, including inhabited parts of cities or villages, camps or columns of refu- gees or evacuees, or camps or groups of no- mads.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
57. Yes.
Tue May 26, 2015, 08:53 AM
May 2015

Would have been nice to have that information in the article.

There are also some othe amendments to the bill, it was a good read please check out the link. A large chunk of the bill seems to be about wildlife preserve, and reclamation.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
33. One that when talking about a specific Senate bill, mentions which Senate bill it is.
Mon May 25, 2015, 11:55 PM
May 2015

Not much to ask Rhett.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
90. Don't know, don't keep one.
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:59 AM
May 2015

But when I see one that isn't quite up to snuff I point it out.

You think it made sense for the author to not even include the bill number?

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
98. maybe they knew about google, etc?
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:08 AM
May 2015

i would love to see the "approved sources" list myself.
I suspect it is hard to nail down, yet includes the unregulated cable outfits who are free to lie.
in fact their right to do so has been guaranteed..

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
100. I don't have an approved sources list. And there isn't one so cut the BS.
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:09 AM
May 2015

But I can think critically, and make my own decisions. I also can tell when a source doesn't have what I would consider important information.

[font color="red"]Again I am NOT debating the argument of the article just the manner in which it was written. [/font]

And I have yet to hear from someone that think it was a good decision for the OP article to not include any information about the bill being discussed.

Have you read the bill/amendment yet?

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
108. are you suggesting Hillary's support for cluster bomb freedom was nuanced?
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:17 AM
May 2015

or just that a fully footnoted description of the legislation at hand was lacking?

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
110. I'll just repost my previous post as it appears maybe you didn't read it...
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:21 AM
May 2015


And I'll ask again, did you read the bill/amendment (I linked to it in the other thread)? Once you have I'll be happy to discuss, until then I'll wait.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
32. It's not a deflection I'm a Bernie supporter but Common Dreams doesn't even tell you which bill.
Mon May 25, 2015, 11:54 PM
May 2015

IMO, a good source would have had this information. Instead I had to find it a check out what the other amendments were.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
35. LOL at the people okay with a source which lacks any citations, and real information.
Mon May 25, 2015, 11:55 PM
May 2015

Good to know you care.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
37. It's not a deflection.
Mon May 25, 2015, 11:58 PM
May 2015

[font color="red"]I am not contesting ANY facts. [/font]

I am asking for more information, what the hell is wrong with that?

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
45. What makes you say that? Got any specific cases to illustrate your claim?
Tue May 26, 2015, 04:19 AM
May 2015

Or is it just a vague sense that tells you that it "isn't always such a good source"? And as compared to what? What do you consider good sources?

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
55. I posted it above.
Tue May 26, 2015, 08:51 AM
May 2015

I'll be happy to reiterate it...

The article mentions a bill and amendment introduced in the senate. The article makes no mention of what that bill is, just gives you a date.

If you are going to write an article about a specific bill that bill should be named.

Again I am not saying this didn't happen just saying this journalism was/is a bit sloppy.

If you can't see that, you've got blinders on.

 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
38. Should we give up our nukes too?
Tue May 26, 2015, 12:34 AM
May 2015

And just hope the rest of the world does, too?

As of March 2015, at least 62 countries have stockpiles of cluster munitions.

Algeria
Angola
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Belarus
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazil
Bulgaria
China
Croatia
Cuba
Egypt
Estonia
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Greece
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
India
Indonesia
Israel
Italy
Jordan
Kazakhstan
North Korea
South Korea
Kuwait
Libya
Mongolia
Morocco
Netherlands
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Peru
Poland
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Serbia
Singapore
Slovakia
South Africa[106]
Spain
Sudan
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Turkey
Republic of China
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United States
Uzbekistan
Yemen
Zimbabwe

 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
56. Conflation of what?
Tue May 26, 2015, 08:52 AM
May 2015

Do 62 other countries have cluster bombs too or don't they? War sucks. But we are the world's police and we aren't going to give up weapons that the rest of the world still has.

SMH.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
62. WRONG.
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:01 AM
May 2015

The world doesn't need a policeman that destroyes nations at whim and based on lies, overthrows gov'ts and causes millions of completely unnecessary and otherwise avoidable deaths, mutilations, homelessness, poverty, mass migrations, leaves behind DU and other waste that will go on deforming and killing for decades - cluster bombs that blow little childrens limbs off, etc. etc. etc. All while proclaiming the right to do so because of some trumped up piece of shit charge. Over and over and over. It never ends. But I guess when you're the world's largest weapons dealer and make trillions off war - it doesn't make sense not to get people to use them and then go in and claim to be 'keeping peace', right?

FUCK THAT SHIT. It may make you feel good to call yourself it, but it hasn't been true for decades (actually, it never was), and only right-wingers like to pretend illegal wars of aggression and 'interventions' to benefit the MIC, 1% and corporations that they're trying to control the world with are 'policing' anyone but those audacious enough to sit on recources - and especially those who use them to benefit their own citizen and keep out the foreign vultures.

Sick and tired of seeing it.

And believe me, most of the world doesn't see 'you' as the world's policeman. Talk about fucking arrogance.

 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
66. Go to google and search the phrase
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:09 AM
May 2015

"united states world police" - that will keep you busy for awhile.

Sorry, you appear to be the last to know.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
67. Nah ........ I just have to look at histories of wars around the world and who started them
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:11 AM
May 2015

and benefited from them, and who is currently killing more people and causing the killing of more people than anyone else has even threatened to in modern times.

Truth - sorry you don't like it. But don't make stupid claims if it bothers you.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
68. I agree with your analogy
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:14 AM
May 2015

just as those cops who kill brown people with impunity inside our borders.
and you are ok with this, at least overseas?

 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
71. I didn't make an analogy
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:28 AM
May 2015

I'm simply stating facts. Both our allies and enemies have cluster bombs. Lots of them.

 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
81. They are made in China, South Korea, Singapore, and the U.S.
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:42 AM
May 2015

That's what I find when I search. What is your point? You think if we got rid of them they would just go away? They wouldn't.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
95. Reality in 'your' mind isn't reality for anyone but you.
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:02 AM
May 2015

I think that's your problem. You seem very upset that it's not everyone's? It's not a terrible sin, it's just pathetic.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
103. No, you just really enjoy posting right-wing shit and ignoring the effects of ugly war
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:11 AM
May 2015

and weapons against those least able to fight back.

 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
107. Reality has a liberal bias - usually
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:16 AM
May 2015

Unless you're talking about the radical left.

It's reality that we are the world's police. Good or bad. That's reality. I'm shocked that ANYONE is not aware of that.

It's also reality that 62 other countries have cluster bombs.

It's not right wing bullshit as you claim. It's just reality.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
111. Your reality is far from liberal. It's right wing bullshit. GRAPHIC.
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:22 AM
May 2015

According to article 17 of the treaty, the convention entered into force "on the first day of the sixth month after the month in which the thirtieth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession has been deposited".[3] Since the thirtieth ratification was deposited during February 2010, the convention entered into force on 1 August 2010; by that point, 38 nations had ratified the treaty.

As the convention entered into force, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon spoke of "not only the world's collective revulsion at these abhorrent weapons, but also the power of collaboration among governments, civil society and the United Nations to change attitudes and policies on a threat faced by all humankind".[29] A spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross said "These weapons are a relic of the Cold War. They are a legacy that has to be eliminated because they increasingly won't work".[30] Nobel peace prize winner Jody Williams called the convention "the most important disarmament and humanitarian convention in over a decade".[30]

Anti-cluster munitions campaigners praised the rapid progress made in the adoption of the convention, and expressed hope that even non-signatories – such as the US, China and Russia – would be discouraged from using the weapons by the entry into force of the convention.[31] As one of the countries that did not ratify the treaty, the United States said that cluster bombs are a legal form of weapon, and that they had a "clear military utility in combat." It also said that compared to other types of weapons, cluster bombs are less harmful to civilians.[29]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Cluster_Munitions







http://thewe.cc/thewei/_/images_4/us_terror_state__/girl_injured_by_us_bombing.jpe

You can shove your defense of these horrors straight up your ass.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
105. well, on the bright side
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:13 AM
May 2015

as the opposition to international legal decency runs with their rope, they will hang themselves.
too bad about all the dead innocents along the way.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
74. Who are your 'enemies'?
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:32 AM
May 2015

The 9/11 bombers are dead. Most of them were from Saudi Arabia, yet SA is an 'ally.

Who are your enemies?

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
86. no, you're not. YOU are posting more false shit.
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:51 AM
May 2015

112 nations have signed the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions. The countries employing them are largely nations that the U.S. considers bad actors.

I know it's too much to ask YOU to stop with the bullshit claims, but this one? particularly noxious.

At least seventeen countries have used cluster munitions in recent history (since the creation of the United Nations). Of these nations Colombia, Iraq, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom no longer have stocks of the munitions [92][93][94] Countries that have subscribed to the Wellington Declaration, agreeing in principle to ban cluster bombs, are listed in bold.

Colombia[95]
Ethiopia
Eritrea
France
Georgia



Iran
Iraq
Israel
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Morocco
Netherlands



Nigeria
Russia
Saudi Arabia
South Africa/ South Africa[96]



Sudan
Syria
United Kingdom
United States
Sri Lanka[97][98

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition#United_States_policy_towards_cluster_munitions

 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
88. So they HAVE them - a few just promise not to use them?
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:54 AM
May 2015

Talk about your constant allegations about my "truthiness" - man, I can't hold a candle to you!

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
97. what part of those countries no longer have stocks of them, don't you grasp, maggs?
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:07 AM
May 2015

What part of this is so difficult for you to wrap your beautiful mind around, maggs?

At least seventeen countries have used cluster munitions in recent history (since the creation of the United Nations). Of these nations Colombia, Iraq, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom no longer have stocks of the munitions [92][93][94] Countries that have subscribed to the Wellington Declaration, agreeing in principle to ban cluster bombs, are listed in bold.

The countries in bold are:

France, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, South Africa, Sudan, Syria, UK, Sri Lanka

The U.S. is one of the very few nations in the world, maggs, that hasn't agreed to stop using cluster munitions.

I post facts with links. You post bullshit false claims.

Oilwellian

(12,647 posts)
39. From the article
Tue May 26, 2015, 12:40 AM
May 2015
The Clinton Sanctions Were Calamitous

Senator Clinton is currently trying to build a campaign around her experience in the White House, but she refuses to take responsibility for the most inhumane and disastrous foreign policy operation of the Clinton years: the infamous economic sanctions against Iraq. The sanctions, a colossal failure, formed the centerpiece of Clinton foreign policy. While the sanctions began with Bush senior in 1990, they were carried out and enforced with a vengeance by the Clinton Administration. The second war against Iraq actually began long before George Bush launched the shock-and-awe bombings in 2003. The Clinton sanctions afflicted the entire Iraqi population. Child mortality, as well as the death rate for the elderly and the chronically ill, skyrocketed. Malnutrition debilitated the country. Irrigation and sanitation systems collapsed. Common diseases multiplied. The Iraqi medical services, the most advanced medical system in the Mideast prior to the sanctions, fell apart. Farmers ran out of fertilizers and machine parts. Thousands of trained professionals fled the country. The sanctions, combined with surprise bombing raids, destroyed the entire infrastructure.

As the full magnitude of the calamity became public knowledge, humanitarian organizations, like Voices in the Wilderness, made appeals to the White House. Denis Halliday, former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, resigned in protest in 1998. (His successor, H.C. von Sponeck, later resigned as well). Contemptuous of human rights and world opinion, President Clinton blocked Russian and French proposals to end the sanctions.


Hillary's concern for women and children is fleeting.

K&R
 

MaggieD

(7,393 posts)
40. So you were Pro Iraq having nukes????
Tue May 26, 2015, 01:35 AM
May 2015

If they'd gotten them because Clinton stood by and did nothing ISIL would have them now.

And no, she doesn't need to take responsibility for Bill's actions as president. That's absurd. And sexist IMO.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
44. I'm against the U.S. having nukes.
Tue May 26, 2015, 04:19 AM
May 2015

And North Korea, and Israel, and everyone else.

What should be done about it?

 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
50. Your post makes no sense whatsoever.
Tue May 26, 2015, 07:27 AM
May 2015

And has nothing to do with Hillary's indefensible votes on cluster bombs and the IWR.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
51. They aren't good for adults either
Tue May 26, 2015, 07:30 AM
May 2015

What about the adults?

there are more children numerically in the third world.

That's being used to distract.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
60. The children aren't a 'distraction'.
Tue May 26, 2015, 08:57 AM
May 2015

Children are much more likely to be maimed and killed by 'leftover bombs'.

Cluster Bomb Fact Sheet

Cluster bombs are designed as anti-personnel, anti-armor weapons, but the primary victims have been innocent civilians. More than 98% of known cluster bomb victims are civilians and 40% are children, who are drawn to the small, toy-like metal objects.

Cluster bomb casings release hundreds of bomblets—the size of a soup can or orange—over wide areas, frequently missing intended military targets and killing nearby civilians.

Commonly used cluster bombs are designed to explode into hundreds of pieces of razor-sharp shrapnel that rip through bodies. They are deadlier than land mines.

Anywhere from 2% to 20% of modern cluster munitions do not detonate upon impact (this rate rises to 30% for older bombs used in the second Indochina War), leaving a deadly hazard for years to come.


http://legaciesofwar.org/resources/cluster-bomb-fact-sheet/



 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
109. Assault Rifles Are Not Good For Children, Bernie
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:20 AM
May 2015
Bernie Sanders, Gun Nut
He supported the most reprehensible pro-gun legislation in recent memory.


By Mark Joseph Stern

During his time in Congress, Sanders opposed several moderate gun control bills. He also supported the most odious NRA–backed law in recent memory—one that may block Sandy Hook families from winning a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the gun used to massacre their children.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html


Its about people, not profits? Really Bernie?

Why is Bernie protecting the profits of assault rifles manufacturers over the people of Sandy Hook who lost their children to a fuckin madman armed with a state of the art killing machine??
 

Man from Pickens

(1,713 posts)
116. cluster bombs are totally awesome for children
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:55 AM
May 2015

When the stocks for the companies that make cluster bombs go up, some people get to make a lot of money, and then they take some of that money and give it to Hillary Clinton through any of the various vehicles set up to facilitate these transactions, which will help make her the first woman President so that she can finally pass TPP and save all the children in Syria from being sold as slaves by ISIS.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Cluster Bombs Are Not Goo...