Where are the straight answers on Darfur? - 7.25.2007.1
Excerpt from Vass, on Darfur. I will be following this subject from time to time on both blogs.
Some may recall that I recently raised the question of what is happening with HR 180 IH. You may not recall the name it has in the House of Representatives, but it’s also known as Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007. This is one item of several that are sitting in Congress waiting for some action to be taken by the nation. Not everyoe is aware of this but at least one person had his YouTube question presented to the Democratic candidates in their recent debate.
Only 4 of the Democratic hopefuls were given the chance to respond. They were Governor Richardson, Senator Biden, Senator Clinton, and Former Senator Gravel. In my opinion none were satisfactory answers, though they were decent soundbites….
As for Senator Clinton, she got a bit of all the best answers and combined them, mostly. She agreed on the need for sanctions. She agreed on a no-fly zone. But she would not agree to place ANY troops on the ground.
Senators Dodd and Obama (as well as Biden and Clinton) co-sponsored Senate Resolution 559 (introduced on Sept. 7, 2006), which encouraged President Bush to work with NATO and the UN in establishing a no-fly zone.
Ok, first off a no-fly zone just does not work. Not in England (Germans during WWII), Viet-Nam, Bosnia, Iraq nor Darfur. … Stopping a plane flying overhead does not stop AK-47 and machete wielding troops from killing people.
Economic and political pressure is one option, but like a no-fly zone it does not stop anything. Cuba, North Korea, and Iraq have all had (or have) sanctions for years if not decades. Yet North Korea has nuclear weapons, Cuba still is a Communist dictatorship and we attacked Iraq. …
Face it, it takes troops. Just like it did in Bosnia. …
Full post found on www.mvass.com
Some may recall that I recently raised the question of what is happening with HR 180 IH. You may not recall the name it has in the House of Representatives, but it’s also known as Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007. This is one item of several that are sitting in Congress waiting for some action to be taken by the nation. Not everyoe is aware of this but at least one person had his YouTube question presented to the Democratic candidates in their recent debate.
Only 4 of the Democratic hopefuls were given the chance to respond. They were Governor Richardson, Senator Biden, Senator Clinton, and Former Senator Gravel. In my opinion none were satisfactory answers, though they were decent soundbites….
As for Senator Clinton, she got a bit of all the best answers and combined them, mostly. She agreed on the need for sanctions. She agreed on a no-fly zone. But she would not agree to place ANY troops on the ground.
Senators Dodd and Obama (as well as Biden and Clinton) co-sponsored Senate Resolution 559 (introduced on Sept. 7, 2006), which encouraged President Bush to work with NATO and the UN in establishing a no-fly zone.
Ok, first off a no-fly zone just does not work. Not in England (Germans during WWII), Viet-Nam, Bosnia, Iraq nor Darfur. … Stopping a plane flying overhead does not stop AK-47 and machete wielding troops from killing people.
Economic and political pressure is one option, but like a no-fly zone it does not stop anything. Cuba, North Korea, and Iraq have all had (or have) sanctions for years if not decades. Yet North Korea has nuclear weapons, Cuba still is a Communist dictatorship and we attacked Iraq. …
Face it, it takes troops. Just like it did in Bosnia. …
Full post found on www.mvass.com
Labels: Bosnia, Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act, political debate, Senator Clinton, Senator Obama, youtube
posted by M. Vass | 9:03 PM
|
2 comments
links to this post
