Clark Would Consider Signing Landmine Treaty Ban

[robbedvoter]

Clark Would Consider Signing Landmine Treaty Ban
http://www.thewmurchannel.com/politics/2608220/detail.html
Clark Made Declaration At KSU Monday
Retired General Wesley Clark said while campaigning in New Hampshire Monday night that he would consider signing the International Treaty to Ban Landmines.

snip

Clark also said he would closely scrutinize all federal spending -- including defense spending -- but he would "take care of the men and women in uniform, and the veterans who have sacrificed so much for our country."


Clark made the remarks at Keene State College after an Internet chat with a handful of the people who submitted 3,500 questions.

[IndianaGreen]

1. Excellent point, and I am glad that at least one Democrat sees the need

to sign this ban. Landmines cause death and wounds long after wars end. I guess it takes a General to have the balls to endorse what had been one of the late Princess Di's major causes.

Kudos to Clark!

[jayfish]

4. Mostly To Children. -NT-

Jay

[KittyWampus]

2. A Very Appreciated Comment On Mines

And the Pentagon budget does need to be brought in line.

[dArKeR]

3. Clinton's Landmine Legacy

"President Clinton personally helped make the landmine crisis an issue of great international concern," said Stephen Goose, program director of the Arms Division at Human Rights Watch. "Instead of walking away from an issue we know he cares about deeply, President Clinton should submit the Mine Ban Treaty to the Senate." Goose urged Clinton to take executive actions to begin implementing a comprehensive ban, rather than waiting for the Senate to act.
http://www.icbl.org/prelease/2000/hrwjuly10.php3

The GOP especially it's leadership is an immoral disgrace to God! The year 2004 in the of our Lord and the GOP is promoting death, murder, amputations, torture, rape, aids... around the world. Something for a good Christian GOP supporter to be proud of and read as an epitaph infront of God on judgement day.

[Muddleoftheroad]

5. I guess Clark

Doesn't want votes from American soldiers based in South Korea, since, as defensive troops, they rely on the landmines more than any in the world.

[jayfish]

6. I Believe That Clinton Tried To Get An Exception For The..

Korean Peninsula but was unsuccessful. Also their value as a front line defensive tool is debatable.

Jay

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. Debatable

I'll agree their debatable, but the idea is not to stop the North Koreans, just slow them down. That, inevitibly, they would do.

[jayfish]

9. Easily Defeatable.

Entire swaths of minefields could be easily cleared by cluster munitions. Saddams’ vast minefields didn't seem to slow us down much in our push toward Kuwait City or Baghdad. Sure, you would have several still intact but they would be tactically insignificant.

Jay

[Muddleoftheroad]

11. Anything

Anything that slows down an enemy advance and makes it impossible for them to blitz through the DMZ is a plus if you are on the defensive.

[wuushew]

17. American airpower would be the tool that destroys NK armor forces

Also no one is forcing South Korea from using landmines, its' their border so they can defend it just not with American mines.


mines are worthless and lethal to innocents. Ban landmines, cluster munitions and Depleted Uranium.

[TexasPatriot]

10. well

now that the north koreans are busy building nukes, a few landmines probably arent really much of a speed bump

bush* screwed the pooch when he decided to walk away from the clinton deal on fuel oil and light water reactors. Now Bush is effectively finishing it all off
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59783-2003Nov3.html

fuel-air will have to suffice.

[Donna Zen]

13. At the time...1995 (?)

Clark specifically mentioned the Korean mines. He was J-5 at the time; therefore, he was part of the objection to the existing treaty. Last night he said that in '95 the military was given 10 years to develope technologies to replace the mining, and he knew of some very favorable possibilities. The Korean situation was the reason for the word "consider" being used.

Hmmmm?

[Desperadoe]

16. So do Surgeons

n/t

[HootieMcBoob]

8. Clark is the only one who could accomplish this

it's a nixon to china move.

[Donna Zen]

12. Worked on it

Clark has worked on this treaty in the past. There are parts he said need to be changed, and he knows which parts. Yes, he could get us a landmine's treaty.


EDIT: wouldn't it be unbelievable to have someone who actually knew something running the country?

[Rowdyboy]

14. Its high time some Democrat took up this issue...

I'm increasingly sure of my choice of Clark as "the" one to take on the filth in the White House.

[On the Road]

15. Good Move for Clark!

and I hadn't realized Korea was the obstacle to a US signature on the treaty. It makes the reluctance more understandable, even though I still wish this country would get on the right side of an issue for a change.

[tlb]

18. Clark Would "Consider " Signing

As usual, mealy-mouthed fence straddling. Clark is really becoming a bore.