Can any Hillary supporter tell me why she voted AGAINST banning cluster bombs in civilian areas?

[Bread and Circus]

This article came to my attention today and I find it worthy of it's own headline because it's almost beyond my comprehension. Especially considering child welfare is Clinton's strong suit. Can anyone defend or explain it?

http://mediabloodhound.typepad.com/weblog/2008/02/hillary-vs-obam.html

Special Report: Clinton vs. Obama on the Cluster Bomb Vote

(updated below - includes full text of Senate Amendment No. 4882)

" the single greatest risk civilians face with regard to a current weapon that is in use." -Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch

David Rees, the man behind the hilarious and trenchant Get Your War On, reminded me yesterday of another especially egregious - yet much less known - vote cast by Senator Hillary Clinton, which no one in the mainstream media is talking about:

But in the autumn of 2006, there was a chance to take a step in the right direction: Senate Amendment No. 4882, an amendment to a Pentagon appropriations bill that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

Analysts say Clinton did not want to risk appearing "soft on terror," as it would have harmed her electibility.

No, neither candidate is perfect. Indeed, as Rees points out about Obama:

Nobody who voted for 2005's wack-ass energy bill is perfect. Nobody who voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act is perfect.

Yet he goes on to say:

But of the two remaining Democratic candidates, one decided her vote on Amendment No. 4882 according to a political calculation. The other used a moral calculation

...

In July 2003, UNICEF's Representative in Iraq, Carel de Rooy, explained why children are drawn to these unexploded bomblets:

“Cluster bombs come in interesting shapes that are attractive to children,” said de Rooy. “Many children are injured or killed because they see a shiny metal object, sometimes in the shape of a ball, and they have to go and pick it up and play with it.”

...


The High Costs of Political Expediency

In fact, as evidenced by her vote against Amendment No. 4882, it's fair to say that Hillary Clinton stands - or stood (she might regret the vote; we don't know because no one in the media has asked her) - with George W. Bush on the issue of cluster bombs. Just a couple of weeks ago, the Bush administration reiterated its support of this weaponry:

"Cluster bombs, which nearly 100 countries are seeking to ban, should not be considered bad as long as states involved in conflicts use them responsibly, a senior United States official said on Wednesday."

The official's remarks, which could not be quoted directly, clearly confirmed that Washington -- like Russia, China and some other powers -- remained opposed to banning the weapon.

...


UPDATE: Just to be perfectly clear, Senator Clinton voted against banning the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. Her vote was not against banning the use of cluster bombs altogether. Think about that: Should our military be permitted to use cluster bombs in civilian areas, with each exploding bomb covering the range of a football field? Yes or no? Senator Clinton said yes. Senator Obama said no. Here is the exact text, straight from Senate Amendment No. 4882:

note: It also states in the article that President Clinton opposed the ban in 1997. It also states the U.S. is the largest manufacturer of such bombs.

[liberalnurse]

1. No, I refuse to tell !

Go ahead Obamarite.........You can water board me if you must, but I will never tell.:mad:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdswfKFt4wo

[Bread and Circus]

5. You think this is a joke? You are going to mock an issue like this?

[jasmine621]

41. She could just say she meant to vote "yes." I worked so well for Obama

in at least five instances.

[Bongo Prophet]

58. This is a bigger issue than just Cinton v Obama, and not a game with points

Seriously, if it were an Obama vote it would be just as wrong.

if you care about human rights and democracy, write your candidate and tell them you are a supporter but disagree with it. This does not mean your "side" loses points, it means you are a part of the process.

The "he did it too" excuse belongs to an age group that doesn't yet have voting rights, and for good reason.
That would be approximately the 3-7 year old group.

This is more important than that, don't you think?

[Bongo Prophet]

57. LiberalNurse, surely you are not for the use of such hideous things.

It is unfortunate that the OP is framed as a vote by a candidate.
That filters people's thinking, and is seen as an attack on them.

If it were posted as "Do you think we should be funding cluster bombs?" what would your answer be? What is the core morality in the fiber of your being, and what do you really stand for?

On joking about waterboarding - you might want to think about that. Such light hearted dismissal seems too much like Bush "No WMDs under my desk" or McCain "Bomb bomb Iran" and that's pretty bad company.
I hope you don't teach your children or grandchildren (if you have them)that attitude of mass destruction being funny. Please search your soul on that, and if religious, pray on that.

Are you really a nurse? If so, I would imagine you are very concerned about people (I have very high regard for caretakers) and you also know the damage that searing hot shrapnel and huge blast force does to the human body. There is no way you could be blind to the implications of this, and common sense will tell you that it will, far too often, be inflicted upon children and other innocent victims.

Work out your true feelings on that first, and then contact your candidate - I think you are a supporter of Sen. Clinton, right - and let her know your thoughts. Democracy is about more than just picking a candidate and fighting other people. It is about the people pushing their representatives to make the changes we need.

It's about human rights and constitutional rights, and plain human decency.
Liberal nurse, this is not an attack. I sit here on verge of tears that a grown woman, a caretaker, can be so flippant about such a vital issue of life and suffering.
No. This is a plea for some reason and compassion from a fellow citizen, a fellow human being.

A cluster bomb is a 14-foot weapon that weighs about 1,000 pounds. When it explodes it sprays hundreds of smaller bomblets over an area the size of two or three football fields. The bomblets are bright yellow and look like beer cans. And because they look like playthings, thousands of children have been killed by dormant bomblets in Afghanistan, Kuwait and Iraq. Each bomblet sprays flying shards of metal that can tear through a quarter inch of steel.

The failure rate, the unexploded rate, is very high, often around 15 to 20 percent. When bomblets fail to detonate on the first round, they become land mines that explode on simple touch at any time.

Human Rights Watch reports that 1600 Kuwaiti and Iraqi civilians have been killed, many more injured, by explosive duds following the Persian Gulf war.

Under the Geneva Conventions, cluster bombs are criminal weapons because it is impossible to use them in significant numbers without indiscriminate effects.

Indiscriminate effects.
Torn flesh, massive burns, massive concussion, loss of hearing.
Indiscriminate.
Inhumane.


Edit for spelling, because you can't see the spellcheck through watery, burning eyes.

[Mojambo]

2. I think this is a legitimate question. n/t

[Alexander]

3. It is, which is why you'll never get a real answer from Shillbots.

[papau]

8. The Pentagon begged for the bill to be defeated saying our guys would die - Obama doesn't care about

our men and women dying - he is more concerned about civilians hiding terrorists.

Does that work for you?

[Bread and Circus]

11. The fact you can't defend her vote is not hidden by your snark.

[papau]

24. snark ? lives of our servicemen

[Bread and Circus]

30. Ahh...hiding behind the troops. Where have I heard that before?

[eridani]

52. Anti-civilian weaponry helps the troops? On what planet? n/t

[Mojambo]

15. The Pentagon made her do it.

Good to know.

[papau]

25. The Pentagon does not ALWAYS lie

[Mojambo]

27. I never said they did. n/t

[K Gardner]

4. Didn't she also vote against banning land mines? I think that was the late Princess Diana's big

cause celeb, wasn't it? I'd like to know about both of these issues. Sounds rather hawkish to me.

[papau]

13. Until the Korea excemption is allowed - landmine treaty would put US kids at risk.

The United States had offered to sign the treaty only if it was amended to allow the continued use of land mines along the tense border between North and South Korea for at least 19 more years, and to allow the use of anti-personnel mines in conjunction with anti-tank mines.

Mr. Clinton insisted on the exemptions at the urging of the Defense Department, which warned that the United States would invite disaster on the Korean Peninsula if it removed the nearly one million land mines that seed the border between the two Koreas.

Pentagon officials insist that without the buffer provided by the minefields, the North Korean Army could seize the South Korean capital, Seoul, within hours of the start of an invasion. About 37,000 American soldiers patrol the Korean border.

In his announcement last month, Mr. Clinton said he could not accept a complete ban on anti-personnel land mines because doing so would put American soldiers at risk.

[Bread and Circus]

16. That's just plain fearmongering. I reject such farce.

[Recursion]

26. BS... our mines are in Cuba

If you'll take the word of a veteran who's been in both Korea and Guantanamo, we don't have very many mines in Korea. We mostly use them around GTMO.

[cali]

55. Here's an interesting tidbit: Land mines and cluster bombs

are a huge issue for Senator Leahy.He's the leading voice on it in the Senate. He's received numerous awards for his work on ridding the planet of land mines and he wrote the cluster bomb legislation and sponsored it with DiFi. Maybe her votes on these issues are part of the reason he endoresd Obama.

[grantcart]

6. I believe that the reason that many voted against it is that they

think it would be useful to keep them around the DMZ in North Korea to inhibit an invasion.

Just for the record I do not agree and worked in refugee camps and have seen the damage first hand of mines of all kind.

[Bread and Circus]

9. Yes, actually I'm on to an interesting article regarding this.

[Schema Thing]

7. Because you have to crack a few eggs to make an omelette...

or to be elected president when the USA is in one of it's warlike moods. Or so the conventional wisdom goes, anyway.

[Fresh_Start]

10. Because Israel was the one who was using the cluster bombs

to protect itself which happened right before the vote and led to the measure being defeated.

Is obama against Isreal protecting itself now?

[Stephanie]

14. DING DING DING

Israel was firing cluster bombs at Lebanon that week. HRC could not risk votes by approving a measure that would protect the lives and limbs of innocent children.

[WillyT]

39. DING DING DING !!!

Yep !!!

:mad:

[eridani]

53. Mass murder of civilians = "protection"? On what planet? n/t

[speedoo]

12. There is more here on this:

http://firedoglake.com/2008/02/06/landmines-on-the-road-to-the-white-house/

Maybe Hillary's "vast experience" gave her some insight as to why she voted this way on landmines and cluster bombs. I'm sure at least one of her supporters here will shed some light on this. Is Blake Fleetwood here?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

17. I seriously question whether Hillary Clinton can bring peace to the Middle East

I've looked over most of her position statements and speeches at her Senate website. These are just the ones involving the Middle East:

http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/nationalsecurity/israel/index.cfm

I haven't seen one single statement from her expressing any compassion for the Palestinian people. She condemns terrorism on the part of Arabs against Israelis, which I applaud. She often speaks about Israel's right to exist, which I also applaud. But I see a very one-sided view of the situation between Palestinians and Israelis on her part. I don't think I've ever seen a more one-sided position on the issue from anyone in elected office.

She gave a speech at a protest rally in July, 2006 on the occasion of the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon in front of the UN in support of Israel's invasion. In fact, it was the speech of a major war hawk. Hillary Clinton called for the release of captured Israeli soldiers, which I applaud. But she never once has mentioned the Palestinians who are also held captive by Israel. She was pro-war and said she approved of the "message" Israel was sending by invading Lebanon, despite the fact that over 1,000 Lebanese civilians died in that conflict. She was silent, however, when Tony Blair called for a cease fire and the introduction of a peace-keeping force:

“We will support efforts to send a message to Hamas, Hezbollah, to the Syrians, to the Iranians, to all who seek death and domination instead of life and freedom."

I think this is a serious matter. I don't see how Hillary Clinton can contribute in any way to bringing lasting peace in the Middle East in this key issue of the Palestinian-Israeli deadlock, considering her very one-sided position. I may be wrong and I would love her to prove me wrong if she goes on to be President and is able to broker a just and lasting peace. But to me the prospects of an honestly-brokered peace don't look good.

And, yes, Israel used cluster bombs and killed civilians with them in that 2006 conflict in Lebanon, that Hillary Clinton was so gung-ho to support.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-cluster1feb01,1,6705689.story

[Evergreen Emerald]

18. This is like the third post today, and 20th post in this month.

ARe you here to spam DU?

[speedoo]

19. So why did she vote that way?

I mean, with all the discussion, I'm sure someone must have answered that question.

[elixir]

22. See #13.

[Bread and Circus]

23. What does the DMZ have to do with civilian areas?

The Korean Demilitarized Zone is a strip of land running across the Korean Peninsula that serves as a buffer zone between North and South Korea. The DMZ cuts the Korean Peninsula roughly in half, crossing the 38th parallel on an angle, with the west end of the DMZ lying south of the parallel and the east end lying north of it. It is 155 miles (248 km) long and approximately 2.5 miles (4 km) wide, and is the most heavily armed border in the world.

The DMZ is not a civilian area.

That defense is bunk.

[Bread and Circus]

29. Also there's a difference between land mines and cluster bombs that act like landmines.

Clinton opposes a ban on both.

Dropping cluster bombs in civilian areas has nothing to do with the Korean DMZ.

[elixir]

20. Good post, I'd be curious to hear her reasoning on this.

[Stephanie]

21. Why? It wouldn't have anything to do with the truth.

As in most things, she will give one reason, but the truth is another. She voted to protect her pro-Israel base, at a time when Israel was bombarding Lebanon with cluster bombs. That same week she gave a speech in front of the Israeli Embassy.

[AGirl]

28. Well, as a Hillary supporter..

Her vote on this is disgusting. Thanks for telling me, I didn't know this.

[Bread and Circus]

35. I appreciate your honest concern, I know it's hard when you like a candidate and...

I know you probably think I'm a jerk because I am very hard on Clinton but please read this article once, just once:

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4803

And if you can find a similar article on Obama I promise to read it and take him to task in this thread.

[AGirl]

43. Thanks for showing me the link

It’s a really great site. I feel stupid for not knowing this. I knew her foreign policies are better than her positions on domestic issues, but this stinks. I am glad Obama voted for the ban. :)

[tkmorris]

36. HOLY MACKEREL!!

Here we have a supporter of a candidate that DOESN'T automatically reject any criticism of their candidate and kneejerk to flaming supporters of the other candidate.

I gotta say, that's pretty refreshing.

[JVS]

31. She doesn't care about the children, that's why.

[CompSciStudent]

32. Cluster bombs distortion of facts

It’s true, that the old models left quite a few unexploded ordinance left on the battlefield, but the new generation types have fail mechanisms build in, to self destruct if not exploding when it hits the target. And when used right, it’s an awesome weapon that plays a vital role in us military strike capability.

Also; all our enemies are using it, the biggest ones China, Russia, and Iran. It would be stupid politics of greate proportions, to ban it because of these facts.

Having said that, if the President(Obama or Clinton if elected) could negotiate a world wide ban of these weapons, that pledge the Security Council members to be on the fore front, it might be a different matter But for now...A sound decision by Hillary

[Bread and Circus]

37. Can you back those assertions up with facts? A majority of Dems

voted for that ban. I find your premises unbelievable. The whole idea that these are "fail safe" is pretty hard to believe.

And how is carpet bombing CIVILIAN AREAS with cluster bombs "a vital role in us military strike capability"?

CIVILIAN AREAS?

You are asking me to dispel a lot of logic here.

[CompSciStudent]

45. US munitions manufactured in the 1970s and 1980s are the majority found and destroyed

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9049.shtml

"
So far the clearance teams working under the MACC have destroyed over 131,000 cluster bombs. While US munitions manufactured in the 1970s and 1980s are the majority found and destroyed, Israeli M85 cluster munition strikes have been discovered mostly in fields and towns like Blida along the Blue Line, the UN demarcated border between Israel and Lebanon"

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

42. 1 million cluster bombs failed to detonate in the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah

That's out of 4 million bomblets dropped. A one-fourth failure rate is not good. And that's according to the internal Israeli government report. Twenty-six Lebanese villagers returning to their villages as of the date of this article in the L.A. Times had already lost their lives due to them and probably a lot more since. Terrible decision by Hillary Clinton. Cluster bombs should simply NOT be used in the vicinity of civilian populations as they always pay the highest price. We have a lot of other bombs.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-cluster1feb01,1,6705689.story

[mojowork_n]

44. a sound decision by Hillary?

That only works if you don't think about the places that cluster bombs have actually been used.

I still remember what I saw on CNN, a Saturday morning in 1999, when a camera crew in Nis, Serbia, recorded the absolute devastation of a cluster bomb attack in the middle of the city. It was a densely populated area, with no military potential, whatsoever.

I was totally shocked that our military was capable of that sort of indiscriminate, useless slaughter.

[Bongo Prophet]

59. China, Russia, Iran and US. ........"All the cool kids are doing it."

I agree with you that ir should be addressed by the next president - that would be smart as well as humane, and show us as the "Leader for the Free World" that we always brag about.

Would Obama do that? He seems to be against it, so it seems possible. Supporters should urge that he do this.
Would Clinton do that? She seems to be for it, at least for now. Supporters who think she should change should urger her on this as well.

As to the attitude of - Hey, they are newer better smarter, and when used right it is awesome and vital....- I will decline to weigh in on that. too disheartened by the issue at the moment.

[AtomicKitten]

33. Um, for the children?

:patriot:

[Hippo_Tron]

34. Good question, if we had REAL debates Obama could ask her this in a debate

But we don't...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4443587&mesg_id=4443587

[Bread and Circus]

38. I agree and I kicked your thread. I'd like it if we had real debates on DU.

Handshake Snubgate got 10X's the amount of discourse that this topic (which is hugely important) will ever get.

[FrenchieCat]

40. Good question,

but no real answers!

[KoKo]

46. Kick....maybe someone will come along who knows some

more info about this ....or could ask the Campaign.

[Bread and Circus]

47. I'd die if Obama turned to her in a debate and asked her about this vote.

[slipslidingaway]

48. Winograd report calls for drastic re-think of how to use cluster

munitions

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=88699

"Israel's use of cluster bombs during the July 2006 war with Lebanon violated international law with regard to protecting civilians, an Israeli committee of inquiry said a year and a half after the end of the conflict...

In the final report, it said that the cluster bombs were inaccurate and spread out over a wide area; not all the bomblets exploded and continue to cause harm long after they were fired.

More than 75 percent of the cluster bombs were fired in the last days of the war, when it was clear a cease-fire would soon be announced. Over 4 million bomblets were fired during the war, according to the UN...


Lebanese army, un to clear unexploded ordnance in south...

BEIRUT: The Lebanese Army, in association with the United Nations Mines Coordination Center (UNMACC), will be clearing cluster bombs and other unexploded ordnance in the southern region of the country between February 4 and February 5, 2008, an army statement said on Monday. De-mining works will include the following towns and villages: Yohmor, West Zawtar, Kfar Sir, Qsaibeh, Adchit, Kfar Ruman, Arnoun, Rmadieh, Sidiqine, Qana, Labouneh, Sawaneh, Deir Ames, Majdel Selem, Haniyeh, Alma al- Shaab, Shameh, Alma al-Shaab, Aita al-Jabal, Beit Yahoun, Mansouri, Chakra, Aitit, Sheaitiyeh, Deir Qanoun, Ras al-Ain, Aita al-Jabal, and Aytaroun."



Map
Lebanon: Cluster bombs strikes and proven roads (as at 18 Sep 2006)
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/CMAS-6TUQ4N?OpenDocument

[fujiyama]

49. I find this incredibly disturbing

and it's telling that only one Hillary supporter actually made a serious reply.

[Bongo Prophet]

50. This as a moral issue, a human rights issue first. A test of integrity.

Before someone says how cluster bombs "save troops lives" - and otherwise bargaining or justifying it, because ANY candidate is for or against - just look at it from a human rights standpoint. Decide the morality of it BEFORE you think about it in relation to your candidate. If you agree that it is fine and worth the cost, then cop to it. If you think it is morally reprehensible, then either switch candidates, or write your candidate and let them know that they have your support BUT you are very concerned about that issue and demand some answers and action.

That is democracy 101 mixed with basic integrity. A citizen worthy of democratic process should work from principle outward, not an "ends justify the means" hypocrisy. In my humble opinion.

And then, like torture, you may decide that it is neither moral nor practical.

Here is a story of cluster bombing in Iraq from Human Rights Watch. Since it is Bush doing this, maybe one can see it more clearly. I personally think a case can be made for war crimes in regard to this and so many other things we are doing.

This is part of the CHANGE that we need to consider.
Don't let love of a candidate blind you to their every position. Democracy need to work at a deepr level than that.
This effects real lives and real people.

Two U.S. Marines were killed in separate incidents on March 27 and 28 after stepping on unexploded cluster munitions delivered by artillery in southern Iraq.

"The United States should not be using these weapons," said Steve Goose, executive director of the Arms Division of Human Rights Watch. "Iraqi civilians will be paying the price with their lives and limbs for many years."

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2003/04/01/usint5475.htm

[Bongo Prophet]

51. I would like to give props to the OP for bringing up a REAL issue

It is a legitimate issue of votes, therefore fair.
It is a real human rights issue that is FAR larger than most primary fights, either here on DU or in the media, both of which are horrendously shallow and trivial.

I would love to see more of this by advocates of candidates and non-aligned citizens alike.
These are the things we miss when the focus is on fluff.

Thank you Bread and Circus.

[GoldieAZ49]

56. I would like the vote explained too, Maybe in the Fox debate

[Bongo Prophet]

60. Agree, but more than the vote explained (away) I would like to see the issue addressed.

i don't think FOX reporters would ask, and even if they did, it would be to knock at Hillary. That would just cause a hardening of the hearts and closing of the minds as the H&O battles ensued.

I want clearer vision and commitment to how we can change our policy and "lead" on this issue. Not just political gotchas.

Don't you love how we are so often the last to lead on human rights issues?
Me neither.

[dailykoff]

54. She had an appointment with her astrologer

and didn't have time to read the bill.

[FrenchieCat]

61. Still waiting, hey?

[Bread and Circus]

62. I think a lot of people would rather shut this out of their minds.

[angie_love]

63. I would like to know an answer too

All I hear is crickets from Hillary supporters

[psychopomp]

64. The horror

I think you can still watch video of cluster bombs being test-dropped during training exercises on youtube. War is a terrible affair and these are really terrible weapons.

Are we so cynical that we can't decide that it is wrong to use these types of weapons on civilians? Apparently, some of our trusted leaders are and it saddens me.