Skip to content

Babes in Warland

October 30, 2010

The internet is buzzing with talk about President Barack Obama’s memo to Secretary Clinton waiving provisions of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act with respect to several of the worst offenders who force children into their militaries/militias/resistance groups- Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan and Yemen. What’s disappointing, beyond the obvious, is that there is no real explanation that Obama gives other than the recitation of “national security.” There is nothing more frustrating than to hear a democratic president use national security as the reason, without any more information. Lets be honest, can’t we pretty much justify anything in the name of national security? Didn’t we have eight years of Bush/Cheney and the neocons using national security to justify just about everything from pointless, unnecessary wars to illegal warrantless wiretapping of US citizens to rendition and torture?

Does the President owe We The People more of an explanation?

Foreign Policy has a photo essay about child soldiers called ‘Babes in Warland” and it’s worth taking a look so that we at least see exactly what it is we are tacitly supporting.

12 Comments leave one →
  1. Thaddeus permalink
    October 30, 2010 11:17 am

    Keep up the good work and keep speaking truth to power. We need to figure out why the Obama administration has sold out these kids.

  2. Steve permalink
    October 30, 2010 11:26 am

    I agree with Thaddeus. I don’t know what Secretary Clinton thinks of this but I am losing faith in this administration’s human rights agenda. In fact, it’s not all together clear to me that they even have an agenda other than to defensively say “we always raise human rights issues with ______ fill in the blank.” It seems like the only time the admin. speaks out is after members of Congress and activists attack them for NOT speaking out. It’s nice Hillary Clinton spoke out about internet freedom earlier this year but just the other day China arrested a woman (in China of course) for tweeting about Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel Prize and as far as anyone knows, Xiaobo’s wife is still missing or in prison or whatever. In other words, what are we doing about any of this? We’re good at taking action and kicking ass when it’s easy in that involves countries like Iran, Cuba, Yemen etc. but not so good in standing up for our ideals when it’s hard.

    On another note, I hope Clinton and Obama realize they’ve been sold down the river by so-called mainstream Jewish organizations fronting for Israel:

    My community should be ashamed of themselves for not vocally supporting this administration’s mideast peace efforts. Enough of this tribal politics BS. Are we not Americans?

    • October 30, 2010 11:22 pm

      Why should Jewish organizations support a political party whose leader is openly hostile to Israel?

      • Tovah permalink
        October 31, 2010 10:39 am

        Oh, please. Stop the propaganda. Sometimes there is more to supporting Israel than simply rubber-stamping and agreeing with every word that comes out of a Likud Prime Minister’s mouth. The HUGE amount of economic and defense aid (more than any other administration) and the unquestioning diplomatic cover at the UN continues unabated. Sometimes friendship involves speaking tough truths and not just cheering mindlessly as they steer themselves towards a sharp cliff. Even Israelis understand this.

      • Steve permalink
        October 31, 2010 12:23 pm

        Perhaps it’s israel that is increasingly hostile to the US- and US Jews no less.

        I keep wondering when liberal Jews in the US are going to wake up and realize Israel is fast becoming an undemocratic, elitist ethnocracy.

  3. David Rhea permalink
    October 30, 2010 1:03 pm

    This is why I like this blog. You didn’t have to post anything about this story you could have just ignored it because it reflects poorly on the administration and is controversial but you didn’t ignore it. I come her for the great photos, videos and schedule information but also for FoPo news that other Hillary sites don’t ever talk about because they aren’t really interested in policy.

  4. Thain permalink
    October 30, 2010 1:33 pm

    Agreed David. I love Hillary but I also love politics and foreign policy and having discussions with people who have different perspectives, all of which I get here. I have gone to other Hillblogs and they just don’t tolerate ANY disagreement and they tend to be more fan clubs. All that’s fine if that’s what some people want but not all of us want JUST that. I’d like to think that Hillary supports the idea of people debating foreign policy issues in addition to providing really in depth coverage of what she is doing at State. It’s all very First Amendment and democratic 😉

    • October 30, 2010 1:43 pm

      Thanks for the compliments guys but don’t diss other Hillary blogs. The internet is a big place and there’s more than enough room for all different kinds of Hillblogs and Hillsites.

      Speaking of Hillary blogs I think Preeti over at Madame Secy is annoyed with me, I left a comment on her blog with a link to my blog and she deleted the comment. I guess I shouldn’t self-promote, huh?

      • Thain permalink
        October 30, 2010 1:54 pm

        Ok, sorry.

        Regarding Madame Secretary over on that’s just silly on her part if she scrubbed your comment just b/c you put link to your blog. maybe what she’s miffed about is I’ve seen comments over there essentially saying Preeti doesn’t update enough and that she should team up with you to provide better coverage.

      • Hillary Fan permalink
        October 30, 2010 5:23 pm

        She shouldn’t have gotten rid of the comment. She should just be happy someone is finally commenting because it’s pretty dead over there.

      • Tovah permalink
        October 30, 2010 9:07 pm

        People leave links to their sites in comment sections all the time, it’s nothing for Pretti to get PO’d about unless she sees your site as competition, which is kind of silly because as you said above the internet is big enough for more than one Hillary Clinton web site. I’m sure Madame Secretary over at FP gets a ton of traffic by nature of the fact that its on which is a very popular site but there doesn’t seem to be that much going on over at MS- not like there used to be. It’s too bad, really.


  1. Tweets that mention Babes in Warland « --

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: