Tuesday, November 24, 2009

US says no to landmine ban

Help us understand this RZ!

U.S. won't join landmine ban, administration decides

From Charley Keyes, CNN Senior Producer
November 24, 2009 6:05 p.m. EST


Washington (CNN) -- The United States won't join its NATO allies and many other countries in formally banning landmines, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said during his midday briefing Tuesday.

"This administration undertook a policy review and we decided our landmine policy remains in effect," Kelly said in response to a question. "We made our policy review and we determined that we would not be able to meet our national defense needs nor our security commitments to our friends and allies if we sign this convention."

Opponents of the U.S. landmine policy said they were surprised.

"It is a disturbing development," said Steve Goose of Human Rights Watch. "The administration never said a policy review was under way."

Goose said the decision to leave the policy in place is at odds with the administration's professed commitments to international agreements and humanitarian issues.

"The international treaty against landmines has made a a huge difference and it is a very strong deterrent," Goose said. "It has to have been a very fast and cursory review."

The United States will attend an international conference on landmines next week in Cartagena, Colombia, sending an inter-agency delegation from the State and Defense departments as observers.

Kelly said the United States continues to work with governments as well as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to help remove landmines.

"The U.S. is proud to be the world's single largest supporter of humanitarian mine action," Kelly said. "Since 1993 the U.S. has provided more than $1.5 billion worldwide dedicated to building new partnerships with more than 50 post-conflict countries and supporting efforts by dozens of NGOs to promote stability and set the stage for recovery and development through mine clearance and conventional-weapons destruction programs."

The United States is the only member of NATO that will not sign the landmine treaty, Goose said. Russia and China also have not joined the 156 nations that have endorsed the ban, he said.


I am feeling increasingly uneasy about this administration and President Obama. Now don't get me wrong, I don't plan on badmouthing him, or jumping ship. I just want to see a more forceful president when it comes to progressive issues. He has disapointed me with the stance on Afghanistan, and his laid back style with the HC reform is so annoying. I am growing impatient and I don't want to. I'm always the optimist remember??

On my bloglist you will see Annette has a video up , there is an event coming up in January, a rally in Washington that we hope will put any 'ole teabagging groupie to shame! This is a rally to support the president and his agenda. We need a massive amout of people there so check out the video and write down the date! We dems have to show the rightwing nutjobs what a real rally looks like, plus I need to get my half empty glass half full again!! I need this bad!

19 comments:

Tao Dao Man said...

I saw this earlier. This is shameful. There is NO, absolutely NO reason to justify this. We are suppose to be the beacon on the hill. Not the night fly in the valley of death.

Jerry Critter said...

I guess we, along with Russia and China, think nothing says I love you like a countryside full of landmines disintegrating the bodies of children.

All's fair in love and war!

This is a disgrace.

Sue said...

RZ can you explain how the current policy is not good enough and why they should join this ban.

Anonymous said...

The conduct of warfare usually means the breakdown of mutual respect for rules. How would a landmine ban be enforced?

Sue said...

lisa when you spout off stupidity and it has nothing to do with the subject I posted, then yes I will delete

Leslie Parsley said...

Sue, you've done the right thing. You're incredibly patient but I'm sure all your many friends appreciate. Too bad this isn't like Facebook where you can block someone forever, or can you.

Hope everyone has a good Turkey Day.

Sue said...

Leslie I have already today deleted around 5 of her comments and when I leave here there is another waiting for me on another post. Soon she will get the message! (I hope she doesn't go to any of my friends next!)

Leslie Parsley said...

I hope she doesn't either. : (
I know it's no fun, but stick with it.

Leslie Parsley said...

Sue - here's a site that tells you how to ban someone from your blog or web site. I love this site and have found so much usefull information.

http://www.bloggertipsandtricks.com/2006/10/how-to-ban-person-from-your-blog-or.html

Lisa said...

Sue just because you disagree doesn't make it stupid.

Lisa said...

Painfully cute:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytedC1heY_8&feature=player_embedded

Leslie Parsley said...

That is cute, Lisa. I had a dog and cat that were like that but the dog was a lot bigger than the cat.

It's always okay to disagree but in an appropriate manner. All you seem interested in is starting fires by tossing out all these accusations and arguments without substantiating any of them or providing sources. When people provide links that dispute your statements, you refuse to check them out. If someone proves you're incorrect you blow it off by saying "forget it, it's not important." In other words, you seem to be more interested in provoking than in any kind of intellectual discourse. You might have some good points but they get lost in the angry, belligerent method in which you present them.

To me, visiting other blogs is a learning experience. I may disagree with what's said on one post or another - or in the comments - but I will give it due consideration and do some research. I don't, however, get in a snit or blast them out of the water or shoot and flee. I don't visit them with the sole purpose of starting an argument.

I don't mean to sound mean, if you will, but you obviously don't agree with anything that anyone says, so why do you continue to put yourself in a position of being beaten up. I think I'd want to go to blogs where the theme is more to my liking. There are many conservative blogs out there and some of them are quite good. I just think you'd be happier there.

Sue said...

Good points Leslie! lisa I used to just visit conservative blogs before I started my own blog, it was not fun and the blog hosts were very mean to me for stating my opinion that was different from theirs. PLEASE start your own blog or go get interested in the blogs that are of your party. You could also join a chat room somewhere cuz you just seem to want to chat. Have a good night and a Happy Thanksgiving, good bye lisa.

Tao Dao Man said...

As far as W goes he declared during his presidency that we would never sign it. It was also not signed during the Clinton regime. I am sorry to say, but this is just one more piece of the ongoing puzzle. I saw chatter yesterday that Obama will also surge the Patriot Act. There is just no logical reason for this. This is from human rights watch.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/HRW/257a4f4bb33b6e84a0417975c77eb513.htm

willis said...

This decision, along with the upcoming annoucement of more troops to the war in Afghanistan are not what I had in mind for this presidency. I don't expect to agree with everything from Obama but dammit, these are core moral issues.

Tao Dao Man said...

IMO; A must read.

http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=87200

It also looks like they are back pedaling on their decision. Now it is --under further review---. Does that mean till it goes out of the news cycle.

Leslie Parsley said...

RZ: I linked to the sight you provided. Too bad the U.S. can't be a world leader in this matter.

Tao Dao Man said...

L.P. I have been all over the place looking for something to justify this. I just do not get it. Some one is behind this insanity.

B.J. said...

Sue: Just read all the comments relating to this subject (and not to Lisa) as I am very much interested in the reaction of others. I read this article earlier and have a post ready to go on it for Monday. Sadly, as RZ states, I have no answers, just a big question. I do know human rights activists and NGOs are not at all happy with this decision. Frankly, the articles headline knocked me out of my chair. Couldn’t help put think of those photos of Princess Diana holding the victims of landmines. Obama is commander in chief of our armed forces and far better equipped than I to make a judgment on Afghanistan, so I’m going to leave that to him. But, I’ve got questions about our stance on such internatonal issues as landmines and global warming. BJ