Whitehouse Gives The OK to use ... Child Soldiers

It's bad enough that we live in a country where we round up Muslims and place them into "rendition camps" where they receive neither the protections of the Geneva Conventions nor basic human rights. It's bad enough that we live in a country that allows it's richest 1% to take away the homes of middle class working families based on forged and illegal paperwork. It's bad enough that we live in a country where in order to travel in an airplane you must consent to either a dose of radiation or a humiliating search of your genitalia ....

But now... three weeks ago the Whitehouse OK'd the use of child soldiers, something that every civilized country views as completely abhorrent and immoral, by four countries: Chad , The Republic of the Congo, Sudan and Yemen. Last October 25th President Obama signed a Presidential memorandum waiving those four countries from the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008. This means we will continue to give foreign aid to countries that take 12 year olds away from their families, put guns into their hands and force them to kill people. You can view that memorandum right here.

“Everyone’s gotten a pass, and Obama has really completely undercut the law and its intent,” said Jo Becker, children’s rights advocacy director for Human Rights Watch.

My God, what kind of nation have we become? An Immoral, lawless nation of sycophants. How have we sunk this low?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

This is the law itself. This memo does do exactly what you're telling me it doesn't.

Here's what he's exercising:



And THIS is what it waives:



This is disgusting. How can you possibly defend this?

And no, I don't feel better (wtf?!!?!)..... I feel completely betrayed.

This is not the man I voted for.

President Obama signed a Presidential memorandum waiving....

What the F. It wasn't okay under Bush but it is Okay under Obama? What is going on here?

I don't get it.

Wish I knew in '08 what I know now.

I'd rather the balloon had popped sooner than later, at least I wouldn't be so shocked, disgusted and hope-less about the next couple years.

http://themcglynn.com/?p=35990

-snip-

Administration officials have said, however, that cutting off military aid to those four countries as required by the law would do more harm than good. And they have said that continuing close cooperation with them can be a more effective way of changing their practices.

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said the countries who received the waiver deserve more time to correct their practices.

“In each of these countries we are working with the governments to stop the recruitment of child soldiers or demobilize those who may already be in the ranks,” Crowley said. “These countries have put the right policies in place but are struggling to effectively implement them. These waivers allow the United States to continue to conduct valuable training programs.”

***

We've been compromised so heavily in this country lately that I feel ashamed to call it America any more.

Compromise on DADT
Compromise on unemployment extensions
Compromise on The Patriot Act
Compromise on Health care.

I feel better now knowing that we are encouraging them not us child soldiers as we give them guns and aid. They just haven't yet implimented it. Good info.

have put the right policies in place but are struggling to effectively implement them. These waivers allow the United States to continue to conduct valuable training programs.”

with child soldiers.

It's unconscionable. Period.

by the act itself.

soldiers. Who will then participate in training directed against the recruitment of child soldiers.

I really don't see any reason why we should compromise or hedge on this issue. The use of child soldiers by any nation.. friend/foe/strategically important/unimportant... doesn't matter. It is universally appalling and there's no excuse for it.

If we have allies who use child soldiers, or if we achieve compromise on foreign policy in such a way that the use of child soldiers is even "put on the table," what does that say about us and our principles.

Fuck Obama for signing that memo.

the child soldiers to other powers in the situation which are going to provide the weapons anyway? "The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel."

ut out completely and having no power over the situation at all.

Not that REALITY matters around here . . . .

At DU, ideology reigns, so it's better to abandon the child soldiers to whomever (who will, btw, see to it that the weapons are delivered anyway), so that "we" can get a buzzz on for how righteous "we" are.

as in compromising one's morals for a "greater good".

Come on - we're talking child soldiers here. We wouldn't even be having this discussion in the 70's, 80's or 90's. We're talking about giving financial aid to countries who make 12 years olds murderers.

And we're talking about just four countries. We continue to withhold funds from many other countries who use child soldiers. But for one reason or another , someone is getting something from those four countries that make it profitable for us to close our eyes to atrocity.

It's all about profit - not about morality.

When I was growing up, it was the "evil Communists" who we would never deal with because they were against all our supposed American principles. Billions of war dollars were spent "protecting us" from the "evil Communists" And today, now that the Communists are highly profitable, they are our biggest trading partner. We give up American jobs in order to build factories in China .

And here we go again - only now we turn a blind eye to child slave soldiers. And some few Americans (on this thread at least) appear to agree with the policy.

For shame, for shame.

and the willingness to do the hard things, not just what looks good to the simple-minded media.

from being ripped from their families, I see that as a good thing.

"It's all about profit - not about morality" = the way the world works. When the opportunity presents itself and we're cognizant enough to recognize it, we can channel those greedy motivations and profit making machines towards a greater good.

we can all take comfort in knowing that we have supplied those child soldiers with the best weapons our tax money can buy. :sarcasm:

I hope Obama thinks of these children when he tucks his daughters safely into their beds each night.

demands for human-rights improvements, made everything way better in that country in the 80s

right?

right?...

crap

ANYONE else here or in D.C.

Which makes them much easier to grind into the mud whenver convenient.

from below segment:

Countries ... recruiting or using child soldiers ... would be eligible only for military assistance to address the issue of child soldiers and otherwise professionalize their armed forces until the problem is remedied.

**

(which is exactly what was decided about these four countries.)



The Child Soldier Prevention Act of 2007 would put restrictions on U.S. military assistance for governments that use child soldiers.

http://www.worldvision.org/content.nsf/learn/globalissues-childprotection-conflict-bill

-snip-

The Child Soldier Prevention Act of 2007, sponsored by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Sam Brownback (R-KS), is designed to encourage governments to disarm, demobilize and rehabilitate child soldiers from government forces and government-supported militias.

Using the Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights as a barometer, this bill would place limits on the provision of U.S. International Military Education and Training, Foreign Military Financing and other defense-related assistance in our foreign operations programs for countries in violation of the bill’s standards.

Countries that are clearly identified in the Human Rights Report as recruiting or using child soldiers in government armed forces or government-supported paramilitaries or militias in violation of international standards would be eligible only for military assistance to address the issue of child soldiers and otherwise professionalize their armed forces until the problem is remedied.

-snip-

***

"this bill would place limits on the provision of U.S. International Military Education and Training, Foreign Military Financing and other defense-related assistance in our foreign operations programs for countries in violation of the bill’s standards."

Weasel words. Each of those statements have loopholes written in to them.

And then there's this

" ...would be eligible only for military assistance to address the issue of child soldiers and otherwise professionalize their armed forces until the problem is remedied."

Because countries that are so scummy they use child soldiers can be trusted to use what assistance they are eligible for to train adults, not more children to be soldiers.

I don't know who is worse, some 3rd world nation that uses child soldiers or an alleged "civilized" county that pays lip service to how awful it is, but still keeps throwing money at the governments doing this.

i suggest you read it. but i have included enough facts, on the act and the waiver, in this thread for you to be assured the waiver does NOT give any such "OK to use ... Child Soldiers."

says that we will tolerate it.

Section 404(a), the part that Obama is waiving, is the requirement for the United States missions in those countries to produce a report on the use of child soldiers. In other words, it's waiving paperwork for the US embassies in countries where we already know the situation and are working to correct it, even as the they work on implementing the requirements of the act. It IN NO WAY waives, repeals, or nullifies the relevant portions of the act with regard to the actual use of child soldiers.

Which is contrary to the law that Congress passed in 08.

I am sickened to point out that it was a Republican Congress that passed the law and a Democratic President who waved it :(

soldiers and otherwise professionalize their armed forces until the problem is remedied."

signed in 2009.
wasn't a republican congress.

the waivers are built into the act, applicable where countries are implementing the goal of ending the use of child soldiers, but need assistance to do so.

we are tolerating it. What this section does is eliminates the paper trail that would hold our gov't accountable.

by mis-characterizing the President's decision in the matter.

How many more people will die if this aid doesn't go through? How many children will join armies just to be fed?

and NONE of those countries are known for our foreign aid actually getting to the people involved.
The "aid" that we give them is much like the billions we gave to the Afghan warlords - it's more of a bribe to keep them on our "side".

Only in this case those four countries enslave children , conscript them into their army and force them to kill other children.

Here is an informative report on what this does to a child:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/africa/july-dec10/uganda_11-16.html

It's not anything that any other civilized western country, which includes Canada, condones.

which prohibited us from, among other things, giving our foreign aid money to countries that used child slave soldiers.

I think not waiving that bill for those four countries would be a good start - but wasn't that easily implied in my O.P. ?

President is over-riding it, because he likes child-soldiers.

:sarcasm:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

issue of child soldiers and otherwise professionalize their armed forces until the problem is remedied."

it is important that you read the act if you want to comment so strongly on it.

That's all I can say about this.

Whitehouse was a rather extreme industrial band from the 80s.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

courses of action in their totality and indicate their positive and negative effects, so that we can then judge your basis for your claim.

Or are we just to accept that you are knowledgeable enough, more so than all of those who participated in this policy decision, to make this evaluation?

You know what, most of us CAN understand differences in subject-matter-expert opinions, but out right, rationally unjustified, pure OPINION is just simply worthless, no matter how many times someone repeats whatever the talking point is.

Are "we" really supposed to respect someone, you in this case, who acts exactly like that which "we" claim to abhor? Isn't that your criticism of the President?

...one man's terrorist/child soldier is another man's simply underage Freedom Fighter!

USA! USA!1!

:puke:

:eyes:

I'm sensing another "nobody could've predicted" event looming...

didn't have the strength to do it!!!

Wow!

there, because we condemn how the adults are using them?

the act is, in large part, designed to provide a means of influencing countries to end the enslavement of children as soldiers. you all appear to hold that act sacred, so consider why it would have such provisions if, any time a country commits that crime, we simply walk away, abandoning the children to that fate?