# Clinton's speech in Britain... what did you think? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 4, 2002, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888 "2002-10-04T20:49:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/21 "2002-10-05T19:36:25Z")
Thanks for that scintillating input, Stoid. You work hard on that? ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/22 "2002-10-05T19:53:59Z")
Boris, my dear, offering me dirty pictures to look at as some kind of comfort is like offering some ice cream to someone who works at 31 Flavors. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/23 "2002-10-05T19:58:36Z")
Elvis: Listen, I had to slap you down once already for your continued attacks on me because I’m Canadian, and therefore apparently don’t have a right to an opinion on American subjects. Time for you to wake up and look around - this is an INTERNATIONAL community on the Straight Dope. And American policies affect all of us. We have a right to speak, without snotty people like you constantly haranguing us. Have you noticed how many Europeans on this board are on your side regarding Bush? I haven’t seen you attacking them for their lack of American credentials. Therefore, I must assume that this is just another form of ad-hominem attack, leveled at me not because I’m Canadian, but because you don’t like my opinions and don’t have substantive rebuttals to what I’m saying. To answer your question, my understanding was that in this case Chretien actually tried to do something right. Canada was advocating military action, and had pledged 1500 soldiers to go to Rwanda. The issue eventually died in the security council, by all accounts largely due to the protestations of Madelaine Albright. > [@](#): > > Canada’s Stephen Lewis launched a stinging rebuke against U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and the Roman Catholic Church yesterday after the United States and the Vatican played down a report that condemns their role – along with France, Belgium and the Anglican Church – in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. > Saying the West chose to ignore “one of the great calamities of our age,” Mr. Lewis, who helped write the report, singled out Ms. Albright for what he called a determined effort to stop any international attempt to end the genocide in its early days. Ms. Albright was then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. > > “Personally speaking, I don’t know how Madeleine Albright lives with it,” he told a news conference at the UN. > > “They made a decision to do nothing,” he said later in an interview with The Globe and Mail. “Madeleine Albright single-handedly prevented the Security Council from beefing up the mission in Rwanda.” > > He called the Clinton administration’s actions in the spring of 1994 “an almost incomprehensible scar of shame on American foreign policy.” Ms. Albright’s own history as a refugee in war-torn Europe, he said, “makes it all the more inexplicable to me.” See? Even Canadian officials sometimes have a right to speak about American policies. Oh, and he’s no right-wing nutbar - Stephen Lewis was Canada’s Ambassador to the U.N., deputy director of UNICEF, and is now the U.N. special envoy to Africa. Now go away and play nicely with your friends. It’s a lovely fall day outside. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/24 "2002-10-05T20:07:42Z")
**Sam** , your attempt to pin the blame for Rwanda on Bill Clinton is the most puerile drivel you have ever slobbered onto a page! Africa is a basket case of snakes, horror and disease. If ever there was a situation to drive good men to despair, it is Africa. American intervention is about the only calamity they have escaped. At least in Bosnia there are roads, infrastructures, radio stations, etc. For the first time in memory, American soldiers were sent to protect the helpless, and I, for one, applaud the effort. Where where you planning on landing these troops? Nigeria? Planning on parachuting them into the Godforsaken bush without logisitical support? They would have been swamped immediatley by the starving and desperate who would have sold thier children for a days worth of Meals Ready to Eat. He had the courage to do what he could, against backstabbing opposition. Did I miss something in the news reports, something about Canadians boldly launching thier soldiers into Malaria World? A disgraceful display, **Sam**. Shame, sir! Shame! ---
**Author:** ![CyberPundit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/76d3ee/32.png) [@CyberPundit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CyberPundit)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/25 "2002-10-05T20:49:57Z")
I don’t think it’s wrong to blame the US for not doing more in Rwanda, especially if the statements by Stephen Lewis above are correct. It is silly, however, to blame Clinton specifically since he was more or less following a long-standing bipartisan consensus. The GOP would have been all over him if he had sent American troops especially if some of them were killed. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/26 "2002-10-05T20:51:05Z")
What the hell are you on about? Canadians were FURIOUS with the U.S. over this. Did you see the quote above from Stephen Lewis? As for Canada and our ‘boldness’, when it comes to peacekeeping Canada holds a backseat to NO ONE. We provide more peacekeeping troops per capita than any other country in the world. In fact, Canada has sent troops on more peacekeeping missions than anyone in the world. > [@](#): > > Although many nations including the US and France originally declared they would contribute troops to the operation in Rwanda, **no country other than Canada actually placed forces under the MNF (Multinational Force) commander**. Despite taking the lead, Canada could not convince others to follow, and could do little itself to fill the void because at that time Canada was also supporting missions in Bosnia, Croatia and Haiti. [http://www.edu.pe.ca/montaguehigh/grass/socialstudies/peacekeeping/missions.htm](http://www.edu.pe.ca/montaguehigh/grass/socialstudies/peacekeeping/missions.htm) > [@](#): > > Did I miss something in the news reports, something about Canadians boldly launching thier soldiers into Malaria World? Well yes, I guess you did. Allow me to quote from the New York Times: > [@](#): > > UNITED NATIONS – Canada has volunteered to lead an > international force into eastern Zaire to bring food and protection to > more than a million refugees displaced by fighting, U.N. officials said > Tuesday. > > The mission envisioned by Canada would include 10,000 to 15,000 > ground troops from about a dozen nations, including the United States, > who would protect aid convoys intended to avert an impending > catastrophe of starvation and disease. > > But an official announcement in Ottawa of Canada’s plan was canceled at > the last minute Tuesday when the Clinton administration did not, as > expected, approve the plan after a high-level meeting at the White House. Cite: [http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/canadian.htm](http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/canadian.htm) For shame, indeed. You should learn more about the issues before telling me that I’m disgraceful or shameful. Shame on you. You seem to think that the Rwanda situation was just out of the control of the U.S. or the U.N. To the contrary, part of the reason for the genocide was that the Tutsi people were PROMISED military protection by the U.S. and the U.N. Those commitments were reneged on. Canada, much to its credit, was screaming about as loudly as is possible that a disaster was about to unfold. To the shame of the United States, the mission was primarily thwarted by Madelaine Albright. Oh, and guess who agrees with me that the Clinton administration shares much of the blame for what happened in Rwanda? Bill Clinton does. This is what he said in 1998: > [@](#): > > “We in the United States and the world community did not do as much as we could have and should have done to try to limit what occurred in Rwanda in 1994,” the president told half a dozen people here who lost parents, siblings and children during three months of ethnic mass killing that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. > > After listening to the victims’ stories of hiding among blood-soaked corpses, of being sliced with machetes, and of watching hundreds die, Clinton said in a later speech that “we cannot change the past,” but that nations should learn from it. > … > In April 1994, the United States decided to take no action in Rwanda, fearing the risks outweighed the potential rewards. The decision was codified in a presidential directive, signed by Clinton the following month, which limited American participation in international peacekeeping operations. > > And in those months, while the massacres were raging, the Clinton administration successfully argued against a U.N. effort that, in retrospect, might have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, according to U.N. officers, former administration officials and human-rights advocates. Cite: [Clinton says the U.S. and the world failed Rwandans](http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/rwaclint.htm) - New York Times, 1998 **ElvisL1ves:** Happy now? We’ve brought Canada into the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/27 "2002-10-05T20:51:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by manhattan \* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by David Simmons_\*\* > > Politics is the art of the possible. How much increase in taxes and possible US casulaties would you have tolerated in order to save lives in Rwanda, Sam? > > > > It was eminently doable at a relatively low cost in both dollars and U.S. lives. Clinton knows this – when I saw him he described missing the signals in Rwanda as one of his biggest regrets. \*\* Anything is “eminently doable at a relatively low cost” in the abstract. I was going to add to my original post, the question of where our base of operations and resupply would be for such an operation, but **elucidator** has done it for me. How many troops would it have taken? How long does it take to move that size force from wherever they are to central Africa? Would they have gone in “preemptively” or only after the killing started? _I.e._ would the troops have gone into a relatively peaceful situation to maintain order, or into a civil war that had already begun in order to impose order? Were operational plans all prepared for such an operation, or would the military staff have had to burn the midnight oil, and how long would the planning take? How long to assemble the necessary transport and supplies? And, or course, how would we have decided that the mission had been accomplished and we could leave? I don’t have much opportunity to see Bill, if you do then you are one up, at least. When you saw him did he mention whether he had run a military intervention past the Joint Chiefs? Or ditto with any Congressional leaders? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/28 "2002-10-05T20:54:20Z")
**CyberPundit:** That is a very valid criticism. In fact, in one of the Presidential debates I seem to remember that George Bush said that he would have done the same thing in Rwanda as Clinton did. And guaranteed, the Republicans would have climbed all over the Clinton administration. There is plenty of blame to go around. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/29 "2002-10-05T20:55:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Stoid \* > \*\*Boris, my dear, offering me dirty pictures to look at as some kind of comfort is like offering some ice cream to someone who works at 31 Flavors. \*\* Well, sure, but not many pictures of nekkid Texans, 'cause we’re a shy and self-effacing lot, by and large. Or, as the virgin cowboy said “I’m a stranger to these parts, ma’am.” The other punch line is “Yeah, but you picked the _ugly_ one!” ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/30 "2002-10-05T20:57:50Z")
Do you know how many troops were needed in Rwanda? ONE DIVISION. That’s all. Canada was willing to lead it. Canada was prepared to provide a disproportionate number of troops. It would have been a UN operation, so the U.S. would have only have had to provide maybe a couple of thousand troops. A drop in the bucket. Remember, they weren’t invading a country, or defending against armored divisions. They were supposed to protect frightened men, women, and children against mobs armed with machetes and picks. The cost of the operation would have been trivial. ---
**Author:** ![jacksen9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jacksen9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacksen9)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/31 "2002-10-05T21:52:46Z")
COOL BEANS! The speech is on CSPAN now. 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![jacksen9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jacksen9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacksen9)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/32 "2002-10-05T22:48:59Z")
Superb speech. Inspirational message. I think I actually miss Bill Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/33 "2002-10-06T03:36:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*Do you know how many troops were needed in Rwanda? ONE DIVISION. That’s all. Canada was willing to lead it. Canada was prepared to provide a disproportionate number of troops. It would have been a UN operation, so the U.S. would have only have had to provide maybe a couple of thousand troops. A drop in the bucket. > > Remember, they weren’t invading a country, or defending against armored divisions. They were supposed to protect frightened men, women, and children against mobs armed with machetes and picks. The cost of the operation would have been trivial. \*\* Sure. If you say so it must be true. By the way, in the dash across Germany at the end of WWII the 2[sup]nd[/sup] Armored division occupied about 70 miles of road according to historian Cornelius Ryan in _The Last Battle_ ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/34 "2002-10-06T03:54:35Z")
What’s your point? My comment about needing one division is not conjecture on my part - it was the Canadian plan of action. I posted cites to it. From what I can tell, it was about right. Like I said, they were keeping the peace from a mob, not fighting an army. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/35 "2002-10-06T03:54:35Z")
What’s your point? My comment about needing one division is not conjecture on my part - it was the Canadian plan of action. I posted cites to it. From what I can tell, it was about right. Like I said, they were keeping the peace from a mob, not fighting an army. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/36 "2002-10-06T04:13:42Z")
The dodging and obfuscation from Clinton fans is amazing. The screwup in Rwanda is a matter of public record. Partisan politics at its very worst; a Clinton or Bush fan is little different from a fan of a handsome quarterback, all drooling adoration and no brains. Clinton talks a good game. As President, he did almost nothing particularly impressive. He’s a smart man but a moral coward of the first order (Four words that prove his cowardice: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell) whose only interest was acquiring and exercising personal power. He betrayed pretty much every interest that got him elected, coasted, and solved not a single problem, and yet people seem to think he was some sort of leader. Amazing. Bush is a crappy President too, but for different reasons. I can’t believe any intelligent person would be fooled by either, but some people are suckers for a nice suit and a frowny face. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/37 "2002-10-06T04:14:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*What’s your point? > > My comment about needing one division is not conjecture on my part - it was the Canadian plan of action. I posted cites to it. From what I can tell, it was about right. Like I said, they were keeping the peace from a mob, not fighting an army. \*\* My point was that a division is a large unit that requires a lot of logistics. Several people here seem to be unaware of that. “We only needed to send a division” sounds so simple that any child could do it. If the Canadians had a plan of action and it was so simple and inexpensive why didn’t they do the job? Surely even Clinton would have helped them get UN support. This whole thing about Rwanda is a result of your hijack post which, as **RedFury** noted, criticized Clinton for intervening in Serbia and not intervening in Rwanda. It sounded like an implication that Clinton shouldn’t have made that particular speech because he didn’t jump into Rwanda. Quote: _“Let’s also remember that his own administration went against the security council to intervene in Serbia. And his administration disgracefully left 800,000 people in Rwanda to be hacked to death with machetes and picks. I’m still shocked that that disaster didn’t leave more of a taint on the Clinton administration.”_ So what was the point of this off topic comment? ---
**Author:** ![jacksen9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jacksen9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacksen9)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/38 "2002-10-06T12:11:22Z")
> [@](#): > > RickJay > Bush is a crappy President too, but for different reasons. I can’t believe any intelligent person would be fooled by either, but some people are suckers for a nice suit and a frowny face. Fooled? I wouldn’t characterize my feelings for the person that holds this office this way. I have to say that I am a “fan”. I see the flaws that are most obvious. However, I respect the efforts and sacrifices that are made by those that are elected to serve. Each of these men bring both strengths and weaknesses to the office. This is fact. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/39 "2002-10-06T14:44:28Z")
Can we get off the Rwanda red herring? Clinton sent troops to Haiti, the Republicans screamed bloody murder. Clinton sent troops to the Balkans, Republicans screamed bloody murder. Clinton fired missiles at Osama bin Laden, Republicans screamed “Wag the dog!” Now how do you suppose Republicans (then the majority in both houses of Congress) would have reacted if Clinton had sent troops to Rwanda? Politics is indeed the art of the possible. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2002, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888/40 "2002-10-06T14:49:52Z")
My error on one point. In '94, the Democrats still hald the House (barely). It was an election year, and Democrats were rightly nervous. (You remember the “Contract with America.”) Clinton would have had no support from either Republicans in Congress or from Democrats trying to hang onto their seats. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clintons-speech-in-britain-what-did-you-think/130888.md?page=3)