Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
During the 1992 Vice Presidential debate, Vice President Dan Quayle said the following:
Quote:
At sometime during these next four years there is going to be a crisis. There will be an international crisis. I can't tell you where it's going to be. I can't even tell you the circumstances, but it will happen. We need a President who has the experience, who has been tested, who has the integrity and qualifications to handle the crisis. The President has been tested. The President has the integrity and the character. The choice is yours. You need to have a President you can trust. Can you really trust Bill Clinton?
Dan Quayle was right. In April-May 1994 nearly 800,000 ethnic Tutsis were slaughtered by the ruling Hutus in Rwanda. The world sat on its heels and did nothing and years later President Bill Clinton expressed shock when a New Yorker article presented the inconvenient and gory facts.
- Samantha Power, "Bystanders to Genocide: Why the United States let the Rwandan Tragedy Happen", The Atlantic Monthly, September 2001.
In the article Power, the current US. Ambassador to the United Nations, says that the Clinton Administration was hesitant to use the "g-word" for fear of being obligated to do something. Also, then U.S. Security Council member Susan Rice (where have we heard that name before?) hinted that the Clintons may have been worried about the effect of any action in Rwanda on the upcoming midterm elections in November 1994.
I wonder what kind of advice Bill got from Hillary.
Last edited by O.C. Ogilvy; 05-12-2015 at 11:42 PM..
What would you have done? Bombed something? US boots on the ground?
I'm not sure what I would have done. The answer probably would have something to be dependent on U.S. interests. U.S. policy on genocide was rather clear at the time - "never again". The real question is whether saving 800,000 Tutsi lives would have been in the U.S.'s best interest.
How do you stop two tribes fighting in remote African villages?
Oh c'mon now. These were civilized people. They had western style governments and everything, including a female prime minister who the Hutus killed. You sound like the 19th century Belgians who colonized the place.
It was a European created problem, and Belgium should've fixed it.
It's a Francophone nation...it's not within our sphere of influence.
You have a point. The Belgians lost ten soldiers in the early stages of the crisis and then asked for U.S. cover for their getting the "hell out of dodge" I am still not sure that making Belgium look good is a valid excuse.
Oh c'mon now. These were civilized people. They had western style governments and everything, including a female prime minister who the Hutus killed. You sound like the 19th century Belgians who colonized the place.
Tutsi was the wealthy Catholic minority who enslaved the Hutus majority, hardly civilized. The country had been engaged in a civil war for a decade.
What advise did Barbara Bush give George Sr. ?
How about Nancy to Ronald?
What purpose does speculation about something thAt happened 20- 30 years ago serve?
What purpose does speculation about something thAt happened 20- 30 years ago serve?
Do you similarly dismiss something that happened in Germany and Poland 70-80 years ago?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.