Change Player Size
Watch this video in a new window

Hillary Clinton on Darfur

Hillary Clinton answers the Save Darfur Coalition's questions about her plan to end the genocide in Darfur  
 
Customize

QuickList(0)

23 ratings
Sign in to rate
18,164 views
Want to add to Favorites? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to add to Playlists? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to flag a video? Sign In or Sign Up now!

Statistics & Data

Loading...

Video Responses (1)

Sign in to post a Comment

Text Comments (68)   Options

Loading...
computer241 (1 month ago) Show Hide
+1
Marked as spam
hilllray with out u in obama administration america will be a joke because bama is soft as pillow...so hillary u are a strong weman so hold on to america until america elect a new president
infinitehumanstupid (1 month ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
I agree that the US foreign policy is somewhat hypocritical... US-based companies are supporting Equatorial Guinea, and Angola:n governments that are one of the most corrupt governments in the world. Also the US has been supplying weapons to the new Somali government, which has been engaging in some pretty nasty activities... Morality has nothing to do with foreign policies... Machiavelli's Price is still valid today as it was back then.
Blechmy (3 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
hillary? pure evil!
the US armed and trained the separatist groups in sudan to overthrow the sudanese gov so the US can install its puppet regime, AGAIN to get african oil, it's a man made (USA) conflicts, just like evry other conflicts around the globe

google this:

Darfur? It's the Oil, Stupid. China and US in New Cold War over Africas oil
Comment(s) marked as spam Show
sharonkk1 (6 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Hillary it your turn and I am waiting to see what you can do Its finally time to put up or shut up
mita18 (7 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
well RENTAMOB1..
... firstly moving them somewhere else would be undermining state sovereignty thus classed as intervention, which basically undermines the whole bases of your argument.
...secondly your idea of moving the people into a different country is absolutely preposterous, yes it is possible with troops, as this is on a short term biases, not to mention it being funded. And where would these people go? America you say...ha! no country would facilitate this, it would put a strain on
mita18 (7 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
resources, increase unemployment. Moreover how would these people survive in these different countries? with a lack of qualifications and difficulty speaking the language this would also create long term problems .
mita18 (7 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
.....Thirdly to answer your question yes I have done my homework ... and i understand one of the causes of conflict and absolute poverty is desertification. But the amount of money spent on your ingenious idea of "moving people" there would be a huge opportunity cost. The money could have actually be spent on cultivating land to make it useful. Giving aid to fund supply side policies such as education and training e.c.t.
mita18 (7 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
....Lastly it is true that oil cannot be used as food or drink, but if there was some kind of infrastructure that avoided corruption, then the revenues gained from the oil, would be an injection into the economy, having the multiplier effect, increasing ones marginal propensity to consume thus increasing real GDP per head. (However the likelihood of this point happening i agree is very slim due to the amount of money and planning would be needed to implement this )
mita18 (7 months ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Basically what i`m trying to say is that your argument is both hypercritical and simplistic. Maybe you should take your own advice and do your homework :) love to hear your response xx

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.