Why not point out that US rules were already as required by international law on not targeting civilian areas - but that this would make civilian areas a safe haven for a retreating enemy as where the safe haven "begins" becomes a combat commander vs media war.
As cluster bombs are an alternative to 'carpet bombing', I'd have thought that most would prefer the reduction in force.
As it is illegal to conduct any attacks against civilian areas, per se, per the International Laws of War and treaties we have signed and ratified, why the amendment?
It is a violation of the Laws of War to place military targets near civilians - but why discuss this if the point is to smear Hillary.
Obviously munitions are used in civilian areas against the enemy if the enemy retreats into those areas - but the Feinstein bill did not allow our troops to do other than grant the enemy safe haven against cluster munition if they retreated into a civilian area,
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r109:3:./temp/~r109TgsT6m::Feinstein (Sen Leahy co-sponsor) Amdt. No. 4882 (70 votes opposed including Clinton, Biden, Dodd, Schumer)
S.Amdt. 4882 to H.R. 5631
SA 4882. Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. LEAHY) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill H.R. 5631, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes; as follows:
At the end of title VIII, add the following:
Sec. 8109. No funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act my be obligated or expended to acquire, utilize, sell, or transfer any cluster munition unless the rules of engagement applicable to the cluster munition ensure that the cluster munition will not be used in or near any concentrated population of civilians, whether permanent or temporary, including inhabited parts of cities or villages, camps or columns of refugees or evacuees, or camps or groups of nomads.