Sudan

[RobinsontoDuncan]

I want to know why we are allowing an actual genocide in Darfur with little or no action. The entire world community is guilty of equivocation on this issue, and i think Bush, considering his justification for iraq, ought to intervene. Here is an actuall isntance where his intervention/ war mongering would be a positive, 5 million people are in concentration camps and 90,000 are going to die this summer alone from starvation.

Plus there is oil in sudan, just like Iraq, and there is a large group of persecuted christians there. i mean that gets the neocons and the religious right on board, i swear to god i don't undertsand republicans, Collin Powell declared this a genocide and we havent even created sanctions? WTF?

[knownalien]

because we are a nation of hypocrits. Actually, I can answer your question, but I dare not utter it aloud.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

because it's black people that are dying, there's your answer, who gives a damn about black africans right?

Americans are pathetic.

[knownalien]

because it's black people that are dying, there's your answer, who gives a damn about black africans right?

Americans are pathetic.
that's true too. but there is another piece to the puzzle.

[desflood]

There's nobody left to send. The military is stretched as thin as it will go.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

there are enought to send into Iran though right?

BTW incase you didn't know there are 1,800 american troops forward deployed in Djibojti that are only a hop skip and a wink away from Sudan, we could always send them.

[ChumpDumper]

Tell them a white woman is in trouble. It's amazing the time and money spent and bitching and gnashing of teeth over one brain dead woman while no one even acknowleges the rape and slaughter of tens of thousands.

[Guru of Nothing]

Americans are pathetic.

That's a pathetic statement.

Since you insist upon categorizing people by their nationality, name one nation Americans ought to emulate.

Testify or obfuscate lawyer - the choice is your's.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

America certainly deserves blame for the Sudan situation, but then again so do all the chickenshits up at the UN.

You want to know why the US, France, Germany, Kofi, etc. don't want to help? Because it's a desert nation with nothing for any of them to gain (their view, not mine).

It's really pathetic though. The UN in all their righteousness have been a bunch of pussies about even bringing it up, and our Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle have also been asleep at the wheel.

[Jekka]

Right fucking on AHF.

~Manny

[ChumpDumper]

What pisses me off the most is that no one in power anywhere is willing to call it a genocide, because that would require specific action everyone agreed to take. Those being raped and slaughtered are being denied help over one fucking word.

Has Mel Gibson written about this?

[timvp]

Good luck.

The truth is the rest of the world will continue to look the other way in hopes that they kill each other off.

People would rather put their life on the line to save an endangered salamander than to help save black Africans.

[Clandestino]

because we are a nation of hypocrits. Actually, I can answer your question, but I dare not utter it aloud.

are you the idiot from spursreport?

[Drachen]

are you the idiot from spursreport?

I dont think so, knownalien (as far as I have seen) doesnt hesitate to put forth conspiracy ideas. Also, why wouldnt he just name himself Knownalien???

I am Drachen on both sites, no need to hide.

[Kori Ellis]

why wouldnt he just name himself Knownalien???

The Knownalien name was already taken here by someone mocking knownalien from SpursReport. We are rendering that.

[Drachen]

Alright my bad.

[Kori Ellis]

I didn't say he was the knownalien from SR. :) I just said that's the reason that he couldn't use that name. Maybe he is, or maybe he isn't.

Or maybe this is just a conspiracy. ;)

[Clandestino]

i was just curious because the ka from sr banned me several times bc he couldn't take the heat.

that is what i like about this site. the mods don't go crazy with their power...

[RobinsontoDuncan]

That's a pathetic statement.

Since you insist upon categorizing people by their nationality, name one nation Americans ought to emulate.

Testify or obfuscate lawyer - the choice is your's.

Obfuscate? You want me to make it unclear? Britian. Tony Blair and the British people have long called the atrocities in Sudan a genocide, and are going to be active participants in the UN peacekeeping operation, if it ever happens, it isn't right now and here's why: (after the next quote b/c this is more a response to the _allas traitor than you're stupid question guru)



America certainly deserves blame for the Sudan situation, but then again so do all the chickenshits up at the UN.

You want to know why the US, France, Germany, Kofi, etc. don't want to help? Because it's a desert nation with nothing for any of them to gain (their view, not mine).

It's really pathetic though. The UN in all their righteousness have been a bunch of pussies about even bringing it up, and our Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle have also been asleep at the wheel.

The UN, specifically France and Britian, have been calling for an ICC (oh i forgot, you have to educate these hillbillies) that's the International Criminal Court, in the Hauge, to declare the atrocities in Darfur a genocide, currently the UN has recognized that the regime in Sudan is guilty of commiting "acts of genocidal intent" which demands an ICC investigation, once that has been determined, a Chapter VII peacekeeping operation is put in place, soverignty in Sudan dissolves, and the UN forcibly ends the situation in Darfur.

Guess who is precluding the neccesary ICC investigation? come on, guess.....The Bush administartion? Yes AHF right on the money, it is the Bush administartion, they are so worried about giving the ICC legitimacy (they are worried it will go after Kissinger for all of those atrocitied in Cambodia and Laos (landminds 100,000 of them)) that they have insisited on vetoing any proposal to use the ICC. Thousands of christians starving..... Henry Kissinger...... Hmmmm... I think i will protect Henry Kissinger.

But wait it gets better, France, who just re-submitted a proposal to launch an ICC investigation said that nations like the US (Clinton signed the treaty that created the ICC, Bush took us out of it) that are not memebers of the court, will not be prosecuted. What did the administartion say..... come on AHF I bet you can guess... Yes they did say i don't give a flying fuck we're gonna veto it anyway.

So you see, Bush really doesn't beilive in all this spread democracy, value of life, rightwing religious BULL SHIT, hell no those are vote getters.

So while we lazy Americans sit here and point the finger at the rest of the world, 90,000 fucking people are starving, 10,000 die every month, the children born of the raped women that the Janjaweed brutilized before their families, the bombs falling of Darfurian villages, the next fucking holocaust.... well it keeps on going, and going, and going...... when are we going to do anything about it?

I remember all the NeoCons who hated clinton because he sent us to Kosovo and Bosnia to stop the genocide there, then they all rejoice at the toppling of Suddam Hussein, but stand and watch idle while 5 million people are dieing in a concentartion camp?

[Clandestino]

the U.S. doesn't want to be part of the ICC to protect our troops... why do you want some other country to be able to punish our troops?

[Solid D]

This article is from last year but it gives some insight to the Arab "ethnic cleansing" in Sudan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16001-2004Jun29.html

'We Want to Make a Light Baby'
Arab Militiamen in Sudan Said to Use Rape as Weapon of Ethnic Cleansing

By Emily Wax
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, June 30, 2004; Page A01

GENEINA, Sudan, June 29 -- At first light on Sunday, three young women walked into a scrubby field just outside their refugee camp in West Darfur. They had gone out to collect straw for their family's donkeys. They recalled thinking that the Arab militiamen who were attacking African tribes at night would still be asleep. But six men grabbed them, yelling Arabic slurs such as "zurga" and "abid," meaning "black" and "slave." Then the men raped them, beat them and left them on the ground, they said.

"They grabbed my donkey and my straw and said, 'Black girl, you are too dark. You are like a dog. We want to make a light baby,' " said Sawela Suliman, 22, showing slashes from where a whip had struck her thighs as her father held up a police and health report with details of the attack. "They said, 'You get out of this area and leave the child when it's made.' "


A mother in a village in Darfur warns her daughter not to leave the schoolhouse where other women are hiding from the militiamen. (Emily Wax - The Washington Post)

Suliman's father, a tall, proud man dressed in a flowing white robe, cried as she described the rape. It was not an isolated incident, according to human rights officials and aid workers in this region of western Sudan, where 1.2 million Africans have been driven from their lands by government-backed Arab militias, tribal fighters known as Janjaweed.

Interviews with two dozen women at camps, schools and health centers in two provincial capitals in Darfur yielded consistent reports that the Janjaweed were carrying out waves of attacks targeting African women. The victims and others said the rapes seemed to be a systematic campaign to humiliate the women, their husbands and fathers, and to weaken tribal ethnic lines. In Sudan, as in many Arab cultures, a child's ethnicity is attached to the ethnicity of the father.

"The pattern is so clear because they are doing it in such a massive way and always saying the same thing," said an international aid worker who is involved in health care. She and other international aid officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they feared reprisals or delays of permits that might hamper their operations.

She showed a list of victims from Rokero, a town outside of Jebel Marra in central Darfur where 400 women said they were raped by the Janjaweed. "It's systematic," the aid worker said. "Everyone knows how the father carries the lineage in the culture. They want more Arab babies to take the land. The scary thing is that I don't think we realize the extent of how widespread this is yet."

Another international aid worker, a high-ranking official, said: "These rapes are built on tribal tensions and orchestrated to create a dynamic where the African tribal groups are destroyed. It's hard to believe that they tell them they want to make Arab babies, but it's true. It's systematic, and these cases are what made me believe that it is part of ethnic cleansing and that they are doing it in a massive way."

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell flew to the capital, Khartoum, on Tuesday to pressure the government to take steps to ease the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. U.S. officials said Powell may threaten to seek action by the United Nations if the Sudanese government blocks aid and continues supporting the Janjaweed. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan is due to arrive on Khartoum this week.

The crisis in Darfur is a result of long-simmering ethnic tensions between nomadic cattle and camel herders, who view themselves as Arabs, and the more sedentary farmers, who see their ancestry as African. In February 2003, activists from three of Darfur's African tribes started a rebellion against the government, which is dominated by an Arab elite.

Riding on horseback and camel, the Janjaweed, many of them teenagers or young adults, burned villages, stole and destroyed grain supplies and animals and raped women, according to refugees and U.N. and human rights investigators. The government used helicopter gunships and aging Russian planes to bomb the area, the U.N. and human rights representatives said. The U.S. government has said it is investigating the killings of an estimated 30,000 people in Darfur and the displacement of the more than 1 million people from their tribal lands to determine whether the violence should be classified as genocide.

The New York-based organization Human Rights Watch said in a June 22 report that it investigated "the use of rape by both Janjaweed and Sudanese soldiers against women from the three African ethnic groups targeted in the 'ethnic cleansing' campaign in Darfur." It added, "The rapes are often accompanied by dehumanizing epithets, stressing the ethnic nature of the joint government-Janjaweed campaign. The rapists use the terms 'slaves' and 'black slaves' to refer to the women, who are mostly from the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa ethnic groups."

Despite a stigma among tribal groups in Sudan against talking about rape, Darfur elders have been allowing and even encouraging their daughters to speak out because of the frequency of the attacks. The women consented to be named in this article.

In El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, about 200 miles east of Geneina, Aisha Arzak Mohammad Adam, 22, described a rape by militiamen. "They said, 'Dog, you have sex with me,' " she said. Adam, who was receiving medical treatment at the Abu Shouk camp, said through a female interpreter that she was raped 10 days ago and has been suffering from stomach cramps and bleeding. "They said, 'The government gave me permission to rape you. This is not your land anymore, abid, go.' "

Nearby, Ramadan Adam Ali, 18, a frail woman, was being examined at the health clinic. She was pregnant from a rape she said took place four months ago. She is a member of the Fur tribe and has African features.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

shit i forgot, security council resolution 15334 (dont qoute me on the number because i'm not 100% positive on that) passed by France and Germany, created the UN PKO in sudan, which has been 6 months away for three years now, because there is only a chapter VI mandate for sudan, the UN has no ability to act rapidly and the Sudanese government keeps stalling for time, twice saying they didn't like the make-up (ethnicity) of the UN pkers army.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

the U.S. doesn't want to be part of the ICC to protect our troops... why do you want some other country to be able to punish our troops?


Did you read my whole speal on nations that aren't members not being prosecuted?

[RobinsontoDuncan]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=10117331

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050328/wl_nm/sudan_darfur_dc_2

all of those cites are brand spanking new, read them if you like they have all of the facts that i have been talking about in this thread

[Clandestino]

Did you read my whole speal on nations that aren't members not being prosecuted?

There is no need for the ICC... that is what the hague already is for. The UN doesn't do shit when they go in to countries except observe. They watched genocides in Bosnia and Kosovo before a US/Britain led NATO took Slobodan out...

[RobinsontoDuncan]

WTF are you talking about, the Hauge is the ICC

[knownalien]

What pisses me off the most is that no one in power anywhere is willing to call it a genocide, because that would require specific action everyone agreed to take. Those being raped and slaughtered are being denied help over one fucking word.

Has Mel Gibson written about this?
actually, the term "genocide" is reserved for another group. And they protect its usage. you bring up a good point. That's why "no one else" is using the term genocide. At the same time, "genocide" would force nations to act. So in essence, hear no evil, see no evil . . . .

[RobinsontoDuncan]

Good luck.

The truth is the rest of the world will continue to look the other way in hopes that they kill each other off.

People would rather put their life on the line to save an endangered salamander than to help save black Africans.


yeah... that sounds about right, I can see the world backing an expedition to protect an endangered species of butterfly, I honestly can.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

actually, the term "genocide" is reserved for another group. And they protect its usage. you bring up a good point. That's why "no one else" is using the term genocide. At the same time, "genocide" would force nations to act. So in essence, hear no evil, see no evil . . . .


Collin Powell, as i previously stated in my first post, has declared the situation is Sudan a genocide, back when he was Sec. State.

[Clandestino]

WTF are you talking about, the Hauge is the ICC

The ICC is only a couple years old. The original Hague tribunal was enough. There is no need for this new ICC.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

well there is no need for it, so let's ignore the genocide in sudan, veto an ivestigation, just to proove our point!

[Clandestino]

the U.S. is screwed if it does something and it is screwed it does nothing. Genocide was being committed in Iraq(many mass graves have been found), but many of you say we shouldn't be there... so, should we be there or not?

Also, why can't the other countries form a coalition and stop the genocide? Does the US have to sign off on everything in the world?

[knownalien]

Collin Powell, as i previously stated in my first post, has declared the situation is Sudan a genocide, back when he was Sec. State.
one person does not an army make. He was one loan voice in the wind and when the administration got tired of him, they dropped his butt. I'll bet that "genocide" comment was part of the reason he was dropped.

[knownalien]

the U.S. is screwed if it does something and it is screwed it does nothing. Genocide was being committed in Iraq(many mass graves have been found), but many of you say we shouldn't be there... so, should we be there or not?



you know, if this is true then it's going to be SO easy to get Sadamm convicted. BUT, that ain't the case. Sadamm has a LOT of dirt on the USA. And we don't want that to get out. Sadamm is still loved by many in his country. Don't fall for all of the propaganda you hear in the USA. You want to harp on mass graves? clearly mass killings bother you, as well they should. Tell me, what do you think we have been doing over there since we went in?? Know the number of civilian deaths?? Probably not, because the Pentagon doesn't believe they are important enough to track. But other international monitors have kept track, and it's ugly. Add this to the dead as a result of sanctions imposed after Gulf War I and you will see "genocidal" numbers.

Aside from the gassing of the Kurds, which the Army War College thinks there is a higher chance Iran did it, tell me what bad Sadamm hussein had done? Please don't say "well, he killed and raped at will!" He was the most "progressive" leader in the middle east. Before we tell how stinky his crap is, we should take a long long look at our own country. Can't "really" say we have any rights anymore. I suspect a few here have no idea what I mean. We have the highest incarceration rate. And we put more prisoners to death than most countries. We also ain't #1 in all of the "good things either. As for a "moral" nation, we have more smut and TV than you could shake a stick at. We have 15/16 year old girls (brittney spears, others) singing songs allegorically about sex and pandering to older men. We have school shootings for no damn reason. We have more people on some type of medication that alters the mind. I could go on and on and on. This country, in theory, could be the greatest. Career politicians have pimped away its spirit for personal gain.
And when we war with someone we talk about giving that country "our democracy." Hey man, take my advice other countries, you DON'T want our version of democracy. In it, only the very rich run the nation.

[Solid D]

the U.S. is screwed if it does something and it is screwed it does nothing. Genocide was being committed in Iraq(many mass graves have been found), but many of you say we shouldn't be there... so, should we be there or not?

Also, why can't the other countries form a coalition and stop the genocide? Does the US have to sign off on everything in the world?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20765-2004Jul1.html

Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sept. 9 that the situation in Darfur constitutes “genocide” by the Sudanese government and Arab militias. Powell, who visited Sudan in early July, said the State Department came to its conclusion after interviews with refugees revealed "consistent and widespread pattern of atrocities committed against non-Arab villagers." His comments, made before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, came a day after the United States circulated a draft U.N. resolution calling for a stronger international security force in Darfur. The House and Senate passed resolutions in July calling the situation in Darfur "genocide" and urged President Bush to seek a U.N. protection force.

The 1948 U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide ( http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm ) requires signatories, including the United States, to prevent and punish genocide. Some in the U.S. government argued that the explicit use of the word genocide might alienate the Sudanese government and limit the United States’s ability to pressure leaders to stop the Janjaweed. Human rights officials counter that the U.S. declaration will draw attention to the crisis and prompt action by the U.N. Security Council.

[Clandestino]

you know, if this is true then it's going to be SO easy to get Sadamm convicted. BUT, that ain't the case. Sadamm has a LOT of dirt on the USA. And we don't want that to get out. Sadamm is still loved by many in his country. Don't fall for all of the propaganda you hear in the USA. You want to harp on mass graves? clearly mass killings bother you, as well they should. Tell me, what do you think we have been doing over there since we went in?? Know the number of civilian deaths?? Probably not, because the Pentagon doesn't believe they are important enough to track. But other international monitors have kept track, and it's ugly. Add this to the dead as a result of sanctions imposed after Gulf War I and you will see "genocidal" numbers.

saddam is not loved by many... none of his people ever loved him. they only feared him... the only people who wanted him back were the ones living the high life...but they too, knew their life could be taken away from them in an instant if saddamm ever thought they could be disloyal.

and reason there were sanctions imposed was because of saddam...the US doesn't just go around and try to impose sanctions on countries...


Aside from the gassing of the Kurds, which the Army War College thinks there is a higher chance Iran did it, tell me what bad Sadamm hussein had done? Please don't say "well, he killed and raped at will!" He was the most "progressive" leader in the middle east. Before we tell how stinky his crap is, we should take a long long look at our own country. Can't "really" say we have any rights anymore. I suspect a few here have no idea what I mean. We have the highest incarceration rate. And we put more prisoners to death than most countries. We also ain't #1 in all of the "good things either. As for a "moral" nation, we have more smut and TV than you could shake a stick at. We have 15/16 year old girls (brittney spears, others) singing songs allegorically about sex and pandering to older men. We have school shootings for no damn reason. We have more people on some type of medication that alters the mind. I could go on and on and on. This country, in theory, could be the greatest. Career politicians have pimped away its spirit for personal gain.
And when we war with someone we talk about giving that country "our democracy." Hey man, take my advice other countries, you DON'T want our version of democracy. In it, only the very rich run the nation.

and if you truly love saddam so much and think he is such a stand up guy why weren't you living in iraq? and if you think the US is so bad why haven't you left yet?

[Clandestino]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20765-2004Jul1.html

Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sept. 9 that the situation in Darfur constitutes “genocide” by the Sudanese government and Arab militias. Powell, who visited Sudan in early July, said the State Department came to its conclusion after interviews with refugees revealed "consistent and widespread pattern of atrocities committed against non-Arab villagers." His comments, made before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, came a day after the United States circulated a draft U.N. resolution calling for a stronger international security force in Darfur. The House and Senate passed resolutions in July calling the situation in Darfur "genocide" and urged President Bush to seek a U.N. protection force.

The 1948 U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide ( http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm ) requires signatories, including the United States, to prevent and punish genocide. Some in the U.S. government argued that the explicit use of the word genocide might alienate the Sudanese government and limit the United States’s ability to pressure leaders to stop the Janjaweed. Human rights officials counter that the U.S. declaration will draw attention to the crisis and prompt action by the U.N. Security Council.

The other countries could go into Sudan by themselves. They don't have to call it genocide. They could go in and call it a peace keeping mission.

[Solid D]

The US is not without sin, however, which nation drafted the UN resolution and called for action via sanctions, etc. against the Arab/Muslim Sudanese govt.? Was it Germany...France....China....GB? The US can do more, but within the confines of the UN - what country has done more?

[RobinsontoDuncan]

jesus, I never wanted this fucking thread to be about Iraq, the only reason i brought it up to, was to establish the precednce of intervention in situations where our "leaders have recognized genocide" or what they call genocide.

Who has done more Solid D? I have to be honest, I don't think anyone has, but really what is 0+0, because the US outside of stating the obvious really has done nothing. The whole world community should be ashamed of itself, i have always maintianed this, but should not the US the self-proclaimed "leader" of the world act? We have no problem toppling one steady, possibly not benign but at least stable government in Iraq yet we allow mass genocide in another nation?

What happened to the Bush doctrine?

[Clandestino]

jesus, I never wanted this fucking thread to be about Iraq, the only reason i brought it up to, was to establish the precednce of intervention in situations where our "leaders have recognized genocide" or what they call genocide.

Who has done more Solid D? I have to be honest, I don't think anyone has, but really what is 0+0, because the US outside of stating the obvious really has done nothing. The whole world community should be ashamed of itself, i have always maintianed this, but should not the US the self-proclaimed "leader" of the world act? We have no problem toppling one steady, possibly not benign but at least stable government in Iraq yet we allow mass genocide in another nation?

What happened to the Bush doctrine?

you can't do everything all at once... the intl community needs to step up in iraq and then we will be free to police more of the world like you want.

[Solid D]

Well, RobinsontoDuncan, the Bush Admin. and the US is in a no-win situation now, with things going so badly with the whole trumping the UN thing with regard to WMD in Iraq. How much do they disregard the UN this time?

It is a slight exagerration to say "0+0" since Powell did go over to the Sudan with Anan and since the US did put forward the resolution for sanctions to the UN.

More tenacity and emphasis should be put forth by the US, to be sure. Particularly on the heels of leaving the 99 to recover the 1 in our own country, so-to-speak, and focusing almost totally on Terry Schiavo. Maybe now is a good time to cowboy up again and do more in the Sudan. I'm not sure how many other UN countries are listening and have the courage to act.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

as long as american companies continue to buy sudanese oil, i wont buy that sanctions bull shit, its always nice to "talk" about imposing sanctions, it is another thing entirely to do something about it.

And again, we have 1,800 troops in Djibojti that we can mobalize and send to sudan within hours, so why are we still doing nothing?

Any peacekeeping operation in Sudan would recieve broad international support, because there has already been an outcry from all of the world community about the atrocities, we just haven't seen anyone step up to the plate. Even at 50, (well a little older but my wife says she's 29) i would be willing to risk my life to go and fight in Sudan, i would relish just the opportunity to do so.

[Clandestino]

as long as american companies continue to buy sudanese oil, i wont buy that sanctions bull shit, its always nice to "talk" about imposing sanctions, it is another thing entirely to do something about it.

And again, we have 1,800 troops in Djibojti that we can mobalize and send to sudan within hours, so why are we still doing nothing?

Any peacekeeping operation in Sudan would recieve broad international support, because there has already been an outcry from all of the world community about the atrocities, we just haven't seen anyone step up to the plate. Even at 50, (well a little older but my wife says she's 29) i would be willing to risk my life to go and fight in Sudan, i would relish just the opportunity to do so.

Why wait? go help protect a village now...

[RobinsontoDuncan]

right, I'll just get on a plane without a gun or any training or anyone to report to or..... dumb ass

this isn't the kind of thing to joke about, there are real people that are dead and going to die by the hundreds of thousands, women are being systematically raped and you crack jokes???

[Clandestino]

right, I'll just get on a plane without a gun or any training or anyone to report to or..... dumb ass

this isn't the kind of thing to joke about, there are real people that are dead and going to die by the hundreds of thousands, women are being systematically raped and you crack jokes???

i'm sure you could be get an AK in the sudan for 50 bux... you could be taught to break it down and fire it in about 5 minutes.. the sights aren't adjustable so you would have to worry about that... you could just live in a village and tell them you would help protect them...

just like the people who become terrorists..they just hop on a plane to pakistan or wherever and say they are willing to help fight.. fighters are always welcome...

[MannyIsGod]

I've learned how likely intelligent conversation is with Clandestion and I think the rest of the forum is catching on.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Aside from the gassing of the Kurds, which the Army War College thinks there is a higher chance Iran did it

My sister just graduated from there, and after talking with her for about two minutes on the phone I'm gonna call bullshit on that one.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

I've learned how likely intelligent conversation is with Clandestion and I think the rest of the forum is catching on.


that's really pathetic though, i bet he laughed in the holocaust musem too.

[Clandestino]

that's really pathetic though, i bet he laughed in the holocaust musem too.

it was only because you started saying your 50 year old ass would go fight for the sudanese... bs talk... did you ever even serve your country when you were young?

[RobinsontoDuncan]

when i was young enough to consider military service, the country was very anti-military, Vietnam had just occured and I was on my way to law school, that doesn't mean that I wouldn't fight now, and I resent your stupidity for suggesting that I was just talking out of my ass, i actually care about those people

[Nbadan]

http://www.looptvandfilm.com/blog/war.330.jpg

[The Ressurrected One]

Need + National interest = legitimate cause for military intervention.
Need + international hand-wringing = tragedy.

[JoeChalupa]

But if Bush is "for life"..isn't that a National interest?

[The Ressurrected One]

But if Bush is "for life"..isn't that a National interest?
Yes, but the President isn't the final authority on such matters. Even with Iraq, he had to build a popular concensus (even if you weren't part of it) before he could intervene militarily.

Face it, there isn't popular support for intervention in Sudan, Rwanda, or any of those other self-destructive pits of inhumanity...and, no, there is no U.S. national interest in the Sudan.

[JoeChalupa]

What was the national interest in Iraq? Oil?
I place human life above oil any day.

There were no WMD or imminent danger.
And now that it's changed to "the liberation of the Iraqi" people why can't we call it the liberation of the Sudan or Rwanda people?
Is it because we don't need a military base there?

[The Ressurrected One]

What was the national interest in Iraq? Oil?
I place human life above oil any day.
Global security is dependent on stability in that region.

There were no WMD or imminent danger.
Well, you're just plain wrong...but, I can see you won't be swayed in your ignorance on that issue so, fine.

And now that it's changed to "the liberation of the Iraqi" people why can't we call it the liberation of the Sudan or Rwanda people?
Hussein's treatment of the Kurds and Shi'ites has always been a major part of the justification for military intervention and, when combined with the near dozen other legitimate reasons for military action against Iraq, it's a bit more than what's going on in Sudan or Rwanda.

Is it because we don't need a military base there?
That's part of it. Yeah.

[JoeChalupa]

It shouldn't be a part of it.

[The Ressurrected One]

It shouldn't be a part of it.
Well, that's a pollyannish view.

[JoeChalupa]

But a view none the less.

[Nbadan]

Yes, but the President isn't the final authority on such matters. Even with Iraq, he had to build a popular concensus (even if you weren't part of it) before he could intervene militarily.

Face it, there isn't popular support for intervention in Sudan, Rwanda, or any of those other self-destructive pits of inhumanity...and, no, there is no U.S. national interest in the Sudan.

Well, actually, there is some oil in Sudan, not as much as in Iraq, but more than there is in ANWAR.

I urge everyone to go see the movie Hotel Rwanda. These people are not animals. Just because they are Africans does not mean that they shouldn't be entitled to the same protection from genocide as Jews or Bosnians. We should all be ashamed.

Both Rwanda and Sudan are perfect examples of the U.N.'s failure to act forcefully when really needed, but then again when it comes to Africa, the U.S. has nothing to be proud of either.

[The Ressurrected One]

Well, actually, there is some oil in Sudan, not as much as in Iraq, but more than there is in ANWAR.
Which only bolsters the position that oil isn't the primary motivating factor for U.S. Military intervention in Iraq.

I urge everyone to go see the movie Hotel Rwanda. These people are not animals. Just because they are Africans does not mean that they shouldn't be entitled to the same protection from genocide as Jews or Bosnians.
Agreed. However, the political, cultural, and logistical realities of intervening militarily are much different than they were in Bosnia or during WWII.

We should all be ashamed.
Starting with Kofi Annan.

Both Rwanda and Sudan are perfect examples of the U.N.'s failure to act forcefully when really needed, but then again when it comes to Africa, the U.S. has nothing to be proud of either.
Agreed on U.N. ineffectiveness however, the U.S. is not the global policeman and shouldn't be faulted for not intervening in the region. The truth of the matter is that Sub-Saharan Africa is the way it is because of the scarcity of resources. Stopping the killing won't put food on the plates or reduce the likelihood that "war lords" will re-emerge, once we've left, and do it all over again. The problem in that part of the world is too much pro-creation and not enough industrialization.

[MannyIsGod]

And I'm sure Europen colonialzation had nothing to do with any of that?

The Western world has a large debt to Africa, and the entire western world refuses to acknowledge anything near that. They simply ignore the attrocities that happen in Africa.

Look, I'm not in support of being the worlds policeman. But it pisses me off to the nth degree when I hear politicians on both sides of the aisle act as though we are and can be when it suits their needs, and only then.

Iraq was about oil. If there had been no oil in Iraq and in the surrounding region we would never have given a rats ass about that corner of the world, so it always comes back to oil Always. You can tie it to terrorism and the security of the United States, but that once again is a result of the perception of the United States in the region, which in turn stems from our actions in the region, which of course were because of threats to the oil supply.

Bush, Clinton and 90 percent of American politicians will trumpet and point out actions around they world they need to stop. We heard it from Clinton about Bosnia after they ignored Rwanda. And now we hear it from Bush about Iraq while they give Sudan token responses.

It's the same with Europe. They are critical of the things we do, yet none of them have the balls to step up to the damn plate when it comes to Sudan, and they were all guilty as well of ignoring Rwanda.

I wonder why I have a cynical view of the world's so called leaders?

[The Ressurrected One]

And I'm sure Europen colonialzation had nothing to do with any of that?
I have no idea, please elaborate.

The Western world has a large debt to Africa, and the entire western world refuses to acknowledge anything near that.
And what debt would that be?

They simply ignore the attrocities that happen in Africa.
It's less painful to ignore the futile. But, speaking of ignorance, how many African countries are actively pursuing a peace in any of those areas?

Look, I'm not in support of being the worlds policeman. But it pisses me off to the nth degree when I hear politicians on both sides of the aisle act as though we are and can be when it suits their needs, and only then.
I would change the end of your last sentence to read, "...suits the national and/or security interests of the United States of America, and only then." and be in perfect agreement with it...except the being pissed off to the nth degree part. I think it is the Executive and Legislative Branches' constitutional duty to act in our country's interests.

Iraq was about oil.
Partly...but, by no means entirely and not for the rhetorical reasons usually stated -- to enrich the oil companies. The U.S. economy and, consequently, the global economy, are largely dependent on petroleum-based trade. It's an unfortunate fact of life and will remain so until a more broad-based alternative is devised or until something takes its place (tech is trying).

If there had been no oil in Iraq and in the surrounding region we would never have given a rats ass about that corner of the world, so it always comes back to oil Always.
That's true. And, there'd be no sheikdoms, no above-standard of living for most in the middle east, etc... The fact remains that Arabia would be much like sub-Saharan Africa and it's tribal genocides had it not been for oil. The oil-dependent world gave life to that region of the globe. Has it been perfect? No. But, who's fault is that? One could blame the poor expansionist policies of the West or; one could blame the back-assward theology of Islamic fundamentalists in a progressively industrialized world. Pick a side -- there is support for both.

You can tie it to terrorism and the security of the United States, but that once again is a result of the perception of the United States in the region, which in turn stems from our actions in the region, which of course were because of threats to the oil supply.
Yep. That doesn't make our presence or actions there any less legitimate. Keep in mind the U.S. has allies in the region and so, not everyone agrees -- in fact, not even a majority of Muslims in the region agree -- that the U.S. and thus, the West, should abandon the Middle East. Far from it, most want us there, they want our culture, or technology, or standard of living. It can be placed on the backs of a very few powerful rulers in the region, who keep their heels firmly on the backs of their respective populations, that the region hasn't joined the 21st century with the rest of the industrialized and "enlightened" world.

Bush, Clinton and 90 percent of American politicians will trumpet and point out actions around they world they need to stop. We heard it from Clinton about Bosnia after they ignored Rwanda. And now we hear it from Bush about Iraq while they give Sudan token responses.
Again, there are complex geo-political issues that differeniate the circumstances. The security of Western European allies in the Bosnia case and our own security (as well as that of the global economy) in the case of the middle east -- however prudent (or imprudent) you believe it was to become so dependent on foreign oil way back when.

As for me, as a Texan, I'd love to see Texas crude go back on the charts...cut the ties to Middle East oil. To hell with them. But, that's a selfish position that would lead to more problems than it would solve.

It's the same with Europe. They are critical of the things we do, yet none of them have the balls to step up to the damn plate when it comes to Sudan, and they were all guilty as well of ignoring Rwanda.
Europe hasn't changed. They've always been good at lip service and never very good as accomplishment.

I wonder why I have a cynical view of the world's so called leaders?
Maybe you don't understand the complexities of being a world leader in today's global society.

[Clandestino]

i don't believe we have a debt to any african nation. african tribes are the ones who sold us the slaves they got from other tribes.

[E20]

Not really, Imperiliasm ring a bell? U.S's big guns against a couple of spears = easy target and easy land to obtain. A little while after US stopped slave trade then Great Britain and other countries ceased to be a part of the slave trade.

[Gerryatrics]

Well, I personally feel that the US has a stake, or should have a stake, in Liberia. Other than that Africa is pretty much in the hands of Europe (especially France) and the UN. If you want to know why I was happy that we went into Iraq without the UN, the mess that is large portions of Africa should give you some pretty big hints. There's no way the US is getting popular support for going into the Sudan, the UN is just a joke when it comes to things like this and I don't really see Europe doing much. I'm sorry to say I don't see any immediate solutions to the Sudan crisis that are likely to happen. While I wouldn't be opposed to the US sending in a MEU with some Army units to back them up, and parking them between the Arab areas and the refugee camps to see if that convinces the Janjaweed to lay low, the international community and the Democratic party would eat the Bush Administration alive.

[Nbadan]

Which only bolsters the position that oil isn't the primary motivating factor for U.S. Military intervention in Iraq.

Maybe, but It also equally bolsters the opinion that the reason the Sudan is in crisis is because it has oil reserves.

[Nbadan]

Starting with Kofi Annan.

Kofi Annan can't force members of the Security Council to act unilaterally, especially when some of the countries in that Security Council may have hidden agendas and ulterior motives. That said, Annan should have battled UN pacification more vigilantly when it comes to Sudan and Rwanda.

[Clandestino]

Well, I personally feel that the US has a stake, or should have a stake, in Liberia. Other than that Africa is pretty much in the hands of Europe (especially France) and the UN. If you want to know why I was happy that we went into Iraq without the UN, the mess that is large portions of Africa should give you some pretty big hints. There's no way the US is getting popular support for going into the Sudan, the UN is just a joke when it comes to things like this and I don't really see Europe doing much. I'm sorry to say I don't see any immediate solutions to the Sudan crisis that are likely to happen. While I wouldn't be opposed to the US sending in a MEU with some Army units to back them up, and parking them between the Arab areas and the refugee camps to see if that convinces the Janjaweed to lay low, the international community and the Democratic party would eat the Bush Administration alive.

the europeans are the reason africa is all fucked up.. they colonized 99% of that country... Mainly, Britain, France, Germany, Belgium and Portugal...

[RobinsontoDuncan]

And what debt would that be?

The debt of colonization and slavery.


It's less painful to ignore the futile. But, speaking of ignorance, how many African countries are actively pursuing a peace in any of those areas?
That you could 1) consider a democide futile shows you aren't to bright, and 2) that you can find a way to ignore it means you aren't a very good human being.


I would change the end of your last sentence to read, "...suits the national and/or security interests of the United States of America, and only then." and be in perfect agreement with it...except the being pissed off to the nth degree part. I think it is the Executive and Legislative Branches' constitutional duty to act in our country's interests.

If this is in any way referencing Iraq, then you really need to get out of your cave more often. Politicans ignored Rawanda, Cambodia, and the Congo until it was to late to do a damn thing, what makes you think there isn't a reason that the second a middle eastern country would, through public sentiment, become a possible target under less severe circumstances?



That's true. And, there'd be no sheikdoms, no above-standard of living for most in the middle east, etc... The fact remains that Arabia would be much like sub-Saharan Africa and it's tribal genocides had it not been for oil. The oil-dependent world gave life to that region of the globe. Has it been perfect? No. But, who's fault is that? One could blame the poor expansionist policies of the West or; one could blame the back-assward theology of Islamic fundamentalists in a progressively industrialized world. Pick a side -- there is support for both.

Ok, so these people live in the desert, they probably aren't that socially developed, and we critize their culture/religion and attempt to dump ours on them (like you) and you wonder why they blow shit up?


Maybe you don't understand the complexities of being a world leader in today's global society

fuck as many people over as you can get away with?


i don't believe we have a debt to any african nation. african tribes are the ones who sold us the slaves they got from other tribes.

Do some reading, history shows us that tribes that didn't attempt to find other tribes to subjugate for the slave trade were wiped out, the African concept of slavery was also far more like what we call indentured servitude, there was no lineage to being a slave and you could eventually work your way back to freedom.


the international community and the Democratic party would eat the Bush Administration alive.

That makes a lot of sense, considering peacekeeping missions are extreamly popular with the American public, 79% Dems & 77% Reps, I'm sure the world community would absoultley hate us for doing something about Sudan. (extreme sarcasm)

[Clandestino]

Do some reading, history shows us that tribes that didn't attempt to find other tribes to subjugate for the slave trade were wiped out, the African concept of slavery was also far more like what we call indentured servitude, there was no lineage to being a slave and you could eventually work your way back to freedom.

i have... maybe you should read about who colonized most of the african nation... who sold us the slaves to begin with. most of the colonizers didn't go into the jungles and bring out slaves... rival tribes captured each other and sold them to us...

and if you believe their version of "slavery" allowed you to eventually buy your way out... haha... what-the-fuck-ever!

[scott]

I know the new Star Wars is coming out, but you guys are going overboard... what is Sudan, a moon of Tatooine?

C'mon guys, the US and UN need to spend their time helping REAL countries, not just ones under threat of the Death Star...