More Genocide we can all ignore ...

[MrDave]

http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=23237

-------------------------------------

This morning the news was that the White House preferred to take a diplomatic approach.

Funny how every time this happens the chant of "Never Again" is hear - just yesterday even from the 10 year anniversary in Rwanda. But here we go again - ingoring this practice when it could be handled with 1/100 of the force in Iraq.

-------------------------------------

Mounting Concern Over Humanitarian Crisis in Darfur

Jim Lobe


WASHINGTON, D.C., Apr 8 (IPS) - Pressure on Sudan's government to cease military activities in the western state of Darfur and open the region to relief shipments for hundreds of thousands of displaced people has grown sharply in recent days, with strong statements issued by both the White House and United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan.

On Wednesday (Apr. 7), Annan suggested that he would push for an armed intervention by international forces if humanitarian workers and human rights observers were not "given full access to the region, and to the victims, without further delay".

"If that is denied, the international community must be prepared to take swift and appropriate action," he said, adding that this would involve "a continuum of steps which may include military action".

United States President George Bush also released a statement Wednesday demanding that the Sudanese government "immediately stop local militias from committing atrocities against the local population ...and provide unrestricted access to humanitarian aid agencies".

He accused Khartoum of complicity in human rights "atrocities" that have displaced about a million civilians over the past year - and said his administration would move toward reestablishing normal ties with Sudan only after humanitarian access in Darfur was assured.

[advantage2000]

Everyone knows that Republicans don't concern themselves with the problems of "black" people. Those countries in Africa have no oil to offer, so in their eyes, they don't count. :cry:

(Jeez, it hurt to even type that)

[MrDave]

Everyone knows that Republicans don't concern themselves with the problems of "black" people. Those countries in Africa have no oil to offer, so in their eyes, they don't count. :cry:

(Jeez, it hurt to even type that)

That doesn't explain why Clinton and the UN ignored the Genocide 10 years ago.

Pisses me off.

[Veuve-Cliquot]

I just hate that whenever we invade a country (Iraq), politicians (both Republican and Democrat) have to come up with some bogus "humanitarian" excuse for it.

"We're really HELPING the Iraqi people. They're so GLAD we're there!!!"

Face it, the two major reasons we are in Iraq are because (A) We're ANGRY (post 9/11), and (B)We're SCARED. (There are a host of other issues, but they're mainly hypothetical at this point.)

We are an extraordinarily complacent, isolationist country, and have been for a long, long time. But we only actually go to war (at least in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and the Middle East) if we're SCARED and ANGRY. To couch it in any other humanitarian terms may make some people feel better about it, but it's simply not true.

Republican in the White House or Democrat in the White House, we never would go into Africa to stop ethnic genocide, because we simply don't care enough to do it. We're not SCARED of them, and we're not ANGRY at them. Sound callous? Yup. But that's life in America.

[tigress2b]

I just hate that whenever we invade a country (Iraq), politicians (both Republican and Democrat) have to come up with some bogus "humanitarian" excuse for it.

"We're really HELPING the Iraqi people. They're so GLAD we're there!!!"

Face it, the two major reasons we are in Iraq are because (A) We're ANGRY (post 9/11), and (B)We're SCARED. (There are a host of other issues, but they're mainly hypothetical at this point.)

We are an extraordinarily complacent, isolationist country, and have been for a long, long time. But we only actually go to war (at least in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and the Middle East) if we're SCARED and ANGRY. To couch it in any other humanitarian terms may make some people feel better about it, but it's simply not true.

Republican in the White House or Democrat in the White House, we never would go into Africa to stop ethnic genocide, because we simply don't care enough to do it. We're not SCARED of them, and we're not ANGRY at them. Sound callous? Yup. But that's life in America.

WOW!!! O knew I liked your sense of humor but your political views are even more intriguing

And Mr Dave you're your right that doesn't explain it all but advantage is making a still valid point, it just isnt limited to political party choice but more about the next election and as V-C so profoundly stated (Im paraphrasing here) "Show me the money" okay it said Angry and Scared but money always plays a huge roll. It is only human to fear those with more resources so to speak.


:sherlock:

[MrDave]

I agree. I can't say I know all of the political reasons, but after WWII, Cambodia, Serbia, and Rwanda, I just get sick to my stomach when I hear the "Never Again" slogan because I know it is crap. The recent events just show the hypocracy better than I could say, with the large presentations on Rwanda and Clinton and the UN apologizing for not acting and the same thing happening again.

I really hope something is done. Screw the Bush administration if they don't want to help. At least it sounds like the UN is getting ready to try and take some action.

Genocide is probably the worst crime against humanity that the world faces, and unless the world starts to react and prevent this from happening it will just happen again and again and soon another 6 million people will be gassed to death while the world debates if it is in their interest to do something.

It really discusts me. Especially in Rwanda where any show of opposition could have stopped the lightly armed criminals.

[LastLaugh]

Rwanda was a disgrace to the United States and the UN . Clinton's failure to act really :mad2: me off. Both the UN and U.S. were afraid of another Somalia. But Rwanda was not Somilia, The commander of the UN military mission said he could control the situation with 5,000 troops. Besides the military planning in Somalia was bad from the start.
At least in Sudan the UN is willing to act even if the U.S. isn't.