Dafur, Sudan could be the next Rwanda
 

Re: Dafur, Sudan could be the next Rwanda
 

I posted about the Sudan and it seemed nobody cared.

Sad that the Muslim Arabs are massacring, raping and ethnic cleansing the other residents. It's great that they are on the UN Human Rights Commission. I hear that and their warm embrace of slavery made them top candidates.

-Rudey
--And that is why Europe and the world can hang their heads in shame and shut up.

Edit for the real link. sorry rudey.

The UN has been saying it forever. They've gone quite because the Sudan government has threaten to pull out of the peace negotiations in the Southern region. HRW and Amnesty is also making a lot of noise about it.

Your right, if the world doesn't do anything, then nobody has the right to say they are for human rights and democracy. And I mean everybody.

The U.S. is making a half-assed effort at bringing this to world wide attention, and even at that, the U.S. is doing far more than most.

Looks like another full blown genocide with no one, who can bring change, doing anything about it.:(

This would have been the perfect time for the African Union to prove themselves. It is in their charter to go in and stop the massacre. Of course, they will not and as I've said all along the AU is nothing but a new name for the OAU.

This is why the entire UN should be disregarded as a "peace keeping entity". That's only going to work if your country is European or you are in a country that has valuable resources.

Well the UN doesn't have troops. Give them a standing army if you want them to intervene a lot . . . .

Really not much of a point. When the UN did have a military force in Rwanda, Bosnia, etc. they were under such horrible rules of engagement that their effectiveness was either completely eliminated or severely crippled.

Yeah, godforbid your military forces killed someone . ..

Which tell you that they are as effective as their member would like them to be. It is the nation's in the UN, not the UN itself that set out the rules of engagement through the Security Council. In Rwanda, they did not have the authority to fight back because of the Security Counci resolution.

Ineffective is ineffective. It doesn't matter how they get to that point. The point is that they are there. It's just disappointing to a lot of us that things like this can go on in the world while there are those that could fairly easily work to stop it.

What is the French army up to these days?

Congo, Haiti, Liberia, Afghanistan, Bosnia . . .

http://www.binarystorage.net/clients...cs/frenchy.jpg

The UN tends not to involve itself in civil wars unless and until it becomes a state versus state conflict. Darfur is a war between neighboring people of the same race, religion, and cultural background. The UN figures, correctly perhaps, that is for local people to resolve. If the AU was stronger and less corrupt, then it could answer the call effectively. The best case scenario would be for that organization to take control of the situation - not the UN. Instead, the AU is a laughing stock.

Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?
 

Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?

--- the answer, highlighted in this week's column: http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

Saddam's barbaric rape rooms, chemical attacks and torture — those, liberals could live with. But now they want us to send troops to Darfur, a country from which no one anticipates terrorism anytime in the next millennium. If you're looking for a good definition of "no imminent threat," Darfur is it. The climate change "emergency," set to start taking effect sometime during the next century, is a more imminent threat to the United States than Darfur.

These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever — and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?

This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest. But liberals want our boys to go fight scimitar-wielding dervishes. While the Democrats hold pointless hearings into what George Bush had for breakfast, Republicans should pass a law prohibiting liberals from mentioning Darfur until Horace Mann and Dalton are prepared to put up a battalion.