sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7205|Argentina
Reading about this conflict, I came up with these questions:
1-Isn't this a Genocide?  Aren't the Janjaweed making an ethnic cleansing supported by the government of Sudan?
2-Why are Russia and China using their vetoes and stopping the UN Securicty Council Resolutions and sanctions?
3-When Human life is considered worthless, like in this case, what hope is there?
4-After all its failures, isn't it time to change the way the UN works?
5-What would you do?

More than two million people are living in camps after fleeing almost four years of fighting in the region.

BBC wrote:

How did the conflict start?
The conflict began in the arid and impoverished region early in 2003 after a rebel group began attacking government targets, saying the region was being neglected by Khartoum.  The rebels say the government is oppressing black Africans in favour of Arabs.  There are two main rebel groups, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (Jem), although the peace talks were complicated by splits in both groups, some along ethnic lines.

What is the government doing?
It admits mobilising "self-defence militias" following rebel attacks but denies any links to the Janjaweed, accused of trying to "cleanse" black Africans from large swathes of territory.  Refugees from Darfur say that following air raids by government aircraft, the Janjaweed ride into villages on horses and camels, slaughtering men, raping women and stealing whatever they can find.  Many women report being abducted by the Janjaweed and held as sex slaves for more than a week before being released.  The US and some human rights groups say that genocide is taking place - though a UN investigation team sent to Sudan said that while war crimes had been committed, there had been no intent to commit genocide.  After strong international pressure and the threat of sanctions, the government promised to disarm the Janjaweed. But so far there is little evidence this has happened.

What has happened to Darfur's civilians?
Millions have fled their destroyed villages, with many heading for camps near Darfur's main towns. But there is not enough food, water or medicine.  The Janjaweed patrol outside the camps and Darfurians say the men are killed and the women raped if they venture too far in search of firewood or water. 

How many have died?
With much of Darfur inaccessible to aid workers and researchers, calculating how many deaths there have been in the past three years is impossible.  The latest research published in September 2006 in the journal Science puts the numbers of deaths above and beyond those that would normally die in this inhospitable area at "no fewer than 200,000". 

Is anyone trying to stop the fighting?
About 7,000 African Union troops have slowly been deployed in Darfur on a very limited mandate.  Sudan has resisted strong western diplomatic pressure for the UN to take control of the peacekeeping mission.  The US and the UK have threatened sanctions against Sudan, unless it agrees to having more UN peacekeepers in Darfur.  But such threats have so far achieved little, as Sudan's allies Russia and China have used their veto in the UN Security Council to block tough resolutions.

Last edited by sergeriver (2007-04-29 18:06:28)

Superslim
BF2s Frat Brother
+211|7139|Calgary
simple: UN=usless
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|7078|Washington, DC

What the fuck do Russia and China have against helping millions of people? Even Stalin helped to destroy the Nazis.
The_Mac
Member
+96|6673
UN are a bunch of retards.
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|7017|Portland, OR, USA
1) It's certainly genocide in my book.
2) No idea.. haven't heard that, but then it's not important enough to be newsworthy anyway right?
3) nope
4) yep
5) gtfo of Iraq and go help in places that we actually can

It says something about out world when the murders of 32 people in American are more important than the 200,000+ in Darfur.

(not saying that VT wasn't a tragedy but ffs...)
BVC
Member
+325|7143
The UN has no teeth.

Actions like Iraq affect the willingness of all western nations to commit troops anywhere.

Last edited by Pubic (2007-04-29 18:07:06)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

CommieChipmunk wrote:

1) It's certainly genocide in my book.
2) No idea.. haven't heard that, but then it's not important enough to be newsworthy anyway right?
3) nope
4) yep
5) gtfo of Iraq and go help in places that we actually can

It says something about out world when the murders of 32 people in American are more important than the 200,000+ in Darfur.

(not saying that VT wasn't a tragedy but ffs...)
(to point 5)

The Sudanese government does not want the US involved... I say good, have someone else pick up the moral responsibility tab. The US would just be accused of exploiting something anyways. I'm fine with continuing to send food and medicine, but I don't want our troops to go anywhere but home. We have reached a point that we should be scaling back our international involvement (aside from the foreign aide) and start refocusing on our own homeland (border security) and goals. Let us resume our capitalistic, obesity ridden, arrogance and continue to do what we do best. Global economic, military, and technological dominance.

Overstretching our military (personnel) has weakened us. Let's take that experience home and focus domestically. Lets funnel our resources into a real tool against fighting militant Islam, intelligence. And when the UN calls on us for support let it be financially. We have sent our men into that shit hole before, not again....not again
Xbone Stormsurgezz
The_Mac
Member
+96|6673
With all due respect, I hardly think we're over stretching ourselves. And I don't think the above comment was so arrogant free itself.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|7009
Technically speaking it isn't their place to do anything: they aren't supposed to intervene in internal issues.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

The_Mac wrote:

With all due respect, I hardly think we're over stretching ourselves. And I don't think the above comment was so arrogant free itself.
Here have a read.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04222007/po … peters.htm
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|7078|Washington, DC

Eeeh Kmarion I'm sure with the proper loadouts we could've kicked ass in Somalia. Too many civilians though which meant we couldn't just level buildings with militia in them.

I wouldn't necessarily want US military intervention, on that point I agree with ya. But somebody has to take a stand. We did it in WWI (albeit there wasn't a madman with a strange mustache trying to kill an entire group of people), we did it in WWII. If we don't do it in Sudan, somebody's got to. Because right now, the situation sounds like total shit.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

Bubbalo wrote:

Technically speaking it isn't their place to do anything: they aren't supposed to intervene in internal issues.
Per our constitution right. However our involvement in the UN dictates otherwise at times.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Skorpy-chan
Member
+127|6792|Twyford, UK

sergeriver wrote:

Reading about this conflict, I came up with these questions:
1-Isn't this a Genocide?  Aren't the Janjaweed making an ethnic cleansing supported by the government of Sudan?
2-Why are Russia and China using their vetoes and stopping the UN Securicty Council Resolutions and sanctions?
3-When Human life is considered worthless, like in this case, what hope is there?
4-After all its failures, isn't it time to change the way the UN works?
5-What would you do?
1. Genocide is not a thing, it is an action. You cannot have 'a' genocide. Also, yes it is. Whaddya know, this is what Africa DOES when someone gets pissy about a border.
2. Because they're colossal jerks.
3. Human life IS worthless. One thing we have no shortage of is people. And there is no hope, we can intervene now, but they'll just go back to it again in a few years.
4. No. No no no. The UN is not there to DO anything. It is there to stop people nuking each other by tying them up in diplomacy and bureaucratic red tape.
5. Embargo both of 'em, and send the UN troops in to break it up. Then force the two people to get along with each other.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7091
the American soldier could kick ass in any situation.  War means casualties.  they may be high, they may not.   im fucking sick of people expecting  lighting fast victories with no scratches.   expecting results instantly and when they dont materialize its already considered defeat.   im tired of the people not letting the soldier/marine/sailor/airman do his fucking job, kick some ass and take some names.  why are we complaining about iraq?   it was yall who voted for him, TWICE!  damn it damn it damn it.


Ive had very few hours of sleep within the last day and im a little out of my element right now. look at all these pink elephants  sitting on my couch.

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2007-04-29 18:59:47)

Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|7009

Kmarion wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Technically speaking it isn't their place to do anything: they aren't supposed to intervene in internal issues.
Per our constitution right. However our involvement in the UN dictates otherwise at times.
I was talking about the UN.

The US is obliged but not required to avoid invasion of UN member states.  If they do, the may face sanctions, though in Darfur they probably wouldn't.  Further, they have no responsibility to go in, whilst the UN has a responsibility to not go in.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

Bubbalo wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Technically speaking it isn't their place to do anything: they aren't supposed to intervene in internal issues.
Per our constitution right. However our involvement in the UN dictates otherwise at times.
I was talking about the UN.

The US is obliged but not required to avoid invasion of UN member states.  If they do, the may face sanctions, though in Darfur they probably wouldn't.  Further, they have no responsibility to go in, whilst the UN has a responsibility to not go in.
You just demonstrated how wonderfully fucked up the UN is..lol. Moral responsibility has just been trumped.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6976|Global Command

Bubbalo wrote:

Further, they have no responsibility to go in, whilst the UN has a responsibility to not go in.
LOL
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|7009

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

the American soldier could kick ass in any situation.
For example, civilians in Iraq.

Oh, wait, that's a bad thing............................

Fact is, any army would struggle to control the situation in Sudan, but those who have the best chance are the African states who at least have some understanding of the situation.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7091

Bubbalo wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

the American soldier could kick ass in any situation.
Fact is, any army would struggle to control the situation in Sudan, but those who have the best chance are the African states who at least have some understanding of the situation.
yes, but are they willing.  i dont know much about the african union.  is it a viable organization for this scenario.  as far as ive understood it,  the sudanese government has not been complying 100% with any kind of regional or internation organization.
David.P
Banned
+649|6721
If they let me and 100 men in with whatever the fuck we needed that place would be cleaned up in a month! I'm coming for you Bashir.

https://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k56/dvdpiddy/dgf.jpg

Last edited by David.Podedworny (2007-04-29 19:13:49)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7048|132 and Bush

David.Podedworny wrote:

If they let me and 100 men in with whatever the fuck we needed that place would be cleaned up in a month! I'm coming for you Bashir.

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k56/dvdpiddy/dgf.jpg
Someone has been playing a little too much BF2.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
LawJik
The Skeptical Realist
+48|6979|Amherst, MA
Darfur Genocide : an eye-witness account from a US Marine, April 2007.


logitech487
Member
+16|6850|From The State Of Taxes
Its time we quit the U.N. ( useless noobs)  and let France + Russia save the world . A nice place to move the U.N. would be the Sudan
The_Mac
Member
+96|6673

Kmarion wrote:

The_Mac wrote:

With all due respect, I hardly think we're over stretching ourselves. And I don't think the above comment was so arrogant free itself.
Here have a read.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04222007/po … peters.htm
Lol, the US Army is always running out of people. And for a good reason too. They're ehmm, one of the less attractive and less professional of branches. The Marines are having a good supply, I know many going in this fall for boot camp. And there's also the fact that even though the Army is having trouble, the government has no trouble finding Americans as mercenaries in Iraq. These guys are gnarly, using AKs, FALs, all the toys of the toybox.
of course the media doesn't tell you about those. They just present it in a light that implies we're losing. Did the same thing with Vietnam.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7091

The_Mac wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

The_Mac wrote:

With all due respect, I hardly think we're over stretching ourselves. And I don't think the above comment was so arrogant free itself.
Here have a read.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04222007/po … peters.htm
Lol, the US Army is always running out of people. And for a good reason too. They're ehmm, one of the less attractive and less professional of branches. The Marines are having a good supply, I know many going in this fall for boot camp. And there's also the fact that even though the Army is having trouble, the government has no trouble finding Americans as mercenaries in Iraq. These guys are gnarly, using AKs, FALs, all the toys of the toybox.
of course the media doesn't tell you about those. They just present it in a light that implies we're losing. Did the same thing with Vietnam.
hey kiddo, what makes you an expert?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard