UN told of mass Darfur killings

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

From the news today:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5081378.stm

[Mirorgate 0]

I thought that was common knowledge... but everyone (western gov'ments) doesnt give a flying ** except the ppl in Darfur?

Edited June 14, 2006 by Mirorgate

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

an all around sad situation.

Daniel

:energetic:

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

200,000+ and we're fighting a 'war on terror'?

tut-tut

[Mirorgate 0]

200,000+ and we're fighting a 'war on terror'?

tut-tut

ayup.. imminent attack, WMDs... those in Darfur.. religious war only... among locals... you not get that memo?

Besides, its been going on for years... and UN hasnt done shite then... suddenly it has to now because.... why?

though I do agree with Daniel... it is very sad, and something should have been done years ago to help stabilize the situation... but i can only vote here, an the UN is more than just 1 nation

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

200,000+ and we're fighting a 'war on terror'?

tut-tut

ayup.. imminent attack, WMDs... those in Darfur.. religious war only... among locals... you not get that memo?

Besides, its been going on for years... and UN hasnt done shite then... suddenly it has to now because.... why?

The fact that in the 21st century this has gone by with the barest modicum of hand-wringing or direct action from the international community is scandalous - and just goes to show that the high morality that we apparently stand for in the developed world is ultimately rooted in narrow self interest.

Noone cares about this because it is a strategically unimportant dust-bowl, that is bereft of significant natural resources.

[Mirorgate 0]

The fact that in the 21st century this has gone by with the barest modicum of hand-wringing or direct action from the international community is scandalous - and just goes to show that the high morality that we apparently stand for in the developed world is ultimately rooted in narrow self interest.

Noone cares about this because it is a strategically unimportant dust-bowl, that is bereft of significant natural resources.

And I agree with you.. something should have been done, but it hasnt. Now attention is being placed there.. why? as you said.. no natural resources... our conciences? doubtful.. no money to be made there.

unless water becomes the next big resource... its just smoke and mirors for polical agenda of western world.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Noone cares about this because it is a strategically unimportant dust-bowl, that is bereft of significant natural resources.

As it should be. Neither should we be in the business of democratizing Iraq, nor should we be in the business of peace keeping anywhere in the world. The US military should exist solely for the purpose of protecting the lives and interests of the American people.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The fact that in the 21st century this has gone by with the barest modicum of hand-wringing or direct action from the international community is scandalous - and just goes to show that the high morality that we apparently stand for in the developed world is ultimately rooted in narrow self interest.

Noone cares about this because it is a strategically unimportant dust-bowl, that is bereft of significant natural resources.

And I agree with you.. something should have been done, but it hasnt. Now attention is being placed there.. why? as you said.. no natural resources... our conciences? doubtful.. no money to be made there.

unless water becomes the next big resource... its just smoke and mirors for polical agenda of western world.

Business as usual.

[dalegg 143]

200,000+ and we're fighting a 'war on terror'?

tut-tut

ayup.. imminent attack, WMDs... those in Darfur.. religious war only... among locals... you not get that memo?

Besides, its been going on for years... and UN hasnt done shite then... suddenly it has to now because.... why?

The fact that in the 21st century this has gone by with the barest modicum of hand-wringing or direct action from the international community is scandalous - and just goes to show that the high morality that we apparently stand for in the developed world is ultimately rooted in narrow self interest.

Noone cares about this because it is a strategically unimportant dust-bowl, that is bereft of significant natural resources.

What is your take on what the U.N should do?

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

Noone cares about this because it is a strategically unimportant dust-bowl, that is bereft of significant natural resources.

As it should be. Neither should we be in the business of democratizing Iraq, nor should we be in the business of peace keeping anywhere in the world. The US military should exist solely for the purpose of protecting the lives and interests of the American people.

ahh yes, the interests ofthe american ppl. just exactly is that? therein lies the crux of the situation.

Daniel

:energetic:

[iceyspots 0]

Govt says if there's no economic gain, let them die.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

ahh yes, the interests ofthe american ppl. just exactly is that? therein lies the crux of the situation.

Let me be more clear. If we are being attacked by rebels in Darfur or by the Arab militia of northern Sudan, then I say we go get em. As long as they are fighting amongst each other, it is not our problem. Lots of people fight amongst each other and always have. It's how the world shakes itself out. When something shakes out that appears to be a threat to the US, then we take em out. Till then, we leave them be. The world is dangerous enough without the United States extending itself into every corner.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What is your take on what the U.N should do?

At the very least the introduction of peace-keeping troops. Sitting on the fence watching huge massacres take place seems a little distasteful to me.

[Mirorgate 0]

ahh yes, the interests ofthe american ppl. just exactly is that? therein lies the crux of the situation.

Let me be more clear. If we are being attacked by rebels in Darfur or by the Arab militia of northern Sudan, then I say we go get em. As long as they are fighting amongst each other, it is not our problem. Lots of people fight amongst each other and always have. It's how the world shakes itself out. When something shakes out that appears to be a threat to the US, then we take em out. Till then, we leave them be. The world is dangerous enough without the United States extending itself into every corner.

too late. we apparently have interests everywhere.