Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Isn't Action Being Taken In Darfur?  
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2364 times:

Why isn't action being taken in Darfur? Why are the United States, Europe, and other countries standing by relatively silent while hundreds are killed, raped, maimed, and tortured every day in Sudan? Is there a reason?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/03/opinion/03kristof.html

With Yom Ha'Shoa coming up this thursday, you think people would remember the Holocaust and take action to avoid any such genocide from happening again in the world. Estimates are that 400,000 have died in the Darfur region of Sudan, but hey, we have more important things to deal with.

How's the saying go? It is the inaction of good men to stop evil that makes them just as bad as those who commit it.

This isn't just an anti-Bush thread, or a Bush-bashing thread. Read the article, its there to support my claim. The overall message though is that action needs to be taken!


NO URLS in signature
64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2362 times:

http://www.ushmm.org/conscience/alert/darfur/steidle/

Just take a look at that. Why are civilized nations standing by idly and letting this happen?



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2357 times:

I know I mentioned it earlier, but estimates are that 400,000 are dead in Darfur, with an estimated 500 dead daily. That's about 15,000 a month, to about 180,000 a year at this rate.


NO URLS in signature
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17511 posts, RR: 45
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2352 times:

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/non_aviation/read.main/774549


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2350 times:

Oh aren't you brilliant, you refer me to a thread from March? Try again dude.

I think this is important enough to bring up again, and again, and again.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2350 times:



Signed,

Most of the World

------

Military action never gets taken just because of atrocities. People just don't care enough. There's a line in Hotel Rwanda, where a TV reporter says "people will watch and say, 'oh that's just awful,' and then go back to having their dinner and forget it ever existed" (some paraphrasing there).

I hesitate to make an Iraq comparison, but I think I have to. If Bush had gone around on his whirlwind tour in late 2002/early 2003 to drum up support for the war, and said something like "Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator, and we must free the Iraqi people from his terrible rule," do you think that he would have gotten the necessary support? Of course not. The American people couldn't give two shits about how the Iraqi people are doing, so long as the Iraqi people aren't trying to attack us. And they couldn't give two shits about the people in Darfur. Heck, I think you'll find that, in general, they couldn't give two shits about anyone living in a third world country.

And it's not just the US. Other countries are the same. That's why any external solution will be a long time in coming.

It's an utter tragedy that it has to be this way. But humanity has an immense capacity to turn a blind eye on some terrible things.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3956 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2346 times:

We are allowing the same genocide to take place in Darfur that happened in Rwanda just 11 short years ago. That said, should the US attempt any sort of Somilia style operation, there would be howls from the radical Islamic world, the EU, the overall global community as a whole. As someone said it so perfectly in another thread, we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. Personally I think the US should step up to the plate and do the right thing for the right reasons.

Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17511 posts, RR: 45
Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2344 times:

"Oh aren't you brilliant, you refer me to a thread from March? Try again dude."

I'm just trying to point you to some related information.

Honestly when did airliners.net turn into asshole.net?



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2343 times:

Quoting Thomasphoto60 (Reply 6):
Personally I think the US should step up to the plate and do the right thing for the right reasons.

Agreed. People are going to hate us either way. But at least we can save a few hundred thousand lives in the process. To me, this one is a no-brainer. Let the genocide go on, or stop it? Is that really that hard of a choice?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2334 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 7):
Honestly when did airliners.net turn into asshole.net?

Sorry, I shouldn't have responded the way I did. Most of the time when people post that its the "search police". Its always, "search for this and don't post again" type stuff. I was riled up after reading that link, didn't mean to respond like that.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2331 times:

I remember images of the Allied Armies marching into the concentration camps in Europe and being greeted as liberaters. Why can't a coalition of world wide troops go in and liberate Sudan? The country is being torn apart and the rest of the civilized world stands by and watches as people suffer.


NO URLS in signature
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17511 posts, RR: 45
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2331 times:

"Its always, "search for this and don't post again" type stuff."

No, I don't do that. I hate when people do that. No worries...



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16282 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2330 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
Why are the United States, Europe, and other countries standing by

Why did you single out the US and Europe? Why is the West responsible for solving every 3rd world tribal conflict?

This is an African problem hence it is best solved by Africans. If African nations want the world's respect, here is their chance to mobilize themselves and solve the crisis. Egypt has a huge army and borders Sudan...why is Egypt doing nothing?

I suggest the West do nothing to solve this crisis since it is not of our making. Let the OAU (Org of African Unity) solve it. They meet frequently enough. Human rights cannot be imposed. Respect for African life has to come from fellow Africans.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2317 times:

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 12):
Why did you single out the US and Europe? Why is the West responsible for solving every 3rd world tribal conflict?

Because the United States and Europe are the beacons of freedom, democracy, and life in the world. That is why I'm singling them out. Since clearly other countries without democracy or a good human rights record (i.e. Egypt) are doing nothing, it is the responsibility of those who hold these values so highly to do so! Did we learn nothing from history? Did we learn nothing from the six million dead Jews in the Holocaust? Or the other five million dead blacks, gays, homosexuals, gypsies from the concentration camps?

The Western world has a responsibility, as free and democratic countries, to act in Sudan where the people have no voice or representation. They have a responsibility to act when African countries that have no democracy or democratic representation aren't acting.

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 12):
I suggest the West do nothing to solve this crisis since it is not of our making.

This is the most irresponsible, and disturbing part of your post. You would suggest to stand by and watch as 500 people a day, 500 innocent men, women and children are slaughtered by government sponsored terrorism? This is frightening!

This isn't a thread picking on Europe of the United States. This isn't a thread singling them out just because I can. I'm singling them out because they have the power to do something, and they're not! They have more power to intervene in Sudan than the pathetic dictatorships in Africa and the Middle East. I hold them to higher standards than those countries because I know they can do better. I expect far less from a dictatorship.

Haven't we learned anything in the last century? The Armenian Genocide, The Holocaust, Cambodian Genocide, Rwandan Genocide. So why stand by and let this happen? Why say its "Africa's" problem? We are all human beings, black or white, African or European. And we should stand up for our fellow human beings. Period. And the fact that we aren't is disturbing.

"We must always fear the wicked. But there is another kind of evil that we must fear the most, and that is the indifference of good men."



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineBiggles From Canada, joined Dec 2004, 459 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2312 times:

Perhaps you should direct your question to that wonderful organisation , the U.N. , and it's great leader from Ghana.

User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2309 times:

Did you bother to read my last post? Did you bother to see why I'm pointing my questions to the U.S., Europe, and the civilized "Western World"?

The U.N. is comprised of many countries, including Sudan. The majority of these countries are probably not democracies that enjoy the same freedom and rights that the U.S., Europe, and other respective democracies enjoy.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19230 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2305 times:

I believe that those countries which are 'able' to assist (in terms of financial ability, morality, experience in such situations, peace-keeping experience, etc.) must for the well-being of the world's citizens. Taking no, little or inappropriate action will affect still further those who cannot defend themselves, which is a tradegy in itself.

As for it being an African problem - well, that's an absurd argument. A generalisation, of course, but how on earth is a debt-ridden African country with little usable funds, plus probable corruption, perhaps no or little social or moral inclinations, no or little relevant experience, etc., expected to do anything worthwhile?

Those countries that can, should.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2298 times:

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 12):
Let the OAU (Org of African Unity) solve it.

Be fun to see that. The OAU doesn't exist any more. It's the African Union now, and they ARE trying - there are AU peacekeepers and monitors on the ground, but unfortunately not nearly enough, and without anything like the kind of logistical support they require.

The reason the UN has not acted in this affair is because Russia and China have vetoed any resolution requiring action in Darfur - they consider the Darfur problem to be an internal issue for Sudan. The real reason is that if the UN is allowed to take action on "internal" conflicts in Sudan and condemn them as genocide, the same thing could happen in Chechnya and in the far west of China, where the Chinese goverment is embroiled in conflict with Uighur Muslims. China and Russia don't want the UN involved in their "internal" conflicts, so they are happy to let hundreds of thousands of Sudanese civilians die. Ain't politics wonderful ? And people wonder why nobody in the western world bothers to vote any more.


User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2296 times:

Quoting Thomasphoto60 (Reply 6):
Personally I think the US should step up to the plate and do the right thing for the right reasons.

Personally, I'm tired of the rest of the world telling us to stop getting involved in everything. I'm tired of the rest of the world treating us like shit if we actually do try to help people somewhere. If they don't like some of things we do, maybe we shouldn't do these things. Adopt an isolationism-type foreign policy for a few years. That's what I say. Then just watch them come calling...

fluffy


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2294 times:

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 17):
The reason the UN has not acted in this affair is because Russia and China have vetoed any resolution requiring action in Darfur - they consider the Darfur problem to be an internal issue for Sudan. The real reason is that if the UN is allowed to take action on "internal" conflicts in Sudan and condemn them as genocide, the same thing could happen in Chechnya and in the far west of China, where the Chinese goverment is embroiled in conflict with Uighur Muslims.

What if Europe acted under NATO? Would that be feasible? That way Russia and China wouldn't have to be involved (political reasons).

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 18):
Adopt an isolationism-type foreign policy for a few years. That's what I say. Then just watch them come calling...

So you would have this country adopt an isolationist stance while thousands die in Sudan from genocide?



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2289 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 19):
So you would have this country adopt an isolationist stance while thousands die in Sudan from genocide?

I'd bet real money that if the US did send troops into Sudan, some country would start saying crap about us trying to be world's police force. Why put up with it? We've fubar'd Iraq pretty good. Afghanistan is slowing coming together. I'd say finish what we've started, and if our "image" is still considered shoddy by the rest of the world, screw 'em. We've got enough internal problems to sort out first. We can't go running to every corner of the world to deal with other people's problems.

fluffy


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2285 times:

You didn't answer my question. You can give me just a yes or no. Would you support an isolationist stance while genocide is occuring in Sudan?


NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2279 times:

LoL. Sorry. Tis late. Finals week and a 60hr work week.  faint   hypnotized   tired 

No, I don't.

Just saying that the more anti-US stuff I hear, the more I wonder if an isolationistic position would be the right thing in the near future...

fluffy


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2276 times:

Oh trust me, I'm studying for finals too.

I think the point I'm trying to make is this. It shouldn't matter what the rest of the world thinks, no matter how sick of it you might be. You can't support an isolationist stance when genocide is happening elsewhere because you know the right thing to do would be to help those innocent people. Sure we'd probably hear trash about it from some countries, but that's all politics. In the end we know we'd have done the right thing in helping save innocent lives from pointless slaughter.

People don't do good things just to hear others be grateful for it. People do good things because its the right thing to do, or at least they should. Our country and European countries should do good things because its the right thing to do.

For example, look at Operations Moses, Joshua, and Solomon. Israel rescued 36,000 Ethiopian Jews in a massive airlift effort, with 14,000 alone rescued in 36 hours by 34 jumbo jets and C-130 hercules aircraft. They didn't have to rescue them. They knew the Arab world would be mad, and probably get the U.N. upset with them. But they did it because it was the right thing to do, to help people in need.

The United States and Europe should do the same for the needy in Sudan.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2270 times:

Very true. I'm just tired of seeing the US try (keyword there) to do the right thing, essentially try to be the world's police force, and then get crapped on by the same European nations you mention. Yes, this is politics, and who ever said politics should be fair and considerate? Well, I do. Why should we have to do everything by ourselves? I'm not going to point fingers at which nations in particular just do things that will, in the end, help themselves, but these nations seem to crap on us the most. No, this doesn't help those in Sudan, and I think we (the US) should do something about it. But I think its high time the EU gets off it's arse and helps out in the world community. Instead of just sitting there acting all high and mighty and literally flipping the US off. Hell, while I'm at it, maybe the UN should, too.

BTW, have some respect from meself.

fluffy

[Edited 2005-05-03 10:27:20]

25 Tbar220 : Good post. Huh?
26 Post contains images GQfluffy : Welcome to my small and pathetic respected user's list. Gimmie a break. Only been a member for under a month. fluffy
27 JGPH1A : Not feasible without a UN resolution, I don't think. I wish they would act, like they did in Kosovo.
28 TedTAce : Why Isn't Action Being Taken In Darfur? No oil, no war.
29 Post contains links Thomasphoto60 : Not necessarily true. http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/sudan1103/26.htm Thomas
30 Yyz717 : The West is largely hated in Africa, despite massive aid and humanitarian intervention in the past. If the West steps in and "solves" this crisis, ho
31 Gkirk : Well, France and Germany aint doing anything about it. The UK and US are stuck in Iraq for a wee bit longer...oh, and dont forget about Poland.
32 KYIPpilot : As much as action should be taken, why the USA on its own??? We have our hands full as it is. You know, half the world says do something, and then if
33 MaverickM11 : "Why Isn't Action Being Taken In Darfur? No oil, no war." Cute, and easy to say without any forethought, but not true. " Perhaps its nature's way of k
34 AA61Hvy : The United States doesn't want to get involved with something like this...It's too similar to Somalia. In that we have no interest in the area, but we
35 Orion737 : Very good question. When Tony Blair came to power he said he would not stand by while another Bosnia/Kosovo/Somalia/Rwanda suffered such atrocities. W
36 Yyz717 : Why not? I'm tired of being politically correct. Africa IS over-populated. Since Africans are unable to exercise birth control, then perhaps war, gen
37 777236ER : I don't even have to read Yyz's posts to know what he'll say: he'll say the Africans aren't doing enough to help, it's all the fault of black people a
38 Pe@rson : Hear, hear!
39 Post contains images 777236ER : Multiply by 200,000 to understand the full scale of the crisis.
40 Post contains links 777236ER : The facts are this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4498409.stm On Friday the AU increased the number of troops there from 2200 to 7700. So d
41 Mham001 : Actually if we want to place blame for inaction in the UN, it starts with China because they have oil interests in Sudan and need the Arab government.
42 Mham001 : Factually incorrect. It is mostly Arabs killing blacks. This seems to change the dynamics for too many countries. Don't want to anger the Arabs! I am
43 Yyz717 : Well, clearly 7700 is insufficient. So what are YOU going to personally do about it 777236ER? I STRONGLY recommend you fly to Sudan this week to help
44 777236ER : I live in Manchester. Don't patronise me, Yyz717. You're busy condemning everyone and anyone (who's not white) for deaths you don't seem too concerne
45 Yyz717 : I knew you were all talk and no action. You could fly BMI or LH to FRA tomorrow and connect to an LH FRA-CAI-Khartoum flight if you REALLY cared abou
46 Daedaeg : I say let the UN and EU handle it. They're doing nothing at the moment. If they want to be recognized as true global powers. Hey here's your chance. Y
47 Tbar220 : Yyz, Did you happen to open the link in my opening thread? Now imagine as Daedaeg has put it. You are born poor and impoverished in Sudan. You live yo
48 777236ER : Yet more evidence of your single-minded hate against black people. Every day I see lots of people who aren't white, yet you're convinced the entire W
49 Yyz717 : The West is overwhelmingly white, and you know it. Any action by any Western nation in Sudan will largely involve white soldiers solving African prob
50 777236ER : The West is overwhelmingly female too, but I've never heard you talking about Western nations as female nations? You simply believe that white Wester
51 Yyz717 : A complete cop-out. I knew it. Why not take a leave of absense and fly to Sudan? Then your actions would match your words. Clearly, your own personal
52 777236ER : In what way? What active things have you done against gun crime or Catholic priests? Do you think white Westerners are better than black Africans?
53 Yyz717 : You claim to care about Darfur, and indeed calls others "racist" (a common word for you) for not sharing your same sense of concern, and yet you're u
54 Post contains images GQfluffy : Exactly. I think it's horrible (what's going on in Sudan). But I also think it's bullshit that when stuff like this happens, the EU starts raising he
55 ACAfan : 1. Because they are black. 2. Because they have no oil.
56 Tbar220 : Yyz, I think your views are very racist. And you may start to notice that I'm not the only one who thinks so. They are not only racist, but elitist.
57 Yyz717 : I think you're a racist and a hypocrite. Muslim Sudanese are killing black southern Sudanese in Darfur and yet you show more anger towards me that th
58 Klaus : Yyz, your perennially bigoted opinions are well-known. No use in trying to divert attention away from that.
59 Yyz717 : Ya right. So says a German just 2 generations removed from Nazism. Whatever. If calling a spade a spade (specifically that Darfur is an African probl
60 Klaus : Yyz717: Ya right. So says a German just 2 generations removed from Nazism. Whatever. You´re feeling that helpless, already, in this discussion? Pity.
61 Tbar220 : Are you kidding? This is by far the stupidest thing you've said. Did you even notice that I started this thread showing anger at what's happening the
62 Yyz717 : It cuts both ways. I ALSO am allowed to criticize the African killers themselves without ME being attacked for calling a spade a spade (namely that t
63 QR332 : So you stereotype me and then you don't count yourself as a racist? You know nothing about me Yyz, so don't come in here claiming things you know not
64 Schoenorama : Who says I'm Spanish?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Isn't Pete Doherty In Jail? posted Fri Apr 21 2006 09:43:08 by AirbusA346
Why Isn't Washington In A State? posted Wed Feb 6 2002 16:04:21 by Arsenal@LHR
Why Cars Are So Cheap In The US? posted Mon Oct 2 2006 20:07:11 by F.pier
Why Gays Should Not Serve In The Army posted Fri Sep 22 2006 00:10:03 by Braybuddy
Over 20,000 Hotel Rooms Planned/Being Built In LAS posted Thu Jun 15 2006 16:22:27 by Iowaman
Is The USA Being Unfair In Iran Talks? posted Thu Jun 1 2006 20:06:39 by Dc10s4ever
Why Are Law Enforcement Dressed In Blue? posted Tue May 2 2006 16:21:45 by UTA_flyinghigh
Why Are Hatchbacks So Popular In Europe? posted Tue Apr 25 2006 04:06:35 by Fanoftristars
Why Is Discover Card Only In The US? posted Fri Apr 7 2006 21:27:44 by CalAir
Why Do They Do This in Hollywood? posted Sat Apr 1 2006 19:52:27 by Braybuddy