Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
777236ER
Topic Author
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:34 pm

Your bone's got a little machine
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:52 pm

I saw this news story yesterday. The thing that's making it even worse now is that the conflict is being spread by the Janjaweed into Chad. So people who have been escaping the conflict into Chad are basically just having the conflict follow them.

But hey, the whole world stands by as hundreds of thousands of innocents are killed.
NO URLS in signature
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:53 pm

Quoting BBC:
Sudan's governments has consistently said the scale of the problems are being exaggerated for political reasons.

Right, that's exactly what amnesty members are being told. As if it 1 million individuals from all around the globe had some kind of selfish desire to blame whatever government for human rights violations.
I support the right to arm bears
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18701
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:55 pm

Before anyone says it, and I know they will, SUDAN HAS OIL.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
hkg82
Posts: 1333
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 4:24 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:03 pm

Why not strike China? I mean, isn't it obvious to Bush & co? China is the REAL enemy. Red China must be stopped!!!
 
777236ER
Topic Author
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:06 pm

Quoting Hkg82 (Reply 4):
Why not strike China? I mean, isn't it obvious to Bush & co? China is the REAL enemy. Red China must be stopped!!!

Given the human rights abuses endemic in China, yes, it is a major enemy to humanity and the rest of the world. There are far bigger problems in Sudan at the moment.

So the US and UN agree on the scale of the problem, people on both sides of the political spectrum agree on the scale and importance of the problem, why aren't multilateral forces going in?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Doona
Posts: 3382
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 9:43 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:17 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 3):
Before anyone says it, and I know they will, SUDAN HAS OIL.

Yup, but who is the principal buyer of this oil? China. Bigger can of worms down there then you might guess...

Cheers
Mats
Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:34 pm

Quoting Hkg82 (Reply 4):
Why not strike China? I mean, isn't it obvious to Bush & co? China is the REAL enemy. Red China must be stopped!!!

I never could understand why the west seems to have a complete blindness to the threat China poses.

The Chinese think in terms of centuries! The leaders of the west cannot think beyond the next election cycle. The patience and the single-minded resolve that Chinese leadership discipline themselves with is a form of political thought that is foreign to the western mindset. The ability to control 1.3billion people, and to move them all in a single, unified, direction is incredible.

Does the west need to counter the rise of China? Most definitely. But to do so through the military in order to stem the growth of Chinese power? Definitely not.


And to answer the original subject of this thread... the United Nations just elected to put IRAN as the vice-chair of the Disarmament Committee! THIS is the UN that we're suppose to rely on to solve the world's issues?!?

How can an organization so devoid of common sense, and lacking any fangs of power, be expected to deal with Sudan if they can't even see the stupidity in this new appointment of Iran to the committee!?

The system is broke. They're not going to do anything. And individual governments are certainly not going to take action on their own. Basically the people of Sudan have been given a big old F&$K YOU.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:47 pm

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 7):
the United Nations just elected to put IRAN as the vice-chair of the Disarmament Committee!

They didn't elect Iran but follow the principle of rotation. It's pure coincidence it's now Iran's turn, and you'll probably be hard pressed to find somebody who's not from Iran and happy about it.
I support the right to arm bears
 
Jetset25j
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:00 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:07 am

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 7):
Basically the people of Sudan have been given a big old F&$K YOU.

The people of Sudan have been given a hearty f&^K you for forty plus years now. A civil war that's claimed more lives than Kosovo, Bosnia, and Rwanda combined. A blatant no blurs around the line genocide(s). Rampant slavery. Corrupt and racist government. Famine and dire poverty.
The world seems to have smaller and far more juicy and exiting issues to relish.
Air New Zealand-Airline of the world's greatest travellers.
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:13 am

Jetset25j,

Its another ugly scar on the face of humanity, and yet its hardly being noticed. Probably wont be in the future either.
NO URLS in signature
 
hkg82
Posts: 1333
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 4:24 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:29 am

My above post about wanting the US to strike China was in pure jest people! This topic should be left for another thread (which I am considering starting shortly).

Let us get back on topic.

I think the reason we've seen minimal outside intervention in the genocidal terror taking place in Africa is that committing to this cause requires immense political will that most countries simply do not have. To successfully intervene, put a stop to the massacres and effect change requires the parties involved to stay until the job is done. This is asking too much in a region that is constantly divided & violent. Call me naive but this is how I would sum up the situation, as depressing as it sounds. I do believe that we will eventually see some form of limited action taken by the UN and/or Western countries but an intervention is not going solve the core problems Africa and its leaders face in failing to put people at the center of development.

Hkg82.
 
Doona
Posts: 3382
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 9:43 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:36 am

Quoting Jetset25j (Reply 9):
A blatant no blurs around the line genocide(s).

The reason for this, is that if we would actually call it a genocide (which it is), the world can not justify a non-intervention standpoint. In the case of the UN, a Chinese veto will block any resolution calling for an intervention. So, the UN can't do anything. The US is currently involved in a occupation/civil war in Iraq, and will be pretty busy, and without the UN or the US, no nation will be willing to commit troops and resources, to fight a war so far from home. This is Rwanda all over again.

As I see it, the only organization that might be able to succesfully intervene is the Organization of African States. A regional solution would be more acceptable to the powers that be in Sudan than a global one. Such an intervention can also be supported by the world organization, or whomever wants to.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 7):
the United Nations just elected to put IRAN as the vice-chair of the Disarmament Committee!

As NoUFO stated, this is coincidental, and part of the rotation system, the same system that had put Rwanda in the security council during the genocide. The system has to be fair to work, but at the same time the fairness sometimes screws us. But hey, you people elected a garden gnome to be your president, and that's how democracy works.
Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18701
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:38 am

Quoting Doona (Reply 12):
But hey, you people elected a garden gnome to be your president, and that's how democracy works.

Childish.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
Doona
Posts: 3382
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 9:43 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:46 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
Childish.

Yes, but I was just trying to illustrate that we don't always agree with what the democratic systems produce, but there's not really anything we can do about it except call people names.  silly 
Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:02 am

Quoting Doona (Reply 12):
The US is currently involved in a occupation/civil war in Iraq, and will be pretty busy, and without the UN or the US, no nation will be willing to commit troops and resources, to fight a war so far from home. This is Rwanda all over again.

Rwanda was my reason to completely distrust the UN. That is a stain that will never be erased.

"The United Nations refused to authorize its peacekeeping operation in Rwanda at the time to take action to bring the killing to a halt. Despite numerous pre- and present-conflict warnings by Canadian Lieutenant-General Rom�o Dallaire the UN peacekeepers on the ground were forbidden from engaging the militias or even discharging their weapons, unless fired upon"

"Frightened by the deaths of their soldiers and aware of the international embarrassment the United States suffered in Mogadishu, Somalia after the civil war there claimed the lives of several American troops, the Belgian government quickly called for the withdrawal of the Belgian contingent of UNAMIR. After the withdrawal of other nations' contingents, UNAMIR was left with 270 soldiers supported by less than 200 local authorities. General Dallaire, despite orders to withdraw from Kigali, refused to abandon the country to the genocide, and remained to lead what forces remained."

Now, the better question here is simple. Has the UN actually been ever able to accomplish a worthy goal in these conflicts? Two, are some people here actually advocating an invasion or some other form of interventation of a country that has done nothing to harm the US? Last, what is the best way to proceed to resolve these shameful acts?
 
GDB
Posts: 14254
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:43 am

Mugabe needs sorting out too.
But, like Sudan, can a force of western, largely caucasian troops really intervene in Africa?
Including substantial numbers, one presumes, of former colonial powers like France, UK, Belgium, with US troops who are, like it or not, unacceptable in the Muslim world.

The only African nation with a military worth a damn, who also have some ability to deploy over distances, is South Africa.
Apart from maybe token acts, they won't, not in Dafur, certainly not in Zimbabwe.
Mbeki might think very little of Mugabe, so what? No way is he going against a fellow 'liberation fighter' (never mind mad Bob spent most of this time in the Eastern Bloc).

It's a terrible thing to say, but the unfortunate Sudanese can expect no real help from the AU.
Neither can those in Zim.
Because that would mean taking responsibility for your own backyard, better to blame someone else, the colonial era ended yesterday, not 45-50 years ago.
Taking at least some responsibiity would collapse the whole edifice of blaming someone else.
But keep that aid coming, that we can siphon off into Swiss Accounts, Mercs, Private Jets, big homes etc.

The UK intervention in Sierra Leone in 2000, was a one off, it was manageable, had clear aims, widespread support of the populace, who were not divided along religous lines, or tribal really.
They (save the gangs doing the terror) did not want British troops to leave, they'd had the at best useless, at worst dangerous and corrupt AU troops already.
 
komododx
Posts: 1734
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 4:40 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:48 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 15):
are some people here actually advocating an invasion or some other form of interventation of a country that has done nothing to harm the US?

Why do you pick on the US? Not even the OP is from the US. I think it's a matter of concer to the world (or at least should be) and I definitely advocate an invasion.

Stefano  wave 
I'm homeless and unemployed
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 3:07 am

Quoting Komododx (Reply 17):
and I definitely advocate an invasion.

I also certainly advocate intervention. But I have had some discussions in the last few weeks here where some claimed that the US should worry about its own internal problems rather than solving and 'imposing its values' in other countries. My position was that the US was typically needed to resolve most of the worlds largest problems, and we cant complain when it gets involved in places where we might not be in agreement with intervention, and then turn around and complain when it doesnt intervene.

My rant about the UN and Rwanda was to highlight the usual lack of effective action from the UN. 10 UN soldiers get killed and 800,000 Rwandans die from this lack of intervention. To me, all who were involved with this inaction should be jailed.
 
WellHung
Posts: 3299
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:50 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 3:52 am

Quoting 777236ER (Thread starter):
Let's Invade Sudan

I think you're forgetting who the 'decider' is.
 
777236ER
Topic Author
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 6:48 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 15):

Rwanda was my reason to completely distrust the UN. That is a stain that will never be erased.

So what is your country doing to solve the worsening crisis in the Sudan?

Quoting GDB (Reply 16):
Mugabe needs sorting out too.
But, like Sudan, can a force of western, largely caucasian troops really intervene in Africa?

Should the obvious and pretty serious problems associated with nations from Europe and the Americas going into Africans nations stop such attempts from happening? There is essentially a genocide going on; a mass, planned campaign of rape, torture and murder against a specific population. 100,000 died in Eastern Europe, on the West's door, in the 1990s. Rwanda occured despite Western forces being present. Should we really sit back and be complicit when genocides happen because the political will isn't there? Or because of excuses like 'they won't appreciate white people helping'?

I'd much rather the military I pay for go to help prevent and stop genocides happening, rather than attack countries based on either criminally flawed evidence, or lies.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
GDB
Posts: 14254
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:35 am

After Somalia, you try getting US in particular, the West in general, to get in the middle of a tribal African situation, that may include genocide.
There is NO large groundswell of support amongst the taxpayers of Western nations for it either.

Iraq went ahead because even here, where we think ourseleves as maybe more worldy, more skeptical, less credulous than the American 'Joe Sixpack' stereotype, enough people DID support it, only just, but enough.
Respect etc, can bang on until the cows come home about THAT huge London demo in early 2003, fact is, there was NOT a mass movement, just an unusually large and vocal one with a more diverse support base.
Nearly big enough to make Blair's position in Parliament tricky, even so, the whole episode in the run up to the war was less divisive than Suez in 1956.

The Irony is, Blair's commitment to overthrowing Saddam was partly a result of his own 'liberal invervention' doctrine.
But when he made it public, in the US in 1999, the world was a different place, the US had, whatever his flaws, an engaged and interested President.
Blair's Chicago speech attracted sneers from some who would two years later laud him, about his ideas needing American body bags to become a reality.

Infuriated by this, Blair asked the MoD to start planning to end the then apparently poor progress of bombing Serbia out of Kosovo.
With, if need be, a 50,000 man all UK ground force.
But with the expectation of US and other NATO logistical and air support, hopefully also embaressing some into putting some boots on the ground, but if need be, it would be a UK ground force-full of troops who had served under the hugely fustrating restrictions of peacekeeping in the region, and were just itching to confront the Serbs with an enemy who could shoot back this time.

As we know, Slobbo caved in, probably the bombing, but it was not long after the plan above was leaked to the broadsheet press.
The poor response by both Europe AND the US in the 1990's, to what was going on in the former Yugoslavia, may well have been seared in Blair's mind, as an opposition leader soon to be PM.
Even now I cringe when former Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd appears on screen.

Blair always wanted to oust Saddam. He must have thought 1998 would be the time, after the UN inspectors were thrown out.
There was a greater Western Consensus, even France would likely approve.
Blair wanted to, even Clinton wanted to.
But Bill could not. Why was he in the news so much in 1998?
No way could he even have so much done a minor operation like Grenada in 83, it would be 'wagging the dog', distracting from a stained dress, much better to have a re-run of the Salem Witch Trials, with modern day Puritans to boot.

Sept 11th, in Blair's own words, changed everything.
Also a chance to add weight to his 'Liberal Intervention' doctrine, with a threat clear to everyone in some places. The US will absolutely be on board now.
Afghanistan clearly, but on Iraq, the Bush administration was in a hurry, the Defence Secretary at the Pentagon careless, or just uncaring, of what happens once Saddam has gone.
Blair wanted Saddam gone, what he did not want was such a split amongst Western Allies, Bush and co might not have worried about this,almost relished it at times, but Blair did.
But he'd pledged support well before.

So we get a PM who wants to 'do the right thing', be it Mugabe, or as he put it 'that lot in Burma', in Sudan even too.
But not after Iraq, the political capitol has gone for years to come.
Not to mention the military overstretch.
The UK, even with highly trained forces, very deployable, very flexible in that they CAN switch from all out conflict to policing/peacekeeping at the drop of a hat, is not a superpower.
It has not had very large numbered (i.e. requiring conscription) forces since the late 1950's.
So broad international agreement is needed to realise his doctrine.

The US is fundamental in all this, but the American public is wary of pure policing/peacekeeping in places of no direct US interest, after Somalia, after Lebanon in 1983/4, quite understandably really, however strong the moral case.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:57 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 20):

So what is your country doing to solve the worsening crisis in the Sudan?

What is any country doing to solve the crisis? Unfortunately, nothing.

Quoting GDB (Reply 21):
The US is fundamental in all this, but the American public is wary of pure policing/peacekeeping in places of no direct US interest, after Somalia, after Lebanon in 1983/4, quite understandably really, however strong the moral case.

I actually highly doubt that. The problem is what information are Americans getting. Was the death of 18 American soldiers in Somalia worth more than leaving that country a mess? Was the death of 243 marines in Lebanon worth the 1000s of deaths in Lebanon from the civil war? Was the death of 200,000 American soldiers worth the death of millions of Europeans during WWII? All these situations have to be placed in perspective. Sure Belgian soldiers died in Rwanda, but if their death and other soldier death had stopped the genocide, then they wouldnt have died in vain. We wouldnt have Africans rightly angry at the Western world for not helping.

But my position is somewhat simply. I dont think anybody disagrees that Saddam was a monster who killed plenty of people. But it becomes a disingenous argument to say that Sudan should be assisted but not Iraq. They share the same issue of trying to stop unneccesary human suffering.

But as the Rwandan problem showed, indecision to act can cause as much or more human suffering than actual action. Politically, however, acting against a perceived problem presents difficulties, because YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO REALLY KNOW IF YOU DID THE RIGHT THING. If the UN and the US had done the right thing in Rwanda, we would be able to sit here and unequivocally state that we saved 800,000 people. We might be getting criticism for 'colonizing' another country or taking advantage of the country or creating another conflict in the same country.
 
777236ER
Topic Author
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:09 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 21):
After Somalia, you try getting US in particular, the West in general, to get in the middle of a tribal African situation, that may include genocide.
There is NO large groundswell of support amongst the taxpayers of Western nations for it either.

Cynicism aside, that doesn't mean that ignoring problems like those in the Sudan are at all right.

The problem with the war on Iraq, from a British and Blair point of view, was entirely the fact that he exploited the feelings in the US post-9/11. He went along with the WMD ideas to garner support for his valid views about Saddam.

An attack on Iraq in 98/99 would have gone down a lot better in the UK and with the world, and despite the problems Clinton was facing back home, I think he could have probably waggled it. I would even go so far as to say that going ahead with meaningful action against Iraq in 98/99 would have silenced a lot of his critics on the right. Maybe they would have though Clinton was trying to out-do Bush I, but I get the feeling a well-constructed argument against Iraq would have won over a significant number of Americans from both sides of the spectrum.

Post-Iraq, everything's changed. Iraq will be a drain on the military resources of the UK and US (and probably ultimately most of the EU) for years to come, and the region isn't getting any more stable. The war on Iraq almost guaranteed significant military presence in the region for decades to come. Would Ahmadinejad have been elected president in 2005 if it wasn't for the war on Iraq and the general idea that the West was 'anti-Islam'? It's certain he has exploited the war on Iraq to try and show this to be the case (ironic, given the history between Iran and sunni-controlled Iraq).

So now there's absolutely no stomach for war, of any sort - despite the situation in Iraq, the worrying state of Iran, the problems in half of Africa, North Korea, human rights abuses in China, nuclear-armed Pakistan and India and the continuing problems in Afghanistan.

Was ousting Saddam in the manner and time in and during which it was carried out really necessary? Fundamentally, did it protect the UK? Did it fullfil any humanitary role we see our armed forces as having?

The UK and her allies are at a greater danger now from more quarters than before the war on Iraq. And as a direct consequence of the war on Iraq, thousands of people will die from lack of intervention from our armed forces.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
User avatar
n229nw
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:30 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 20):
I'd much rather the military I pay for go to help prevent and stop genocides happening, rather than attack countries based on either criminally flawed evidence, or lies.

That about sums it up.

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
But it becomes a disingenous argument to say that Sudan should be assisted but not Iraq. They share the same issue of trying to stop unneccesary human suffering.

Not really. Saddam's gassing of the Kurds happened long before this war, (and it happened while Dumsfeld was shaking has hand and giving him weapons). More recently, Saddam was a brutal tyrant, but not actively genocidal, and multilateral containment strategies and diplomacy needed to be used instead (especially since we, the US, were not a trusted broker in the region even before the second gulf war.) On the other hand, any intervention is Sudan is centered on prevention of present and ongoing genocide--along with rape, torture and pillage.

Quoting GDB (Reply 21):
But not after Iraq, the political capitol has gone for years to come.

Sad but true. And how much sadder since that war has also propelled a madman to power in Iran...

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
Politically, however, acting against a perceived problem presents difficulties, because YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO REALLY KNOW IF YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.

Absolutely. These sorts of moral decisions are truly difficult and very complicated, and the organizations we rely on ideally (the UN, etc.) are inherently political because every member state has its own monetary and political interests and alliances. Also, we can NEVER know the "what ifs" much as we would like to convince outselves that we can.

Still, hard as these situations are, I don't think we should use their difficulty as a way to abdicate out ethical duties as human beings. We need to figure out something to do about Sudan and do it. ASAP.
All Glory to the Hypnotoad!
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:40 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 23):
The UK and her allies are at a greater danger now from more quarters than before the war on Iraq. And as a direct consequence of the war on Iraq, thousands of people will die from lack of intervention from our armed forces.

Again, there is no real simple answer to that. We now know as a fact that there existed a nuclear black market, where A.Q. Khan admitted to selling blueprints and material to build proven nuclear bombs. The government of Pakistan has not allowed him to be questioned to whom he sold this technology to, but there are some obvious guesses now.

There was a lot of pressure to remove the UN sanctions on Saddam prior to the 2003 invasion. If the sanctions had been lifted, it is almost certain that Saddam would have had some sort of nuclear device, which would place Iran in the same position they are right now, developing a nuclear weapon. And we dont know and will never know if that nightmare could have become real.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13515
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:53 am

Does Sudan really matter in terms of the rest of the world's daily lives?

sadly no.

Unfortunately the tragedies going on there will continue unchecked till all involved are so sick of it, they make it stop.


Will it happen?

Doubtful.

The US doesn't like to get involved unless economic independence is threatened.. like say.. by oil. Sad but true.

Russia won't get involved because they sell weapons, commodities, and equipment to these regions, so they don't like to rock the boat. In fact I think they prefer the instability.

The UN doesn't like to get involved without the US. So end of support from rest of world.

Good luck to those in Somalia.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
WrenchBender
Posts: 1662
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 5:59 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:04 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
What is any country doing to solve the crisis? Unfortunately, nothing.

The Following answers that question
United Nations
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/operations/Safari/index_e.asp?id=1416
African Union (Senegal, Rwanda, and Nigeria)
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/operations/augural/index_e.asp

WrenchBender

edit for spelling

[Edited 2006-04-22 02:14:03]
Silly Pilot, Tricks are for kids.......
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:08 am

Quoting WrenchBender (Reply 27):

That is all the help they are getting? Thats a joke.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ry.php?storyId=5356015&ft=1&f=1001
 
WrenchBender
Posts: 1662
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 5:59 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:15 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 28):
That is all the help they are getting? Thats a joke.

I agree with you, but at least there are some countries trying to help.

WrenchBender
Silly Pilot, Tricks are for kids.......
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:23 am

I love how the debate has of course focused on the US.

Can't Germany or France take a shot at saveing the world?

Lawyers, Police, and the US: It's fashionable to hate on them, but god forbid they aren't there to save your butts when you need it.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
777236ER
Topic Author
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:24 am

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 30):
I love how the debate has of course focused on the US.

Can't Germany or France take a shot at saveing the world?

Lawyers, Police, and the US: It's fashionable to hate on them, but god forbid they aren't there to save your butts when you need it.

The debate has focused on the US because it felt the need to invade Iraq to 'save Iraqis', but doesn't see the need to invade Sudan for the same reason.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:25 am

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 30):
I love how the debate has of course focused on the US.

Can't Germany or France take a shot at saveing the world?

Lawyers, Police, and the US: It's fashionable to hate on them, but god forbid they aren't there to save your butts when you need it.

Well, of course, its always the US fault!  sarcastic 

Can Germany and France do anything nowadays? I mean, what kind of success have they had with Iran's nukes?

Hate lawyers, like police.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:37 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 31):
The debate has focused on the US because it felt the need to invade Iraq to 'save Iraqis', but doesn't see the need to invade Sudan for the same reason.



You can thank Wikipedia for proof the US has invaded Sudan too.

We are the African Unions peacekeeping force airlift arm.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
Jetset25j
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:00 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 4:30 pm

Quoting Doona (Reply 12):
The reason for this, is that if we would actually call it a genocide (which it is), the world can not justify a non-intervention standpoint.

The US has called what is happening Genocide, in the State departments Human rights report, it made no beating around the bush to describe the situation as genocide.
Perhaps it is the EU that needs to be more proactive in dealing with Sudan on this one. The "AU" is as a mess as some of its contributors-its like the UN-bought and dealt and ultimately powerless.
Air New Zealand-Airline of the world's greatest travellers.
 
777236ER
Topic Author
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:14 pm

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 33):
You can thank Wikipedia for proof the US has invaded Sudan too.

We are the African Unions peacekeeping force airlift arm.

I don't quite understand what you're getting at; I'm not being anti-American...

Any pithy response by you dismisses the fact that there is essentially a genocide being carried out, while the West sits back and watches.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
GDB
Posts: 14254
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:30 pm

I actually agree with you 777236ER, but as you know, to quote draft dodging corporate boy Cheney, Iraq was 'do-able'
Translation-no threat, no ability to significantly oppose, easy to over demonise Saddam, we'll just say 'A-Rab-must have been in on 9/11'.

Hence the much greater problem of N.Korea not involving similar action, he can fight back-still lose but after inflicting large US/Korean civillian casualties.
As well as maybe having deployable nukes.

So clearly, Iran has noticed this, not that their nuke programme started so recently, but now they have a clear and present need for one-in their view.

Of course, had Sudan not kicked Bin Laden out in 1996 (after US demands to hand him over-this was before he announced his 'Jihad' on the 'far enemy'), there would have course be a much greater imperative for intervention.
Having said that, after the error of using those who were a big part of the problem in Afghanistan-the Northern Alliance, against the Taliban, who can say whether intervening in Sudan several years ago would have prevented the situation in Darfur?
 
Derico
Posts: 4477
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 1999 9:14 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:36 pm

I know is sort of off base, but where are all the various African genocides and civil wars in Nostradamus prophecies or in the Bible Code?

All the ancient prophecies hidden in secret codes and verses always seems to be about historical events from places in the world with a good cable network... Just a thought.
My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
 
bill142
Posts: 7867
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 1:50 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:57 pm

While your at it invade all your allies and make them formal states of the US.
 
KSYR
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 12:45 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:28 pm

Screw Sudan. I'm sick and tired of US troops being killed on 'humanitarian' missions. If Germans or Brits or Australians have a problem with Sudan, they can send their own damn troops over there. We tried to be the nice guys in Somalia, and we all know how receptive the skinnies were to our aid over there...

America has larger problems to worry about (Iran, North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan). We don't have the time nor the resources to get bogged down in a PR stunt gone haywire.
 
CXA330300
Posts: 1318
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 5:51 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:42 pm

It wouldn't work. We'd get Bin Ladin really worked up.....Sudan is majority Muslim. And the refugees are Muslim as well.

Quoting GDB (Reply 16):
Neither can those in Zim.

But you know who they can get helped by? The UK, EU, US, and Oz, who put sanctions on Zim so that they cannot get aid, so that there is 70% unemployment and massive starvation.

That doesn't take away from how bad Mugabe is though. I support land reform, but I DO NOT support torture (as in MDC supporters).

Quoting KSYR (Reply 39):
Screw Sudan. I'm sick and tired of US troops being killed on 'humanitarian' missions.

I'm sick and tired of the US acting like its superior to everything. You invaded a nation for its oil. You can easily help people. But no, 12 Americans are worth more than 470,000 Africans! Bloody racists.
Home airport now: DCA/IAD
 
KSYR
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 12:45 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:13 am

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 40):
I'm sick and tired of the US acting like its superior to everything. You invaded a nation for its oil. You can easily help people. But no, 12 Americans are worth more than 470,000 Africans! Bloody racists.

Why should we have our soldiers killed just because a nation can't take care of its own people? I'm all for rescue and relief missions- the Asian tsunami, earthquakes in Turkey and Iran, things like that.

But we aren't the world's policeman. I'm sick of people criticizing us for our actions in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and then expecting us to drop everything when they turn around and ask for our help dealing with problems that they can't control.

Call the fucking UN. I'm sick of the US being the nation that comes to the rescue and then after the deed is done is back to being the world's bulls-eye.
 
GDB
Posts: 14254
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:31 am

Why do some in the US constantly bang on about the massive burden the US suffers in peacekeeping?
Most boots on the ground are NOT US, not even NATO in general.
Not in the former Yugoslavia either.

France has intervened very often in situations in Africa, sometimes not with good results, since de-colonisation.
They did not when it was most needed, in 1994, but who did?
That was a UN failure-which means it was a failure by all members, particulary the Security Council.

Somalia is an understandably sore point, though 'BlackHawk Down' is an exciting, very well made film, it is not about what led up to the events portrayed. Not meant to be really.
The US troops, chucked into a complex situation (about the last act of Bush 1), with no real plan, no real idea of what to do, no proper training in aspects of what would be needed to sometimes prevent escalation.
Not really their fault, as stated, it was a rushed, PR driven deployment.

The UK is over stretched in Iraq, Afghanistan, still in Kosovo, a recent find in Northern Ireland of a large bomb being put together by dissident Republicans shows a total troop pull out is not near there, along with deterring agression elsewhere too.

Germany still has restrictions on overseas deployment, but they have stepped up in peacekeeping, most European NATO nations have, or have had, operations in Afghanistan, from boots on the ground to Danish, Dutch or Norwegian F-16's providing air support-including for US troops under fire.

They wanted to do a lot more in 2001, but the US preferred using the Northern Alliance, brutal (worse than the Taliban when they ran Kabul-not through Islam-just rape and pilliage), very untrustworthy.
Don't think that rebuff (and now requests for more troops as Afghanistan still teeters on the edge), has been forgotten in some European nations.

If you offer unlimited help-the US won't want to know, then will attack you for not doing enough.
At least under this incompetent, careless administration.
 
PSA53
Posts: 2939
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:54 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:48 am

Quoting Hkg82 (Reply 4):
Why not strike China?

Or Mexico, politically.Create a US/Hispanic party that will reform the entire
Mexican political format,will start taking care of it's people on the road
to becoming a super power.Throw the bum's out!

Quoting KSYR (Reply 39):
Screw Sudan. I'm sick and tired of US troops being killed on 'humanitarian' missions. If Germans or Brits or Australians have a problem with Sudan, they can send their own damn troops over there. We tried to be the nice guys in Somalia, and we all know how receptive the skinnies were to our aid over there...

Our "Good Guys" days are over and has never really worked and or has
backfire in the PR dept.

But I also feel that all these anit-Bush,anti-war protests, created a smoke screen to have the Sudan problem to get badly out of hand.

[Edited 2006-04-23 22:16:56]
Tuesday's Off! Do not disturb.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15781
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:16 am

Quoting Jetset25j (Reply 9):
A blatant no blurs around the line genocide(s). Rampant slavery. Corrupt and racist government. Famine and dire poverty.

That is Africa for you. Whether Rwanda or Sudan or any number of other failed "countries" in that continent. If the West steps in, these traits will continue the moment the West steps out. Best to leave Africa to Africans.

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 10):
Its another ugly scar on the face of humanity

No, it's an ugly scar on the face of Africa. Not all of humanity.

Quoting Doona (Reply 12):
As I see it, the only organization that might be able to succesfully intervene is the Organization of African States.

I agree, and they're doing nothing.

Quoting GDB (Reply 16):
It's a terrible thing to say, but the unfortunate Sudanese can expect no real help from the AU.

True. So why should the West step in?

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
Was the death of 18 American soldiers in Somalia worth more than leaving that country a mess?

Yes. Somalia is a hell-hole. It is not worth an ounce of Western blood. Anyway, it was Somalians who left Somalia in a mess...no one else.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:47 pm

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 35):
I don't quite understand what you're getting at; I'm not being anti-American...

Let's see what I'm getting at.

"The debate has focused on the US because it felt the need to invade Iraq to 'save Iraqis', but doesn't see the need to invade Sudan for the same reason."

Read the side of the plane in post #33. What does it say? I'll hepl, it says U.S. Airforce.

I can assure you, it wasn't picking up party novelties.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 35):
Any pithy response by you dismisses the fact that there is essentially a genocide being carried out, while the West sits back and watches.

I readily acknowledge it, and fully plan to sit back and watch.

You know why?

Let's read your quotes thoughts on the matter.

"The debate has focused on the US because it felt the need to invade Iraq to 'save Iraqis"

Yeah, that's right. That's exactly what we did. We went in to get rid of a tyranical madman who slaughtered his people and sqaundered their futures so he could have palaces.

And now the rest of the world can't shut up about evil america and the modern hilter, dictator Bush.

You know what, it's time for the rest of the world to give it a shot. As we say here, it's time to put your money where your mouth is. It's time the rest of the world showed the US how it's done. Go on, go save a nation. It's your turn.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
windshear
Posts: 2268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 4:45 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:58 pm

Quoting KSYR (Reply 41):
Call the fucking UN. I'm sick of the US beingrnthe nation that comes to the rescue and then after the deed is done isrnback to being the world's bulls-eye.

 bigthumbsup 

First off...

I cannot comprehend why the Muslim world have done or said nothing about this...

Secondly...

All that talk about Israel/Palestine, yet people here are being ethnically cleansed and slaughtered, for real in Sudan!

The US does not have the responsibility, yet people tend to complain, if the US does not do anything...

Could be interesting to see what would happen, should the US back out of international affairs.

Boaz.
"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
 
DC10GUY
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 5:52 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:05 pm

You can't simply "invade" Sudan, Their are important questions that must be answered first. Like, is there any oil ? Whats in it for Haliburton? Do the Saudis want it invaded ? These questions to name a few will all have to be answered.
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:13 pm

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 15):
Two, are some people here actually advocating an invasion or some other form of interventation of a country that has done nothing to harm the US?

Yup. Not an invasion, but an intervention in something that is claiming hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. Sometimes the civilized world has to stand up and say "this is wrong, and it will not happen on our watch."

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 31):
The debate has focused on the US because it felt the need to invade Iraq to 'save Iraqis', but doesn't see the need to invade Sudan for the same reason.

Criticism of the US going to Iraq instead of Sudan is fair, but it doesn't change what's going on in Sudan. Europe does not need the US in order to act. In fact, if Europe was to take some initiative and take the lead in getting involved in the conflict, the US might be pressed to follow. If Europe acts and the US doesn't, then criticise away, and it will be perfectly justified. Otherwise, how about doing something rather than sitting around waiting?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
windshear
Posts: 2268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 4:45 pm

RE: Let's Invade Sudan

Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:24 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 48):
If Europe acts and the US doesn't, thenrncriticise away, and it will be perfectly justified. Otherwise, howrnabout doing something rather than sitting around waiting?

Exactly where I stand as well.

Some Europeans are against intervening in its entirety, so I guess, for some, yes sitting around is better.

Boaz.
"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: B777LRF, BaconButty and 24 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos