Darfur Rebels Kill 10 in Peace Force

[shrike]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/01/wo...tml?ref=africa

NAIROBI, Kenya, Sept. 30 — Hundreds of Darfurian rebels overran an African Union peacekeeping base in the central Darfur region of Sudan in a surprise raid over the weekend, killing at least 10 soldiers, possibly kidnapping dozens more and seizing supplies that included heavy weapons, African Union officials said Sunday. Haskanita was the temporary home of 100 peacekeepers. The raid, which began late Saturday and appeared to be highly organized, was the deadliest and boldest attack on African Union peacekeepers since they arrived in Darfur three years ago. It came just as the United Nations has been trying to persuade member countries to commit troops and support to a greatly expanded Darfur peacekeeping force. Aid officials now fear that some of those countries may have second thoughts about participating. According to Noureddine Mezni, an African Union spokesman, the rebels swarmed the base just after sunset with 30 heavily armed trucks, surprising the guards and overwhelming the peacekeepers with a barrage of machine-gun fire.

The world really don't care about Suddan.We see news about it only when some armed forces are hurt but no one cares when civilian killed on daily basis.

[butterbut]

Nobody gives a crap. Makes me wanna bust somebody's face.

[butterbut]

Apparently nobody on this board gives a crap. So lets argue about the usefullness of the UN.

The UN is absolutely useless. What conflict have they ever managed to stop? Srebrenica, Rwanda, and now Darfur. The UN needs serious reform.

[shrike]

Quote by: butterbut Apparently nobody on this board gives a crap. .

Of course no one gives a crap becouse its Muslims kills other people.
So leftists on this boatd don't care about that:eek:

[butterbut]

maybe you're on to something there. :eek:

[Osborn F Enready]

What "constitutes" caring, Shrike, butterbut?

Please, define what you "expected" to see here?

[butterbut]

A reply of some sort. Why can't the UN do anything about this crap?

[Osborn F Enready]

Well, I didn't reply because I don't support the UN, or foreign aid missions like they are typically proposing for Darfur.

The UN is a tool, a tool that has been habitually abused since its inception.

Darfur is not a US protectorate, nor is Darfur our policing problem.

Does that mean I have no feelings about what is happening there? Certianly not. Does it mean I don't care what is the outcome in Darfur? Certainly not.

My point is, I want my nation to remove itself, and disassociate itself from the UN entirely and completely, so, I have no opinion other than "stay out" regarding our role, within the UN to do something.

May I ask your age butterbut? I am curious what stake you have in the U.S. as it exists today.

[butterbut]

I'm a 20 year old college student. If you think that makes me nieve please enlighten me. My ears are open.

[Osborn F Enready]

I wasn't alledging "naievte' ", I was curious as to your stake in the system as it exists, and I was curious how long you have been dealing with the IRS, government in general, and being an adult.

Usually, the more people deal with these "agents" of government policy and force, they understand the government is more a "protection racket" like the mafia, then a valid, as introduced, system of law deriving its power from conscent of the governed.

[butterbut]

I get what you're saying. The average person does not have much power at all. All we have is one measly vote every four years.

The Darfur thing really pisses me off. I'm not saying the US should do anything, but the UN definitely should do something. Thier absoulutely useless.

I figured somebody would come on this thread trying to defend the UN. Its good to know that the general consensus is that "the UN sucks."

[Chancellor]

Quote by: shrike http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/01/wo...tml?ref=africa The world really don't care about Suddan.We see news about it only when some armed forces are hurt but no one cares when civilian killed on daily basis.

Why is it up to the rest of the world to care about Sudan (by which I presume you mean "intervene")? Why aren't Sudan's own people rising up in revolt (like American ancestors did)? If you insist there must be foreign intervention, why aren't Sudan's neighbors dealing with it?

[Chancellor]

Quote by: butterbut I get what you're saying. The average person does not have much power at all. All we have is one measly vote every four years.

And as long as Americans stupidly keep voting for Democrats or Republicans that's all they're ever going to have.

The Darfur thing really pisses me off. I'm not saying the US should do anything, but the UN definitely should do something.

Why should the United Nations (which includes the United States) do something? Do you realize that it's in the UN charter not to interfere with the sovereignty of individual nations? Consider: All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use offeree against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations (Article 2, Paragraph 4). Also consider: Article 2 paragraph 7 of the U.N. Charter declares that "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the U.N. to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state...."

If, as you insist, some foreign entity must intervene in the internal affairs of another sovereign state, why shouldn't Sudan's neighbors be the ones to intervene? If Africa ever expects to be treated as if its nations are equal to European or North American nations, then Africa needs to step up to the plate and take care of what's going on in its own backyard.

[butterbut]

Its a moral obligation. Are you suggesting that we let the kids in Africa starve? That we give no foreign aid of any kind whatsoever? We have an obligation to do what we can to make things right. There is a limit to this obligation; we shouldn't necessarily send in tropps but we should do what we can.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: butterbut Its a moral obligation.

Oh really?

Are you suggesting that we let the kids in Africa starve?

I'm not suggesting anything but I will come right out and say it: the United States of America, as a geopolitical entity, has no obligation whatsoever to impose on, offer or give assistance to any other nation. Now, if private charities and individual citizens want to do something, that's up to them.

That we give no foreign aid of any kind whatsoever?

Our government should not be giving foreign aid to any country.

We have an obligation to do what we can to make things right.

Why do we, as a geopolitical entity or as a society, have an obligation to make things "right" (according to whatever we think that right might be)? Where does this obligation come from?

There is a limit to this obligation; we shouldn't necessarily send in troops but we should do what we can.

Again, why should we do anything? Why shouldn't we let them reap what they sow?

[butterbut]

Quote by: Chancellor Again, why should we do anything? Why shouldn't we let them reap what they sow?

What power do private organizations have to stop tyrannical governments? The world's governments alone have the power to stop this. Therefore, they have the responsiblity. Its simple right and wrong.

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

[butterbut]

Quote by: Chancellor Why aren't Sudan's own people rising up in revolt (like American ancestors did)?

Would not have won the Revolutionary War without French intervention.

[another day]

Quote by: butterbut What power do private organizations have to stop tyrannical governments? The world's governments alone have the power to stop this. Therefore, they have the responsiblity. Its simple right and wrong. First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. Pastor Martin Niemöller

A great quote, no doubt, but where's the relevance? It's not applicable.

Your just dealing with hardcore libertarians who don't think it should be up to the government to deal with things like this. That people in locales should solve their own problems, rather then having globilized government forces running the world. Unfortunatly, while this is a good idea, it's not very practical because we have come to a point in time where governments around the world have accumulated so much wealth, power and weaponry that the people can no longer simply rise up, or they will just be slaughtered and put in jail.

Case in point; burma. A revolution successfully thwarted by genocide by the government. (btw 10 monks dead? gimme a break. i guarantee they have killed thousands by now...a senior official who has fled has supported this notion, that's why they cut the internet and phone lines, so the world doesn't hear about it)

[Chaossaber314]

I see Butterbut's point. If we have a thread about George Bush mowing the grass within an hour we'll have 20 posts reaffirming their hatred of the man as if we haven't all shared this 500 times before. However, something happens that is relatively important in Darfur and silence.

[Osborn F Enready]

If individuals want to send money, volunteer to go help, or arrange charity missions to Darfur, I fully support that.

It is not the duty, responsibility or job of Americans to do this using government forces, tax dollars, etc.

I don't think any sane person wants ANY kids to die, regardless of their color, creed, location or anything else, but we have quite a debt, quite a war, and quite a large amount of injustice occurring in our own nation right now, and we must prioritize accordingly.

Last time I checked, the "religions" still had plenty of money to build new churches all over the globe, so, since they aquire and dole their money tax-free, as a charity, perhaps they should start living up to that "charitable" nature they cling to and defend?