You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Africa: Horn
Sudan Calls Out U.S. on Genocide Claim
2004-10-06
Sudan's U.N. ambassador challenged the United States to send troops to the Darfur region if it really believes a genocide is taking place as the U.S. Congress and President Bush's administration have determined.
Sounds like an invitation to me...
Elfatih Mohamed Erwa was asked Tuesday about the effect of the U.S. "genocide" designations when both Bush and his Democratic challenger John Kerry ruled out sending U.S. troops to end the 19-month conflict in their debate Thursday. "If it is really a genocide they should be committed to send troops," the Sudanese ambassador said. "This is why I don't think they're genuine about its being genocide."
I'd say it's more an indication that he thinks U.S. troops are too tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan to actually do anything...
Would U.S. troops really be welcome? "I won't say that I welcome them because I don't have the authority to say that, but if they want to do that, let them talk to us," Erwa said.
"Yo, Erwa! We're gonna come into your country and kill as the janjaweed, okay?"
U.S. Ambassador John Danforth, when told that Erwa raised the possibility of discussing the deployment of U.S. troops, said: "I've never heard of such a thing before. It's certainly an attention grabber. It's a curious idea, but I don't think it has a future."
"But just in case it does, remember, they asked for it..."
Danforth noted that U.S. troops are now in Iraq, Afghanistan and other hotspots and said the United States is strongly supporting the speedy deployment of an expanded African Union force to help end the Darfur conflict. "I think really the focus has been on the AU and that's where the focus should be ... because that is the most promising source of troops," he said, adding that an African force "would offer the most credible source of assurance for the people of Darfur."
"But if they'd really rather have the 82nd Airborne and the Rangers, just let us know. I'm sure we can work something out."
Posted by:Fred

#5  Jules i agree with ya and if anyone at the UN has anything too say well tell them too kiss our ass. Also Just go ahead and AC 130 a couplke of those shitheads a couple times and they will shut their mouth and that including their leadership.
Posted by: smokeysinse   2004-10-06 9:43:28 PM  

#4  Not at all-nice touch. The kvetching from the folks at the UN is ridiculous. Thanks, Dreadnought.
Posted by: jules 187   2004-10-06 3:38:48 PM  

#3  Jules,

If you don't mind I'll add onto your fine rant:

We fix the problems, they contribute nothing AND get to complain about it.
Posted by: Dreadnought   2004-10-06 3:17:15 PM  

#2  Just once I'd like to hear a US diplomat or ambassador publicly chastise no-action countries in the world (and we know who they are-the big talkers) for their parasitic lifestyles and catatonia in the face of crimes against humanity.

If the US military feels it can afford 5000 troops, then maybe mhw has it right-it could be worth it. But in doing so and not holding up the poor example of so many other "advanced" countries in the world, we are reinforcing an already dysfunctional behavior-the US fixes the world's problems while other countries are exempted from contributing their blood, their money, their sweat.
Posted by: jules 187   2004-10-06 12:24:52 PM  

#1  A rudimentary African Union force of 5000 combined with USAF support could mop the floor with the Sudanese army.

If the African Union says they want this, I'd agree to it in a NY minute.
Posted by: mhw   2004-10-06 12:10:05 PM  

00:00