| Submit your comments on this article |
| Save Darfur! |
| 2006-04-24 |
| There will be a rally in DC on Sunday. Come if you can. See below for more info. http://www.savedarfur.org/home |
| Posted by:liberalhawk |
| #29 What TW said!! What 49 Pan said. Once again, LH - you stand with your party instead of being right. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-24 23:58 |
| #28 what TW said Dan! |
| Posted by: RD 2006-04-24 23:44 |
| #27 I'm back. Re: the Chinese troops... earlier, I was looking through Google, and according to some sites some of the ones not attached to the peacekeeping group may have been more like security guards than an armed force. Also, regarding Darfur itself: there may be opportunities to work with Chad on the situation, especially if they're at war with Sudan to begin with. Which will give you a decent slogan right there. |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-04-24 18:44 |
| #26 liberalhawk, I really don't think NATO is going to budge. They resent having been forced into actual activity in Afghanistan (even as the various Special Forces units revel in the opportunity to use their skills). However, I think sendng in some Rangers (or Green Berets or something) to train the locals in self-defence would be better in the long run. Teach a man to fish, and all that. I just would have been more pleased, and think it would have increased the likelihood of having an impact, had the rally taken place a year or two ago, before how many hundreds of thousands been driven out, enslaved or killed. But I do wish y'all good luck with the rally -- pleasant weather and lots of people. And I cant' wait to read Dan Darling's article tomorrow. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-04-24 18:03 |
| #25 I find it a bit distrubing that when they Kartoum Govt was killing the Christians in the South, nobody said a word. Now that is muzzi on muzzi we hold rallies. I agree that it will do no good. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-04-24 17:54 |
| #24 TW I havent given up on a NATO force. I can assure you, however, that something will only be done if there is pressure for it to be done. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-04-24 17:31 |
| #23 There are several thousand Chinese 'engineers' in Sudan mostly working in the oil industry. I believe they have their own security teams, which could well be PLA or other government agency. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-04-24 17:24 |
| #22 NATO has already negated the possibility of taking over from the [useless] African Union troops. China will veto anything the UN Security Council comes up with -- they prefer the government of Sudan in turmoil beholden to them, to ensure their oil supply. The Sudanese ("Arab"/Muslim) government is not interested in interference by a competent military as they proceed to drive off/murder the Black/Muslim citizenry, stealing land, cattle and slaves in the process, as is their natural right as Uebermenschen. At one point the figure 10,000 deaths per month was bandied about, the direct result of government-sponsored activities by the Janjaweed militias. After all, Sudan's Arab/Muslims had to turn their excess energy to another little Lebensraum project after the world interfered in their attempted erasure of the Black/non-Muslim citizens in the south of the country. I'm afraid I don't see what this rally will accomplish -- given that the major parties have already taken positions on the matter -- except to bring the situation to the attention of America and, if the number of participants is large enough, to goose some politicians into doing something (perhaps allowing the Black/Muslim refugees to come here in some numbers? or, in view of Bin Laden's latest statement, to send in some Special Forces types to help the Black/Muslims to set up a suitable defence against the government "Janjaweed" aggressors?). |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-04-24 17:20 |
| #21 And I have to go now; I've been looking further for actual figures, and I found something interesting on what I consider to be a dishonest site here (ask me later when I have a couple days on why I htink the peak oil people are dishonest) but I have too much work to do getting my oil production quota done to mess with it further today. The spice must flow! |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-04-24 17:04 |
| #20 Phil, is this a typical U.N. peacekeeping force? The kind that aren't allowed to protect anybody. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2006-04-24 17:04 |
| #19 Sudan -- ultimately the creation of Egyptian slave raiders -- should be at least trisected. Country One: Northern and Central Nile Valley (Arab and Muslim). Country Two: Darfur (Muslim and non-Arab, mostly Fur). Country Three: The South (Christian and Animist, non-Arab, Nuer and Dinka). But what about the Nuba Hills of Kordofan, also bitterly exploited (Muslim majority, but many Christians and animists, 50 separate languages)? And the Red Sea Coast (Muslim, Beja-speaking, occasionally in rebellion)? Right now, Sudan is an Arab empire. Time to decline and fall. |
| Posted by: pagan infidel 2006-04-24 17:00 |
| #18 There's a couple hundred attached to a UN peacekeeping force in the area around where the Sudan was having its last civil war (see strategypage here and supposedly enforcing the peace agreement between the SPLA and the government. There is reportedly a separate contingent that's mainly there to protect a chinese-government-owned pipeline. There are more exaggerated and alarmist figures running around the net, but I doubt them. |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-04-24 17:00 |
| #17 It's not in the Darfur region but according to the reports I've heard they're in the oil-producing region, and moved in during the negotiations for the cease-fire there. Let me see if I can check the search function. |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-04-24 16:47 |
| #16 havent heard that Phil. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-04-24 16:40 |
| #15 Liberalhawk, I was under the impression that not only do they sell arms to the government, but that they have boots on the ground in the SE part of the country. |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-04-24 16:39 |
| #14 Thankyewverymuch. Just a little late, though. |
| Posted by: Ian Smith 2006-04-24 16:18 |
| #13 Save Rhodesia! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-04-24 16:04 |
| #12 I'll have a piece in the Weekly Standard on this and Osama's rant's relationship to it tomorrow. |
| Posted by: Dan Darling 2006-04-24 16:03 |
| #11 Yes, the govt is muslim, and the victims are muslims. Not sure why that should matter. It matters a great deal to me, so I want to make sure I understand the situation correctly. |
| Posted by: BH 2006-04-24 16:00 |
| #10 That explains it perfectly. Now that I know the Chinese are against it, then I am all for intervention in the Sudan. It's things like the Chinese interest that a person doesn't hear about unless they check out places like the 'Burg, and get he scoop from someone like the Hawk. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2006-04-24 15:56 |
| #9 The site links to the Kristoff column, under "latest news" |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-04-24 15:51 |
| #8 China imports most of Sudans oil, and yes, sells weapons to the govt of Sudan. Nick Kristoff of the NYT did a column the other day on Chinese involvement. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-04-24 15:50 |
| #7 The part about the U.N. was a wisecrack. Just picking on how limp theyt are in these matters. They just might actually be more limp in the Sudan than they where in Rowanda. If that's even possible. What's with the Chinese veto? Would they by chance be arming one or more side of ths conflict. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2006-04-24 15:48 |
| #6 Osama bin Laden seems to think supporting the Khartoum govt is important, despite Darfuris being muslims. Darfuris are not arabs, and are of lesser "value" than Arabs. Much as Kurds and Berbers are. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-04-24 15:45 |
| #5 1. Yes, the govt is muslim, and the victims are muslims. Not sure why that should matter. Look at the site - sponsoring groups include a ranger of Jewish orgs, including Orthodox. 2. Yeah, the UN knows. Jan Egland (?) the UN rep over there, was stopped by the Sudan govt from going to Darfur. What the UN can do, in the way of sanctions, is limited by the Chinese veto. Right now theres an african union force there, but its too small, too poorly supported, and has too little authority. Proposal to create a UN force, opposed by Sudan. Not clear if China will veto that, but my guess is they will. A NATO force will be an alternative. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-04-24 15:43 |
| #4 B.H. The website confirms your suspicion. This is taken from the "History" section of the sight. "The war, which risks inflicting irreparable damage on a delicate ethnic balance of seven million people who are uniformly Muslim" |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2006-04-24 15:43 |
| #3 What's a Darfur? |
| Posted by: U.N. 2006-04-24 15:21 |
| #2 Does the U.N. knoe about that there'e trouble in Dafur? |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2006-04-24 15:19 |
| #1 Somebody please clarify: Is this a muslim on muslim conflict, or not? Not sure yet if I can get behind this. |
| Posted by: BH 2006-04-24 15:06 |