Log In
Sign Up and Get Started Blogging!
JoeUser is completely free to use! By Signing Up on JoeUser, you can create your own blog and participate on the blogs of others!
Loony Left Navel Gazing
A champagne socialist reflects on Western culture and the Universe... and whilst gazing at his navel, he comes up with a lot of useless lint. It is the fruits of this navel-gazing that form the substance of this blog.
Should the USA invade Sudan?
Published on March 17, 2005 By
Champas Socialist
In
Politics
I was just sent a link to an online petition which will be sent to President Bush, urging him to "demand the [UN] Security Council support a larger African Union troop deployment, a general arms embargo and targeted sanctions against those most responsible for the atrocities."
Well doesn't that sound familiar, hit too close to home, make you shiver when you think of the way things could go in Sudan. For those of you who are unaware, the Sudanese Government is sanctioning mass killings of its people. Many predict that Sudan will be the next Rwanda. Genocide is on its way to Africa again.
The UN is being weak on this issue. The US wants a stronger resolution on this issue. Sounding a lot like Iraq isn't it. The friend who sent me this forward by the way is probably someone you'd call a leftie, but he's a thinking leftie. But I hesitate before signing.
I believe that the UN is a vital organisation. It is highly imperfect, but I think it is dangerous to ignore it. The reason it was set up was because of the lessons we learned from the 2nd World War. Countries must act together because if countries start acting as renegades, doing whatever they think is best, then we get to the point of chaos once again. The UN acts as a way of us all keeping check on each other, not allowing any nation to become another Nazi Germany.
But the UN is dragging its heels and millions of people stand to lose their lives as a result. I simply cannot stand the idea of another Rwanda. I want Bush and Howard to kick the UN's arse into gear. But I do not want to encourage them to act without the UN, because I also think that many of the problems created by the culturally insensitive and arrogant way in which the USA invaded Iraq could have been avoided had there been more involvement from the UN.
So should I sing the petition or not. What are your views?
http://www.democracyinaction.org/darfur/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=407
Link
Article Tags
politics
Popular Articles in this Category
Let's see your political memes
Popular Articles from Champas Socialist
Obama: More Conservative than Bush?
Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages
Prev
1
2
3
Next
16
T B
on Mar 21, 2005
This, by the way is what I sent Mr Bush. It is not the original words of the petition, but my own words
Wonderfully written.
With regard to the original post question, I think it's high time we get NATO and the international community to pony up troops on this one (Sudan).
17
T B
on Mar 21, 2005
That's why North Korea is free
A perverse view of what freedom is Lucy.
18
Dr Guy
on Mar 22, 2005
With regard to the original post question, I think it's high time we get NATO and the international community to pony up troops on this one (Sudan).
It is not Europe, and it is not NATO's business. It is the UNs. And that is where the failure lies.
19
Dr Guy
on Mar 22, 2005
Sudan is a worse situation in my view. But I have hinted that Iraq was not as bad as I originally thought. I would have in time supported Bush's invasion, I just think he was better off waiting for the UN...
It is not a question of scoring points against lefties here in the Colonies. Most of the world vilified us for doing what you essentially say was the right thing to do, just not at the cost you thought it would impose. And while you advocate sending US troops into a situation that is clearly tailor made for the UN (that is shirking its charter duty), the reality is that Armies are designed for one thing. They are not designed for peacekeeping, but for breaking things and Killing People. That the US and Coalition in Iraq has not done a lot of that is a testament to their competancy and professionalism. But the sad rality is that if the US were to go into Sudan, they would break things and kill people, and then the same people creaming for intervention would be screaming for our heads. The solution is so simple as it defies any complicated analysis. Get the UN to do its job. But as you can plainly see, any organization that puts the Sudan on the Human Rights council while its government practices Genocide, will never be competant to do the right thing, since it is not competant to understand it. The backup plan is equally as simple, but perhaps not as abvious. Get the OAS to go in. They can ask for American support, but it is their neighbor doing it, and ultimately their black eye for allowing it. The world has bitten the hand of freedom that America has offered too many times. Once bitten twice warned. It is on their heads that America does not want to shed its blood for a cause that they will be condemned for by the rest of the world.
20
Nick
on May 02, 2005
"I believe that the UN is a vital organisation. It is highly imperfect, but I think it is dangerous to ignore it. The reason it was set up was because of the lessons we learned from the 2nd World War."
What BS! Just how are all the morons from the 3rd world supposed to help us remember the lessons? Too many insignificant teats running around.
21
drmiler
on May 03, 2005
I think we probably disagree less on the UN than you realise. I think it is horribly corrupted and has become so bureaucratic that too much of the money devoted to it doesn't actually get to the causes required. But it also does some good. Like democracy, no one has yet come up with a better system. It is the least worst system. Regardless, let's talk about this Sudan issue as rational human beings debating an issue, not people trying to score points agsinst the enemy.
Can you tell me the last "good" thing the UN did?
22
dabe
on May 03, 2005
We should not invade Sudan unless we find oil there and can insure that Halliburton makes a ton of money. Otherwise, there is no US interest in invading. In fact, if they slaughter eachother into extinction, then maybe we can go in and set up a strategic military base without any interferrence from them. Hmmmmmmmmmm.................
All kidding aside, I used to think that the US military had moved away from killing and imperialism and other misdeeds to one of providing humanitarian support to other countries. That's the way I viewed the US intervention in Bosnia, because they were so busy slaughtering eachother, we just couldn't stand by and do nothing. I actually was trying to convince my daughter to join the navy because we don't invade other countries and fight wars. Holy shit, was I wrong. I am so glad she didn't listen to me, and did not enlist.
But, with this administration, I do not believe the USA has any modicum of altruism anymore. I am ashamed of this country. We are failing the rest of the world on so many levels and so many issues, including our own country and citizens because of the conflicts of interest, outright imperialism, coddling of dictators, and downright greed.
I cannot understand how we could justify going into Iraq because Saddam "killed his citizens", for which the US aided and abetted such activity until no longer needed, but when it comes to
real
genocide, we say we cannot get involved. I am so disgusted with this fascist and greedy administration. They will go down. And, history will not judge them kindly.
23
dabe
on May 03, 2005
Can you tell me the last "good" thing the UN did?
drmiler wants a lesson in the UN activities. That would be like trying to fill a colander with water.
24
drmiler
on May 03, 2005
Can you tell me the last "good" thing the UN did?
drmiler wants a lesson in the UN activities. That would be like trying to fill a colander with water.
shut up stupid
! You are not Champas, so the question was NOT for you to comment on.
25
dabe
on May 03, 2005
Oh drmiler, you learned how to use an avatar. Oh goody. Your choice really validates who you are and what I think of you. From Infoplease
Link
"The Confederate battle flag, called the "Southern Cross" or the cross of St. Andrew, has been described variously as a proud emblem of Southern heritage and as a shameful reminder of slavery and segregation. In the past, several Southern states flew the Confederate battle flag along with the U.S. and state flags over their statehouses. Others incorporated the controversial symbol into the design of their state flags. The Confederate battle flag has also been appropriated by the Ku Klux Klan and other racist hate groups. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center,
more than 500 extremist groups use the Southern Cross as one of their symbols
."
Here's a statement from wikepedia
Link
"Others see it as a symbol of the institution of slavery which the Confederate government defended, or of the Jim Crow laws enforcing racial segregation in the Southern States for almost a century later. According to Civil War historian and southerner Shelby Foote, the flag traditionally represented the south's resistance to northern political dominance generally; it became racially charged during the Civil Rights Movement, when protecting segregation suddenly became the focal point of that resistance."
Given the racism controversy of this flag, and the fact that one poster even pointed out that the Sudanese are a nation of dark skinned people, and the topic of this article is about whether we should get involved with ending the conflict, I find this new addition to your persona quite telling. What a surprise ................ NOT
26
drmiler
on May 03, 2005
"The Confederate battle flag, called the "Southern Cross" or the cross of St. Andrew, has been described variously as a proud emblem of Southern heritage and as a shameful reminder of slavery and segregation. In the past, several Southern states flew the Confederate battle flag along with the U.S. and state flags over their statehouses. Others incorporated the controversial symbol into the design of their state flags. The Confederate battle flag has also been appropriated by the Ku Klux Klan and other racist hate groups. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, more than 500 extremist groups use the Southern Cross as one of their symbols."
Here's a statement from wikepedia
Link
"Others see it as a symbol of the institution of slavery which the Confederate government defended, or of the Jim Crow laws enforcing racial segregation in the Southern States for almost a century later. According to Civil War historian and southerner Shelby Foote, the flag traditionally represented the south's resistance to northern political dominance generally; it became racially charged during the Civil Rights Movement, when protecting segregation suddenly became the focal point of that resistance."
Given the racism controversy of this flag, and the fact that one poster even pointed out that the Sudanese are a nation of dark skinned people, and the topic of this article is about
I'm sorry but this is all so much bullshit! Although, since it's coming from you I am not at all surprised. This is just another PRIME example of your ignorance and stupidity!
27
BigBoy
on May 03, 2005
Teats are always significant
28
BigBoy
on May 03, 2005
Teats are always significant
29
dabe
on May 03, 2005
Well, I suppose you're not going to respond to my accusation that you are a dumbass racist, dopemiler, because you basically are, and by displaying that hateful symbol, you really are showing your true colors. Pictures speak a thousand words.
30
drmiler
on May 03, 2005
Well, I suppose you're not going to respond to my accusation that you are a dumbass racist, dopemiler, because you basically are, and by displaying that hateful symbol, you really are showing your true colors. Pictures speak a thousand words
Hateful to who? Since *your* the only one commenting on it. Racist? I think not you ignorant twit. And twit is spelled with an "a"! Take a hike oh mindless one. Go visit the *col*.
3 Pages
Prev
1
2
3
Next
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!
Sign Up Now!
Meta
Views
» 9964
Comments
»
32
Category
»
Politics
Comment
Recent Article Comments
Let's start a New Jammin Thr...
Modding Ara: History Untold
LightStar Design Windowblind...
DeskScapes 11: The Dream Mak...
Which A.I. Software Are You ...
ChatGPT 4o vs. o1 vs. o1 Pro...
What's the Last Book You Rea...
A day in the Life of Odditie...
Let's see your political mem...
Safe and free software downl...
Sponsored Links