Congolese Nightmare

Cypress

Well-known member
Burma, Sudan, Iraq...heartbreaking stories of human rights crimes. Flat taxes and school curriculum in venezuela; farther down the list of things to be concerned about.

But, if you have a strong stomach and don't mind truly being horrified, what's happening in the Congo is a complete nightmare.




Rape Epidemic Raises Trauma of Congo War

BUKAVU, Congo — Denis Mukwege, a Congolese gynecologist, cannot bear to listen to the stories his patients tell him anymore.

Every day, 10 new women and girls who have been raped show up at his hospital. Many have been so sadistically attacked from the inside out, butchered by bayonets and assaulted with chunks of wood, that their reproductive and digestive systems are beyond repair.

“We don’t know why these rapes are happening, but one thing is clear,” said Dr. Mukwege, who works in South Kivu Province, the epicenter of Congo’s rape epidemic. “They are done to destroy women.”

Eastern Congo is going through another one of its convulsions of violence, and this time it seems that women are being systematically attacked on a scale never before seen here. According to the United Nations, 27,000 sexual assaults were reported in 2006 in South Kivu Province alone, and that may be just a fraction of the total number across the country.

“The sexual violence in Congo is the worst in the world,” said John Holmes, the United Nations under secretary general for humanitarian affairs. “The sheer numbers, the wholesale brutality, the culture of impunity — it’s appalling.”

The days of chaos in Congo were supposed to be over. Last year, this country of 66 million people held a historic election that cost $500 million and was intended to end Congo’s various wars and rebellions and its tradition of epically bad government.

But the elections have not unified the country or significantly strengthened the Congolese government’s hand to deal with renegade forces, many of them from outside the country. The justice system and the military still barely function, and United Nations officials say Congolese government troops are among the worst offenders when it comes to rape. Large swaths of the country, especially in the east, remain authority-free zones where civilians are at the mercy of heavily armed groups who have made warfare a livelihood and survive by raiding villages and abducting women for ransom.

According to victims, one of the newest groups to emerge is called the Rastas, a mysterious gang of dreadlocked fugitives who live deep in the forest, wear shiny tracksuits and Los Angeles Lakers jerseys and are notorious for burning babies, kidnapping women and literally chopping up anybody who gets in their way.

United Nations officials said the so-called Rastas were once part of the Hutu militias who fled Rwanda after committing genocide there in 1994, but now it seems they have split off on their own and specialize in freelance cruelty.

Honorata Barinjibanwa, an 18-year-old woman with high cheekbones and downcast eyes, said she was kidnapped from a village that the Rastas raided in April and kept as a sex slave until August. Most of that time she was tied to a tree, and she still has rope marks ringing her delicate neck. The men would untie her for a few hours each day to gang-rape her, she said.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/world/africa/07congo.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
 
I purposely did not read this story yesterday. I thought there would be things in there that wouldn't leave my mind, ever.
 
that's why I put the warning about having a strong constitution before reading it darla.

Some of those images are seared in my mind, today. Good on the NY Times for reporting it. Fox, MSNBC, and Time aren't reporting it.
 
Damo, I don't know.

I think sub-saharan africa basically gets largely ignored by the world media. But, from the snippets I've managed to get out of the media, its worse than Burma, Iraq, and the former Yugoslavia combined.
 
LMAO..............

More KGB crap...Putin et al learned well from the US Game(Play) on their Afghan war...we broke them financially...they regrouped and called themselves 'Social Democrats' they have now regrouped their losses...and have stolen the play...are y'all that dumbed down..that ya can't see the forrest thru the trees? Communism never disappeared(if so please explain where the millions of followers went?) they just borrowed some time and called themselves something other than what they once were...and continue to be...I really can't believe how stupid some people have become!
 
As am I. I wonder if Nigeria will send any forces to the Congo... They seem to be the only place that pays any attention.

UN has troops in the Congo. From what I gather though, there's not nearly enough, given the geographic size of the area, and the UN troops are not mandated to intervene in the genocide. It actually sounds as bad or worse than Rwanda.

Moreoever, this article suggest that part of the problem is that there is an entire generation of men who are psychologically destroyed. They grew up under the Rwandan massacres, and the shadow of violent Hutu militias, and this generation of men has simply lost any connection to humanity and conscience. They've lived through a decade of brutality, rape and chaos. And now rape murder and mayhem are just a way of life for them.
 
BAC - the political leaders of the world won't authorize UN troops to do anything to stop the carnage.


UN troops wait behind razor wire as Congo's streets run with blood

Dead bodies litter Bunia's empty streets. From some the blood still drips from machete slashes, spear thrusts and bullet wounds. Others are two weeks old and stinking, half-eaten by the packs of dogs flopping lazily about the once-prosperous north-eastern capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

There are women's bodies scattered in Bunia's main mar ket place; a baby's body on its main road; two priests' bodies inside one church. Last week, a burning corpse was tossed on to the main UN compound's lawn, to show 700 Uruguayan peacekeepers what they were missing while they cowered under fire behind its razor-wire perimeter, unauthorised to intervene in the latest massacre of Congolese civilians.

With the UN mission in Congo unable to fill the vacuum - having only 4,000 troops to police an area two-thirds the size of western Europe - a massacre in Bunia had been widely predicted.

"Does the world care what happens to Congo? No," said Lieutenant-Colonel Daniel Vollot, the French commander of UN forces in Ituri.

"We've been sending messages every day to [the UN headquarters in] New York [saying] this was going to happen, that we need more troops. Nothing was done."



http://www.guardian.co.uk/congo/story/0,12292,961954,00.html
 
There are times when an effective use of military force is justified.

The UN should act more forcefully.

What's the litmus test black?

Not a rhetorical question, btw. At what point or through what actions does a country lose its right to sovereignty and require international intervention?
 
What's the litmus test black?

Not a rhetorical question, btw. At what point or through what actions does a country lose its right to sovereignty and require international intervention?

What's the litmus test?

Its a good question. When I read this story, I was shocked. The mere thought of tens of thousands of women and girls being abducted, raped and mutilated, almost makes me want to grab a gun and head over there to do something to stop it.

On a practical level, its a difficult question, on where to draw the line. Diplomacy is always the first option, of course. And I don't know enough about the congolese civil war to talk intelligently about it. But, it sounds like the worst genocide and human rights crisis on the planet right now. One that should be getting FAR, far more attention.
 
What's the litmus test?

Its a good question. When I read this story, I was shocked. The mere thought of tens of thousands of women and girls being abducted, raped and mutilated, almost makes me want to grab a gun and head over there to do something to stop it.

On a practical level, its a difficult question, on where to draw the line. Diplomacy is always the first option, of course. And I don't know enough about the congolese civil war to talk intelligently about it. But, it sounds like the worst genocide and human rights crisis on the planet right now. One that should be getting FAR, far more attention.

Yeah I don't know enough about the Congo to comment intelligently so I won't. My general libertarian sentiment leans toward non-intervention in almost all cases, but I do feel for the plight of those in Zimbabwe, North Korea, Burma, and the Congo.

It is a slap in the face to those countries who face dire humanitarian and political crises that Iraq was chosen to be the US's nationbuilding guineau pig just because Sadaam had pissed off Bush Sr.

I pride myself on consistency in positions, but it is very difficult to maintain a consistent position about global intervention because each individual case is so different.
 
Yeah I don't know enough about the Congo to comment intelligently so I won't. My general libertarian sentiment leans toward non-intervention in almost all cases, but I do feel for the plight of those in Zimbabwe, North Korea, Burma, and the Congo.

It is a slap in the face to those countries who face dire humanitarian and political crises that Iraq was chosen to be the US's nationbuilding guineau pig just because Sadaam had pissed off Bush Sr.

I pride myself on consistency in positions, but it is very difficult to maintain a consistent position about global intervention because each individual case is so different.

Agree, every situation has to be taken on a case by case basis.

In my gut though, I feel that sub-saharan africa doesn't get the attention other regions do. That world leaders and UN beauracrats don't give it the attention comensurate with the level of genocide going on there.
 
Agree, every situation has to be taken on a case by case basis.

In my gut though, I feel that sub-saharan africa doesn't get the attention other regions do. That world leaders and UN beauracrats don't give it the attention comensurate with the level of genocide going on there.

Also just looking at Iraq, we don't seem to be much good at liberating.

I genuinely think that most Iraqis would have been better off under Sadaam Hussein. I don't think we did them any favors by uncorking a sectarian civil war and getting Iran involved in the insurgency. Opinion polls show Iraqis overwhelmingly opposed to our presence.

Considering that, it's hard to justify more meddling.
 
How can the rest of the world speak of ethics at all when this goes ignored by so many?

I remember hearing a great quote from a professor from Africa when asked about the problems in some countries and his response was the best I've ever seen. He said:
"People talk about poverty, disease, war, aid, but no one wants to talk about the elephant in the room, which is African governments."

His point was that richer countries don't want to be seen as interfering in their former colonies and are scared as hell of showing the image that their (mainly white) countries tell African governments (mainly black) that they know better or need to tell them off or what have you. So they just talk about catastrophe, need for aid, etc...
The actual government in power is not held accountable. If you look at Serbia with Milosevic, he was nailed to the wall by the UN and western countries. But name the last time you ever heard some dictator in Africa held to the same account?

Just another double standard to add to the many that exist and the one I already exposed with lefties here.
 
I remember hearing a great quote from a professor from Africa when asked about the problems in some countries and his response was the best I've ever seen. He said:
"People talk about poverty, disease, war, aid, but no one wants to talk about the elephant in the room, which is African governments."

His point was that richer countries don't want to be seen as interfering in their former colonies and are scared as hell of showing the image that their (mainly white) countries tell African governments (mainly black) that they know better or need to tell them off or what have you. So they just talk about catastrophe, need for aid, etc...
The actual government in power is not held accountable. If you look at Serbia with Milosevic, he was nailed to the wall by the UN and western countries. But name the last time you ever heard some dictator in Africa held to the same account?

Just another double standard to add to the many that exist and the one I already exposed with lefties here.
Idi Amin.

Still, there is some truth in what you say. I do think that we -- by which I mean all "Western" nations -- should be always reluctant to interfere in anyone's government. That's true no matter how bad that government might be -- or might seem to us. There are, however, times when intervention is truly called for.

Iraq was not one of those times, because there was no clear mandate from the Iraqi people for intervention and there was not enough evidence of ongoing genocide by Saddam Hussein's government. By way of contrast, the world should have intervened in Rwanda during early 1994.

I also think the world should be getting ready to intervene in both Congo and Sudan, right now.
 
Back
Top