UN to Deploy peacekeepers to Darfur

[Cypress]

Some good news...

U.N. to deploy peacekeepers to Darfur

A force of as many as 26,000 troops and police will be sent to the troubled Sudanese region by the end of the year.

By Maggie Farley, Times Staff Writer
August 1, 2007

UNITED NATIONS — The Security Council on Tuesday authorized a massive U.N. peacekeeping operation to deploy to Darfur in an effort to protect civilians and aid workers in Sudan's conflict-racked region.

The council voted 15 to 0 to begin sending a joint U.N.-African Union force of as many as 26,000 troops and police to Darfur before the end of the year to quell violence that has killed more than 200,000 people and displaced more than 2 million in four years.

The full force, the largest authorized by the U.N., will take about a year to muster and could cost $2 billion, said peacekeeping chief Jean-Marie Guehenno. He added that a substantial number of troops will arrive before year's end.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called the resolution "historic and unprecedented" and said it would help "improve the lives of the people of the region and close this tragic chapter in Sudan's history.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ry?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true

 

[Cancel7]

I know, this was one news item that finally, made me happy. It's about time.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I know, this was one news item that finally, made me happy. It's about time.

damn straight. FINALLY. Better late than never.

 

[uscitizen]

Too late for many. what was that about 1 million killed ?
But then none were white or jewish so why should we care....

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Too late for many. what was that about 1 million killed ?
But then none were white or jewish so why should we care....

True... to late for many, but hopefully in time for those still alive.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Also US... what the hell are you bringing race into it for? Kofi Annan was African and did little to stop this.

 

[uscitizen]

I brought race into it because I felt that is why it never was a concern to the US before. Only a concern to us "bleeding heart liberals".

 

[Cypress]

Also US... what the hell are you bringing race into it for? Kofi Annan was African and did little to stop this.

Kofi Annan, or any Secretary General of the UN, is an employee of the security council. The Secretary General implments the will of the security council. He doesn't make policy.

Is the fault of the security council, for letting this fester.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I brought race into it because I felt that is why it never was a concern to the US before. Only a concern to us "bleeding heart liberals".

Bush/Clinton and many others have been calling upon the UN to send in troops for years now. It isn't the US that has been blocking the movement. It was China.... because they did not want an interuption in their oil contracts.

 

[uscitizen]

Bush called for it ? I guess we get no oil from there then....

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Kofi Annan, or any Secretary General of the UN, is an employee of the security council. The Secretary General implments the will of the security council. He doesn't make policy.

Is the fault of the security council, for letting this fester.

http://www.un.org/sg/sgrole.shtml

The above link is provided for you since you seem to be oblivious to how the UN works.

The Secretary general is recommended by the Security council and is put in place by the general assembly. The Secretary General is NOT an employee of the security council.

"One of the most vital roles played by the Secretary-General is the use of his "good offices" -- steps taken publicly and in private, drawing upon his independence, impartiality and integrity, to prevent international disputes from arising, escalating or spreading. "

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

"The Charter describes the Secretary-General as "chief administrative officer" of the Organization"

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Bush called for it ? I guess we get no oil from there then....

No, I do not believe we get much if any oil from the Sudan. But isn't the whole "ihate Bush" crowds mantra that he only goes in WHEN we get oil from a country?

 

[Cypress]

an "Adminstrative" officer is just that: An adminstrator. He's not the chairman of the security council, nor the chief executive officer of the security council.

If you want to believe that the UN Secretary General is an entirely autonmous leader, with the freedoms and lattitude to make UN decisions unilaterally, go ahead. This isn't an issue I really feel I need to educate you about.

 

[Damocles]

an "Adminstrative" officer is just that: An adminstrator. He's not the chairman of the security council, nor the chief executive officer of the security council.

If you want to believe that the UN Secretary General is an entirely autonmous leader, with the freedoms and lattitude to make UN decisions unilaterally, go ahead. This isn't an issue I really feel I need to educate you about.

He most certainly has the freedom to condemn such actions as Darfur.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

an "Adminstrative" officer is just that: An adminstrator. He's not the chairman of the security council, nor the chief executive officer of the security council.

If you want to believe that the UN Secretary General is an entirely autonmous leader, with the freedoms and lattitude to make UN decisions unilaterally, go ahead. This isn't an issue I really feel I need to educate you about.

The point you twit, is that it IS his responsibility to put pressure on the Security Council to act.

It is the same as in this country... If the President feels there is a desperate need for action, that cannot take place without the Legislature enacting a new law or bill... then it is the Presidents responsibility to act and to put public pressure on the legislature to do so.

 

[Cypress]

The point you twit, is that it IS his responsibility to put pressure on the Security Council to act.

It is the same as in this country... If the President feels there is a desperate need for action, that cannot take place without the Legislature enacting a new law or bill... then it is the Presidents responsibility to act and to put public pressure on the legislature to do so.

Uh-huh.....

Newest excuse for Darfur inaction from President Bush, Tony Blair, and Jacque Chirac:

"But, Kofi didn't pressure us enough to do anything!!!"


SF, Fox News might not have told you this, but on balance, Kofi was one of the most popular, respected, and effective UN Secretary Generals ever. Was he perfect? LOL, no one ever said he was.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

AGAIN... from the UN's own website....

"One of the most vital roles played by the Secretary-General is the use of his "good offices" -- steps taken publicly and in private, drawing upon his independence, impartiality and integrity, to prevent international disputes from arising, escalating or spreading. "

But let me guess... you didn't even bother reading the UN's own description of the Secretary Generals role... did you?

Yes, he cannot act on his own.... but it is his responsibility to hold the Security council accountable if they fail to act. It is his responsiblity to put the pressure on them in public or private.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Uh-huh.....

Newest excuse for Darfur inaction from President Bush, Tony Blair, and Jacque Chirac:

"But, Kofi didn't pressure us enough to do anything!!!"


SF, Fox News might not have told you this, but on balance, Kofi was one of the most popular, respected, and effective UN Secretary Generals ever. Was he perfect? LOL, no one ever said he was.

You fucking moron... it was China that continually blocked the security council from going into the Sudan. Quit listening to moveon.org and commondreams and pull your head out of your ass.

 

[Cypress]

You fucking moron... it was China that continually blocked the security council from going into the Sudan. Quit listening to moveon.org and commondreams and pull your head out of your ass.

Uh-huh.

And its all Kofi's fault.

The US and the UK simply have no leverage with China. None. Nada. Zip.