UN to Deploy peacekeepers to Darfur

Cypress said:
I disagree.

I don't know how anybody can be against the social, health, and education stuff the UN does: UNICEF, the World Health Organization, the IAEA....I mean, just because Fox News doesn't report on all the valuable work the UN does, doesn't mean it isn't happening.


The UN has successes and failures on the diplomatic front. East Timor=good. Rwanda = Bad.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's far from perfect, but I agree.
 
Cypress said:
I disagree.

I don't know how anybody can be against the social, health, and education stuff the UN does: UNICEF, the World Health Organization, the IAEA....I mean, just because Fox News doesn't report on all the valuable work the UN does, doesn't mean it isn't happening.


The UN has successes and failures on the diplomatic front. East Timor=good. Rwanda = Bad.
Click to expand...

Let me rephrase my previous post... In situations like the Sudan, the UN is not an effective tool. I agree that on the social and health fronts they do good work. and enough with the Fox news crap. I don't watch Fox for news. I watch CNN predominantly. The internet for most of the rest of my news consumption.
 
uscitizen said:
The real issue here is what did our rep to the UN (Bush's boy) do in regards to Darfur ?
Click to expand...

I think that is an excellent question usc, and also, whether or not bush was even aware of what he was, or perhaps more importantly, was not doing on this issue.
 
Superfreak said:
"Sudan is China's largest overseas oil project. China is Sudan's largest supplier of arms, according to a former Sudan government minister. Chinese-made tanks, fighter planes, bombers, helicopters, machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades have intensified Sudan's two-decade-old north-south civil war. A cease-fire is in effect and a peace agreement is expected to be signed by year-end. But the fighting in Sudan's Darfur region rages on, as government-backed Arab militias push African tribes off their land. "

from...

http://www.genocidewatch.org/SudanChinaInvestsHeavily23December2004.htm
Click to expand...

Yes, I get it. I wonder why they backed off now?
 
Darla said:
I think that is an excellent question usc, and also, whether or not bush was even aware of what he was, or perhaps more importantly, was not doing on this issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah , very easy for bush to tell the press he wants to help in Darfur, while teliing his boy in the UN to fight it low key style.
 
uscitizen said:
Yeah , very easy for bush to tell the press he wants to help in Darfur, while teliing his boy in the UN to fight it low key style.
Click to expand...

Or for his boy in the UN, who is a known radical extremist, to tell his boss, not known as the brightest bulb, that he is doing one thing, while doing another.

These Ollie North types you know? They always have their own agendas.
 
Darla said:
Yes, I get it. I wonder why they backed off now?
Click to expand...

I think a large part is due to the fact that Ki-moon is not as gung ho on it being simply an AU force. He praised the AU forces and gave them a pat on the back and then pushed for a larger UN force to go in.

I do not blame the AU forces... I think they did what they could, but they simply do not project the strength that they will now have when rolled up into the UN forces.
 
uscitizen said:
Yeah , very easy for bush to tell the press he wants to help in Darfur, while teliing his boy in the UN to fight it low key style.
Click to expand...

Seriously, if you haven't been following the situation, that is fine. But don't start making up shit just to appease your desire to bash Bush/Bolton etc...

do you honestly think the other UN members wouldn't have called him out if this were the case? Please.
 
Superfreak said:
Seriously, if you haven't been following the situation, that is fine. But don't start making up shit just to appease your desire to bash Bush/Bolton etc...

do you honestly think the other UN members wouldn't have called him out if this were the case? Please.
Click to expand...

A lot of Un members did call Bolten out, off record, about all kinds of shit.

No one cared. No one ever does. Especially so since they won't go on record with their names. But that is fear of retribution.
 
Superfreak said:
Seriously, if you haven't been following the situation, that is fine. But don't start making up shit just to appease your desire to bash Bush/Bolton etc...

do you honestly think the other UN members wouldn't have called him out if this were the case? Please.
Click to expand...

I am not making up crap, Just setting up a common political scenario.
Pretending to be for something while fighting it behind the scenes.
Like congress passing something and then not funding it.
I asked if you knew Boltheads stance on Darfur.
 
Perhaps that was the other african country where we get oil from. I forget the name.
I did Indicate that I was vauge on the fact SF.
btw what was Boltheads stance on Darfur ?
 
uscitizen said:
I am not making up crap, Just setting up a common political scenario.
Pretending to be for something while fighting it behind the scenes.
Like congress passing something and then not funding it.
I asked if you knew Boltheads stance on Darfur.
Click to expand...

Yet you fail to realize that this goes against everything you and those who claim Bush is only in it for gains for his oil buddies.

IF the UN were to go into Sudan and get control of the situation, the US would very likely remove sanctions against Sudan... which would allow the US oil companies to go in and compete for the oil contracts that China is currently getting. So there... now you have an I hate Bush reason for going in, since you are so desperate to find something on this topic to bitch about... use that as your conspiracty theory of the day.

Bottom line... this is a good thing. I believe that a large part of the credit goes to Ki-Moon. The AU forces have done a decent job, but they need help and Ki-Moon has now seen that they will get it... soon.
 
uscitizen said:
Perhaps that was the other african country where we get oil from. I forget the name.
I did Indicate that I was vauge on the fact SF.
btw what was Boltheads stance on Darfur ?
Click to expand...

I posted a link to Boltons stance. I am trying to find a more universally acceptable one.
 
Ahh but it is not that simple SF. America has a bunch invested in China and a big vested interest in seeing them succeed.
And they own a bunch or our national debt as well.
plus many other considerations I have not even thought of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top