..and where is the useless UN...come Nov.3 we can only hope GW sends these clowns packing...Give the gov. 24hrs to stop the killing..then if no solution...STOP IT, ROCKET SCIENCE I THINK NOT, SIMPLE...

This is an amazing situation. What we're seeing here, right before our very eyes is the fecklessness of the much vaunted "international community".

The reaction of the UN, the EU and arab league will get zero play in our media because to do so would weaken Kerry's position vis a vis a more sensitive war on terror.

the international community is basically a bunch of inept, unarmed goody goodies who's sole duty is to point out what it is that America should be doing and then acting offended when we get it done.

The reaction of the "world" to this tragedy is simply disgusting. Talk about out of sight, out of mind.

Just disgusting.

Excuse me Skip, but the leader of the free world is not exactly leading on Sudan. While you are exercised by the UN and the EU, I see no difference in their attitudes and that of the Bush administration. Amnesty International is actually leading on this issue, bet you just love that.

rdelephant it may or may not interest you to know that the abolitionist movement is the leading voice in calling for international intervention in the Sudan and has been for years.

Not that it matters much who gets the credit. Nobody who actually cares about genocide or mass rape or slavery in Darfur and elswhere minds AI's participation in the slightest, because tacky little games of political gotcha! aren't the point. But then I'd hardly expect an apologist for Kim Jong Il to comprehend that.

Speaking of which, does the same logic apply in reverse? Do the massacres mean it's unfair to call the Sudanese government slave traders?

Well, I don't know why that first link to the AASG press release came up blank. Here's their home page

Yikes!! Three's the charm I hope

http://www.iabolish.com/index.htm

..oh please rdelephant give me a break, this rhetioc just sux the big wazoo..as soon as" W "does something on his on the lib's start screaming bloody damn murder,doesn't matter one ioda if it`s right or not; hypocritical s**`s..

Ah, the pointless pachyderm. Tell us oh pointless one, just exactly which secretary of state dragged Kofi Anan by the ear to the Sudan, Hmmm?

And I ticked at the EU because they decided that what's going on in the Sudan isn't genocide, therefore no action on their part is necessary.

I don't see French troops landing there, pointless pachyderm, do you? Germans? hmmm? guess not.

HOw about the fabled blue helmets of the UN see them anywhere?

No you don't but you do see people in America actually taking action. didn'T Charlie Rangel get arrrested protesting in front of the Sudanese legation?

Why aren't you peace love drugs woodstock moonbeams out there bleeding from every pore over this?

And the sentiment expressed in a prior post is dead bang right on: as soon as something gets done, the left will rise in righteous indignation.

I wonder how many starving sudanese could live on what Michael Moore eats in a day?

"And I ticked at the EU because they decided that what’s going on in the Sudan isn’t genocide, therefore no action on their part is necessary"

Maybe you missed this little item from yesterday's news.

State Dept.: Sudan Genocide Hard to Prove

Wednesday August 11, 2004 11:01 PM


By BARRY SCHWEID

AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - As human rights groups demand action against Sudan, the State Department is informing Congress it is difficult to establish that the Khartoum government is trying to destroy the non-Arab community in Darfur.

And even if Secretary of State Colin Powell, who has been weighing a judgment for weeks, decides that Sudan and Arab-led militia in the province are committing genocide, the Bush administration would not be required to take legal action, the department said in an informal analysis obtained by The Associated Press.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4411963,00.html

Seems like the Bush administration has EXACTLY the view you find so contemptible by the EU. And maybe I am missing something, but I thought Charles Rangel and Amnesty Interantional were of the left ??

Don't think we didn't notice that you tried to hide behind Rangel, rather than defend Bush's deafening silence on the issue. To paraphrase, we know what it looks like when Bush leads, and this is not it.

If you'd pay attention rde, you'd realize that the U.S. was the sponsor of a bill (or whatever they're called) in the UN to disarm the factions in Sudan. It passed but it is unlikely the UNSC will impose sanctions. Anyway, nice try, we got the ball rolling but it was summarily blocked.

What Bush is trying to do here is show the rest of us(you) how really unimportant the U.N. is to have along. Do you get it yet?

Chads

I think you are confused Chads. Unlike the U.S. Congress, the Bush administration can't decide if this is genocide or not (see article above). The resolution you refer to was passed with just two abstentions by the Security Council (with just the word sanctions removed, but instead with reference to the sanction sections of the United Nations charter). The United States hardly seemed displeased with this approach. My point is that if you think more should be happening, Bush shares as much blame as the UN and the EU (at least), maybe more since he is the leader of the worlds' sole superpower. If you think this is a vindication of Bush and an indictment of the UN and EU then you will have to explain why.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: