should we?
Printable View
should we?
China's special representative on Darfur says the Chinese government's dialogue with Sudan was key to Khartoum agreeing to allow United Nations peacekeepers into the conflict-ridden Darfur region. As Daniel Schearf reports from Beijing, China has become more active in trying to resolve the Darfur conflict after facing criticism for putting economic concerns above human rights.
VOA News - China Takes Credit for Sudan Allowing UN Peacekeepers
China's No. 1 oil company, CNPC, and Indonesia's PT Pertamina have agreed to co-develop a Sudanese offshore oil block, ignoring international efforts to isolate Sudan over the crisis in its Darfur region, a report said Monday.
The agreement, signed Thursday in Sudan's capital, Khartoum, calls for a six-year exploration phase and shared future oil production under a 20-year concession, the CNPC-backed China Petroleum Daily reported.
Sudan is among Beijing's key oil suppliers. It shipped 4.7 million metric tons of crude oil to China in January-May, a fivefold increase over the same period in 2006.
Chinese Company OKs Deal on Sudan Oil - Forbes.com
HELL NO! China is part of the U.N.....let them deal with it since they want to go after the oil contracts. Why should we have to send troops to more/less protect their interests?
Have a good one!:s4:
As a vet who's seen genocide up close in the former Yugoslavia, and been to several civil wars in Africa, we have a lot more business in Darfur than we do Iraq.
The people there are fighting a daily battle for their very existence, wondering where their next meal is coming from, or if they'll be killed by the rebels or the govt troops.
For that cause I would go back.
Of course we should. We should pull the hell out of Iraq and save Darfur.
Fo SHO... why wouldn't we? We're the only country in the world that can stop this. And I hope it does bring China to a head, cuz they are just flithy when it comes to this issue.
Ok, I don't care how much money China lends us. Clearly our next President will have more fiscal sanity than numbnuts, so we should be able to get the economy back on track - meaning, less debt to China.
We would need to kill our deficit spending and do sort of multi prong approach to Darfur. Tell the Chinese to pound sand by sending troops into Darfur and stabilizing the trade over there; and as I said stop borrowing so much money from them.
I voted no, not because we aren't needed, but simply because there aren't any troops left.
The United States is not the world's police force. The American taxpayer is not responsible for every human life on this planet!
A P4B pointed out, let countries that have interests in the area invest their resources in the area. China can afford to do their share of world policing. Actually, they have a huge army that hasn't seen combat in 40 years. It's high time they did something.
For that matter, Mo Qadafi is talking about uniting Africa, let him send Libyan forces to the area.
JMO
PC:smokin:
Quote:
Originally Posted by PharmaCan
u shouldnt think like that
Oh really? And exactly how should I think, my sage?Quote:
Originally Posted by S.W.I.M. 504
PC :smokin:
o lol i was really high. but its still a good idea
I';m high bare with me
I Wrote a paper on this for my english class last semester. Yes we should sent the troops in. They need help land we the US Must be the ones to take a stand :)
Well, Canada would help you, but unfortunately our government hasn't acted on genocide since the 1994 Rwandan Genocide..where the Canadian commander, Lt.Gen. Romeo Dallaire tried desperatly to aid the problem, but was denied the funding and troops he needed to keep things under control. People SHOULD try to stop this, as it's a terrible thing...but, unfortunately most of the people in power have the opinion that "africans can't be helped, we should just leave them and never go there". Terrible and inhumane, but its true the powers that be think that way.
This is why I study this stuff. I would like the help. But one person cannot do anything without power and forces to back him up, as was proved by the failed UN mission in Rwanda.
The UN is pretty useless, if you ask me. They do some good things, sure...but often they don't give enough effort to really solve the problem. And also, they did nothing when the US went into Iraq....Bush kinda said fuck you I'm going, and the UN went...well...we tried to stop it but oh well, we can't. Obviously they aren't a control over international relations like they were supposed to be when created.
Interestingly they did make a report of cannabis use, and Canada is #4 on the list. :thumbsup:
I just don't think peacekeeping works in some senses. But I would say that a genocide is almost worse than a war. Wars are violent and brutal...but in Rwanda, it took four months for 800,000 people to be cut to pieces with machetes. So let's examine that...4 months...approx. 120 days...if you divide the number of people killed by the amount of days, thats 6666.66(weird..:wtf:) people in A DAY!!!! Are 6 thousand people a day being butchered in Iraq?? Hellz no!
Which is more serious?
I find it AMAZING that the yes vote is in the lead here. Then what? We send troops on in to protect other countries interests? This "conflict" has been going on now for 40 years with tribal wars and now there is even an Al-Queda influence there! So we march on in and after we have a few hundred or thousand dead and people loose the taste of "helping" we hit the road?
Before we grow this set of balls to walk into Somalia/Darfur lets clean up the job in Iraq first. MAYBE if we show some resolve there the people of Somalia may just look at us with a bit of trust that we'd stay the course and actually put and end to the madness.
Have a good one!:s4:
i think we should think like that...why should our sons,brothers.etc... die to protect the world...i say we should keep our noses out of everyones crap..if we ain't gonna nuke and kick serious ass we just need to stay out of it...most of the people we FORCE our help on don't want us there so fuck'mQuote:
Originally Posted by S.W.I.M. 504
NO, get our troops home and put them on the border
I said no because although I think Darfur is the worst humanitarian crisis at the moment and we should help it in every way, I think that the US should focus on getting their troops out of Iraq and finding another way of helping the people instead of just using more violence. And I doubt that the Sudanese peopel would welcome American help seeing how they really fucked up Iraq.
There is always a peaceful solution, it's just harder to find
I know that america isnt the worlds police force and darfur is not our problem. anyway i dont think sending troops would really help the situation. there has got to be a better way to resolve this huge clusterfuck
FUCK NO!!! like everyone said we arnt america world police if they wanna have a fucked up place let um, we have a somewhat peaceful country for a reason its what the people want. I remember washington saying we should not be policing other countrys that we should stay out of it and try to concentrate on our shit. if we aint goin on no world domination quest then fuck it why would it matter anyways just gettin our people killed for nothin. But i would support like if hitler came back cuz that dude was a serious threat.
I don't think we should go to Darfur. We haven't got the will as a nation to stay in Iraq. We only do well in very quick wars, once we are somewhere for a long period of time the media makes america out to be the bad guy and it doesn't take long for americans to start agreeing with the media.
DDT
:rastasmoke:
Hitler staged a genocide and killed 6 million.
In Darfur, it's the same thing. Left alone long enough, I'm sure it will compare with the holocaust.
I think we need to get out of Iraq,but we shouldn't help neone unless we actually get some good help,fuck em all if were the only ones ever helping.
We need to pressure China to help stop the bloodshed. Nobody in this thread is talking about PetroChina and the other Chinese oil companies in the Sudan, that are funding the Janjiweed, etc and keeping this bloodshed alive.
We BARELY have enough troops as it is. We need to do as others have suggested and put pressure on China and other countries to act, since the conflict affects them directly.
Psycho I voted no for a different reason I think we should clean up our mess at home like health care and social security just to name a few of our problems. Its not our job to police the world! I think whats happening there is terrible but you take care of your own first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Quote:
Originally Posted by TallCoolOne
Exactly, maybe thats what some of the less than friendly outside nations are actually plotting on.. Stretch the united states' resources and invade us right when we're at our weakest.
Stranger things have happened, and every mighty civilization in the past has fallen with more than alittle help from the outside at an opportune moment in time. They would take advantage of our situation, with troops deployed all across the world and not enough to defend the homeland and launch a lightning fast assault on the homeland, and quite possibly leave the United states soldiers no America to come home to..
I say no, stay out of Dafur and lets just start focusing on our own health and well being for just a few years without more drama on the world-wide stage. Take a back seat for once.
Hell, how hard would it be to knock over Sudan, kick the chinamen out, take the oil and liberate the PDB tribal Sudanese from the heathen Arabs who are doing all the murdering there? Seems like a win-win. How many of you liberal do-gooders know that it's Arabs who did the slaughter in Rwanda? Well, it's Arabs doing the slaughter in Darfur, too.
Yeah, let's stick our nose in more people's business.
Here's a common sense note, the United States is genocide! We have been destroying ourselves for some time now..