Article

2004-09-09 Africa: Horn

Powell says Sudan atrocities now equaling genocide

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-09-09 11:08:13 AM|| || Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Powell says Sudan atrocities now equaling genocide

So what was it last week? Just a whole lot of discriminate killing? Dumbass.

Posted by BH 2004-09-09 11:28:30 AM|| 2004-09-09 11:28:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Powell should be centering his undivided attention to Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan; and leave the small fry to the UN! I could give a hairy rat's a** what goes on in Sudan. Let the United States of Africa mobilize!

Posted by smn 2004-09-09 12:07:00 PM|| 2004-09-09 12:07:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Do they still use the term "genocide?" I thought they used "ethnic cleansing" instead. Like there's a difference....

Posted by nada 2004-09-09 12:12:11 PM|| 2004-09-09 12:12:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Isn't the UN supposed to be handling this? This is a chance for it to actually do its job, so let it go and see what happens. (not that we don't know what the outcome is likely to be)

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-09-09 1:13:56 PM|| 2004-09-09 1:13:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 As I have argued here before, this is an overdue move by the Bush Administration. Calling this what it is -- a genocide -- is the right thing to do. He should demand UN action and threaten to take unilateral action if nothing is done. (A thousand Marines could probably end the genocide.) This would: (a) shove it up the @ss of (i) the French, (ii) the Chinese, (iii) the Arab League, (iv) the New York Times, and (v) John Kerry; (b) force the UN's hand (if the UN won't act to stop genocide, what the hell do they stand for?); and (c) embarrass the Clinton Administration, which did not have the stones to declare a genocide in Rwanda. Bush could make the whole thing very political, with a Rose Garden press conference featuring Christians such as Brownback, who have been out front on this issue, as well as CBC members like Charlie Rangel. Bush should do this not only because it's the right thing to do, but also because it is part of the GWoT, and is necessary. As an added bonus, it will allow the military to kill more Islamic terrorists while protecting innocent Islamic people who are black to boot! I say win-win.

Posted by Tibor 2004-09-09 1:33:46 PM|| 2004-09-09 1:33:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 I agree with you, Tibor. We need to force the UN's hand and quick. I myself am Christian and became interested in Sudan about a year ago. Personally, I think as we're going through the ME, the new "homefront" for the jihadis will be North Africa (see: Somalia/Black Hawk Down). While I don't want to lose 1 troop to these local punks (after all, Sudan is NOT a threat to us), and would prefer to let them handle it, we promised (after Rwanda) "never again!" This is a win-win (low # of troops needed; supporting native/black Muslims against their jihadi Arab counterparts, and takes away another "home country" for future jihadi base). Low transaction costs, and great "press" for the US. First, and foremost, though, it's the right thing to do!

Posted by BA 2004-09-09 1:42:27 PM|| 2004-09-09 1:42:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Sudan is a threat, BA .. There are several camps where children are brainwashed and schooled as radical islamist, ready to destroy the West.. This is done with the help of the Sudanese governement..I'd say the US has to act..It would be good for it's credibility in the WoT

Posted by lyot 2004-09-09 2:20:11 PM|| 2004-09-09 2:20:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 firt we are need invade chad.

Posted by muck4doo 2004-09-09 5:57:35 PM|| [http://meatismurder.blogspot.com/] 2004-09-09 5:57:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Sudan can, probably is, and has been used as a base for al Q. We cannot let the situation go to hell. We are going to first have to rub the UN's nose into it and do our best to have the members of the UN take responsibility. That failing, we need a plan to clean it up. There are serious humanitarian issues involved, and there are serious WoT implications, too, and we cannot just walk away from it. **sigh** more stuff piled up on the plate.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2004-09-09 6:17:58 PM|| 2004-09-09 6:17:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Sudan is a distraction till aftere Iran. Nobody in Khartoum is developing a bomb, though they may be helping.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-09-09 6:19:58 PM|| 2004-09-09 6:19:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 "Sudan is a distraction till aftere Iran. Nobody in Khartoum is developing a bomb, though they may be helping."

None of the terrorist massacres so far ever needed a nuclear bomb -- not 9/11, not 3/11, not Beslan --, so if nuclear bombs are your one and only concern then Sudan is indeed only a distraction.

But if the problem is Islamofascism and terrorism as a whole, then Sudan is now just third after Iran and Syria in axis-of-Islamofascism power states. And given the genocide it has far greater immediacy.

And it has the great advantage that, unlike Iran and Syria, and definitely unlike Iraq, Sudan can be cleanly broken into three pieces, and you don't even need to occupy the one nasty piece, just stop it from hurting the other two ones. That'd be enough to *truly* render it a distraction -- aka stop it from preventing genocide.

Turn Darfur defacto independent and likewise with South Sudan. Is freeing two nations from the power of Islamofascism meaningless?

nada> Ethnic cleansing and genocide *are* two different meanings. Ethnic cleansing means you are driving a people away. Genocide means you are out to physically destroy it. The Serbs of Krajna for example suffered ethnic cleansing, not genocide. The Armenians, the Jews, the Tutsi on the other hand suffered genocide.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-09 7:22:00 PM|| 2004-09-09 7:22:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Aris and Tibor are right on this one. We need to send some troops in there and clean this mess up fast. Make the UN look like the feckless fools that they are. I don't care if it would cement a Bush victory be pulling black votes from Kerry. It is the right thing to do.

Posted by remote man 2004-09-09 7:47:38 PM|| 2004-09-09 7:47:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 I would take this in steps. There is no reason that the Janjaweeders should be allowed the use of helicopters. Establish a no fly zone for military aircraft using patrols based in Chad.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-09-09 8:23:45 PM|| 2004-09-09 8:23:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 remote man wrote: "Aris and Tibor are right on this one."

Uh, can I change my views on this one if it means I don't have to agree with Aris?

Posted by Tibor 2004-09-09 9:58:12 PM|| 2004-09-09 9:58:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 (Rolls eyes)

Tibor, granted that watching Aris fight his hand becomes tiresome after awhile, just because he says something is a good idea it isn't necessarily bad.

Posted by Ernest Brown 2004-09-09 11:13:06 PM|| [http://saturninretrograde.blogspot.com] 2004-09-09 11:13:06 PM|| Front Page Top

21:08 UFO
20:55 UFO
16:18 UFO
08:08 UFO
10:24 UFO
01:11 UFO
01:06 UFO
00:57 UFO
00:43 UFO
00:39 UFO
00:26 UFO
00:22 UFO
00:22 UFO
09:17 Sock Puppet of Doom
09:14 Howard UK
09:07 Howard UK
08:58 Critch Griger4522
11:57 Gerry
05:25 Sock Puppet of Doom
05:20 Sock Puppet of Doom
04:33 Super Hose
00:32 Zenster
00:22 Anonymous6378
00:10 Dar