Darfur

Remove all ads!

Yes well the Dutch never really had colonies in Africa as far as I know. Belgians, Italians, Germans, British, French, Italians, Portugese and Spaniards would make up the complete list I believe.

Anyway I don't support interventionist policies for EU. If US wants to act as a world police then fine, but they are and will allways do so by their own will so they have not really any business of telling what Europe should do, on the other hand this means that EU has no business telling what the US should do. Additionally our military is not nearly as well suited for bigger international missions as the US military and we lack a central military organization to gather an efficent army from all the European countries. Even if we had I doubt we would intervene but then I doubt that US would intervene either even if they would not be in Iraq, most likely North Korea and Iran would be higher on their priority list anyway.

I think we should just offer help in the form of medical supplies and food and take care of refugees but that's about it. A possible economical blockade might also be considered but they usually end up hurting the ones who are being hurt the most allready, Going beyoned that would be just risking creating an even bigger mess and too expensive.

[ October 15, 2005, 18:36: Message edited by: Morgoroth ]

 

I read some more about this conflict. An overview can be found at wikipedia

It turns out that some ways of dealing with this hace been established, theoretically. African nations were supposed to provide troops, while UN would pay.

However, they have ran into some sort of bureaucratic trouble/turf war:

Apparently things improved a bit, when some ex-rebel leader had become vice-president in July. However, three weeks later he died in an helicopter crash. Things are worsening now again.

 

I completely agree with you. Most of the mess in those countries is directly related to colonialism and the way those countries were ruled, put together and divided into fractions to be more obedient when ruled. The link between colonial goverment and post-colonial mess is particularly strong in Ruanda.

On the other hand, I wouldn't single out particular countries, it was a whole European thing. Surely economical, as share-holders of those colonial endeavours usually where from all over Europe. As were businesses involved.

Sudan is surely known to be a mess since that Mahdi-rising back in the 1880's. But I would not like to see anyone invading that country and trying to get it under control by force. Because I don't believe it to be feasible without an effort that would be unrealistic. And if it were the British that would go in (Sudan being a former possession of them), I'd be really doubtful of their motives. And, finally, I am under the impression that everytime someone tries to use force to get things in colonial matters under control, everything ends being way more screwed and messed up than before.

So, the best way is diplomacy. It's not "good", but if reality only yealds the optimum, there is nothing else left but worse options.

(Completely off topic: I think that Sudan inspired the desert in "dune", because of the messiah and jihad concepts in connection with an up-rising against a foreign opressor contained. I thought the ressemblances were striking as I read Dune two months ago. )

That omission was of course deliberate. It's about the land, the cattle and the women of the neighbour. Ideology, poltics, racism, nationalism and religion in this cases are merely cheap excuses to legitimate murder and theft. Same thing in Zimbabwe, just a different excuse. Same thing in Somalia, just a different excuse. Same thing in Nigeria, just a different excuse.

[ October 15, 2005, 00:58: Message edited by: Iago ]

 

Feel free to change "not speak out" for "nothing".

 

That was a good one. And I had it at school too, I think I actually quoted that already on this board. This poem and the thought behind it is just another good reason to leave religion out (race, ethnicity whatever)

That's just why religion should be left out in such things. Because that's the root of antisemitism. To simplify and find someone or something to blame. If one starts to say, look it's their jewish/muslim religion, that's why they kill themselves and act so greedy. In reality it's at same time much simpler and much more complicated. It's never about race or religion. In this cases, Race and religion just are excuses. Of course, Antisemitism will always be popular. It's because they are semites, Arabs and Jews, that's why they're so ****ed up. It's not about the money, the land and the mineral resources.

And I am not hypocrite enough to say that we all don't profit from some well placed atrocity in Nigeria. It makes the oil run cheap. And to say that the world is neither fair nor just shouldn't be something too revealing.

But if someone thinks that it's enough to send two hundred thousand soldiers into a country and everything will just be fine... That isn't thinking, that's dreaming. And if the reasoning behind the invasion would be, look it's them poor christians that are mistreated by the evil arabs, it will turn out to be a disaster.

And obviously, the black/white, poor this evil raster will not help to get more sense into a chaotic world. Chechnya ? Evil Christians hunting poor moslems. Zimabwe ? Namibia ? Angola ?

[ October 15, 2005, 11:27: Message edited by: Iago ]