Sudan: U.S. to smash us like Iraq

[seemslikeadream]

"Sudan is not afraid of the threat of sanctions by the United States, which is using the crisis in Darfur to weaken and destroy the government of Sudan in a similar fashion in which they devastated Iraq and Somalia," said Angelo Beda, Deputy Speaker of Sudan's parliament.

Beda, speaking at a news conference in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa late on Monday, was referring to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and U.S. support of a Somalia peace operation that ended in humiliation in 1993.

The U.N. Security Council gave Sudan 30 days to disarm and prosecute Arab Janjaweed militia accused of killing, raping and driving villagers from their land in an 18-month conflict or face unspecified sanctions. The deadline expired on August 30.

U.N. envoy Jan Pronk has called for more pressure to be put on Khartoum but with opinion split among Security Council members after the expiry of the deadline, the United Nations is not expected to take action soon.
more
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/africa/09/07/sudan.un.reut/

[RivetJoint]

1. I'm begining to think

that, together with our European allies, we OUGHT to "smash" Sudan (i.e., their Govt). It's far better than allowing the Arab portion of the population to murder hundreds of thousands of their non-Arab countrymen.

[seemslikeadream]

3. This is the problem

International arms trade $800 billion annually - largest business in the world.


Twice the second placed - illegal sale of drugs $400 billion a year


82 armed conflicts between 1989-1999 - 79 took place within national borders - arms not needed for self defense.


Reality is most arms are used on ordinary people by forces in the government or close to it.


159 wars fought since WWII - 9 out of 10 in developing world - more than 20 million people - were civilians.


War brings starvation - Biafra, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Chad, Sudan, Liberia and Somalia.


Until there is a radical reassessment of the arms trade and its consequences, millions more will be directly or indirectly killed by this lethal business.


The bottom line is that there is a lot of money to be made in weapons, and this motivates arms manufacturing.


To add to high profit margins, all arms manufactures are heavily subsidised and protected by their governments.


Free trade agreements - nearly always exempt from military spending


Industrialised countries will always be able to subsidise their corporations through defense contracts and grants for weapons research.

[RivetJoint]

4. They aren't killing each other with F-16s

and T-72 tanks. In Brundi and Rwanda, over 800,000 were killed ina few wekks, large numebrs of them with machetes. The arms trade has little to do with the genocide in Sudan; this is pure evil behavior by one ethnic group against another.

[seemslikeadream]

5. Researcher Islamic Institute for Human Rights

By Matt Tirman

The causes behind the conflict in the Sudan are numerous and commonly misconstrued by those of us in the West. While religion remains one of the most divisive issues in the conflict, to define this on and off again half century conflict as a war of Muslims against Christians is misleading. There are, however, powerful voices from the United States (mainly Evangelical Christians in elected office) who view the conflict as another Muslim crusade against a Christian minority. Radical voices from the Islamic community have also been a major player in helping to perpetuate the war in Sudan by providing mercenaries, money and arms to help the Islamist government defeat the rebels. The politicizing of such a deadly conflict as led to myopic policies toward Sudan by governments in Europe, the Americas and Middle East.

While dismissing religion as an impetus for the continuance of armed conflict in Sudan would be dangerous, relying on doctrinal beliefs as the only cause is equally if not more troubling. When Sudan gained independence from Britain in 1956 it was a country divided not only by an Islamic north and Christian south, but also a more prosperous politically involved north and a rural, apolitical south. The lack of educational opportunities for southerners, coupled with rigged elections throughout the country created a general mood of discontent, which led to the first of many internal conflicts. The most recent civil conflict, which began in 1983, was attributed to draconian policies imposed upon the south by the government in Khartoum, along with the continued desire to gain full autonomy from the north.



Proliferation of Small Arms

The armed conflict in Sudan has been fueled not only by ethnic hatred, gross disparities of wealth, education and health services, but also by the proliferation of small arms to the various warring factions. While a UN embargo has done much to curtail the flow of legal arms transfers, Sudan's porous borders and willing buyers have provided arms dealers and other gunrunners with an enticing open market. The Norwegian Initiative on Small Arms Transfers defines small arms, "as any weapons, such as automatic rifles, high powered pistols and others, that can be easily operated by a single person." Both the SPLA and the Sudanese government have come to rely on illegal weapons purchases from a multitude of different suppliers. Western Sudan, especially in and around Darfur have become a virtual small arms bazaar and transit point to central and western Africa. Arms move freely between the borders of Libya, Chad, CAR and most significantly Uganda. The availability of arms in Sudan has led to a steady rise in banditry along Sudan's highways and has made the lives of UN and other humanitarian workers exceedingly difficult. The buying and selling of illegal arms is not limited to opposition groups or quasi government backed militias. The Sudanese government, which has pledged to stem the flow of illegal arms into its country, is said to have ties with numerous arms dealers throughout Africa, the Middle East and the former Soviet Bloc. According to NISAT, the Islamist government in Khartoum has used illegally purchased arms to aid Islamic Fundamentalists in Egypt and to fight SPLA soldiers in the south. Neither the UN, nor any other governmental body has any idea about how many of these small arms there are throughout the world. The Ak-47, which has become every rebel leader and Che Guevara wannabe's weapon of choice, is the cheapest and most widely available assault rife. While it is nearly impossible to account for the total number of AK-47s in circulation, identifying the manufacturers of this weapon is not. China, Russia, Slovakia and the Czech Republic account for a large number of AK-47's throughout the world. This weapon, along with many like it, fall into the hands of despotic regimes, brutal rebel armies and arms dealers who are in large part responsible for capitalizing on the deaths of millions of people a year. Human Rights Watch, an American based human rights watchdog, details the numerous failures of the government in curtailing the flow of weapons into Sudan. In its 2002 situation report on Sudan, HRW calls on the government to live up to its word, and begin destroying its stockpiles of anti-personnel landmines and explosives of that nature.

Gross Violations of Human Rights

Human rights monitors from the non-governmental and public sector have documented violations of human rights perpetrated by governmental forces as well as the SPLA. In its effort to root out southern forces, the government has pursued a policy of blind intervention, which has led to the indiscriminate aerial bombing of churches, aid stations, villages and other civilian structures. With money generated from over 500 million dollars in oil sales in 2002, the government has purchased itself more advanced weaponry including attack helicopters, surface-to-surface missiles and Russian fighter jets. In turn, this weaponry is used to defend oil fields and clear peoples like the Nuer from their to pursue new oil interests. Amnesty International has been highly critical of foreign oil investors such as China National Petroleum Company and Tailsman Energy, a Canadian energy firm. These investors have provided the Bashir government with millions of dollars to pursue oil exploration in the Upper Nile and Western Nile valley, which has led to the government's scorched earth policy of removing indigenous people from the land. Rebel groups like the SPLA and the Ugandan based Lord's Resistance Army are also consistent abusers of human rights. During the height of the civil war in the 1980's the SPLA recruited children from refugee camps, used coercive means to extract information from villagers and tribal members in the south and to this day continue to hinder humanitarian efforts. The LRA, a Christian militia that some suspect is still financed by the Islamist government in Khartoum, has done much to further destabilize the situation in Equitoria. HRW and the ICG have documented numerous accounts of abuses committed by the LRA including murder, forced conscription and the deliberate targeting of Sudanese in the south.

Child Soldiers in Sudan

The number of child soldiers fighting on the side of the SPLA and the government have decreased significantly in years, however, both sides in the conflict are guilty of continuing to recruit children as young as 12 to fight their battles. The Sudanese government has signed and ratified the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict in late 2002, and the SPLA endorsed the protocol in 1995. The Watch List on Children and Armed Conflict put out a report in March 2003 detailing the status of children in Sudan. In its thirty-four page report, the Watch List examines human rights abuses perpetrated by both sides, the general health of children throughout Sudan, gender-based violence and a plethora of other information. The report notes that children in the south of Sudan, especially in Equitoria and Bah-al Gazer are particularly at risk when it comes to forced recruitment by opposition forces. Refugee camps based in the south as well as in Uganda have been prime recruitment centers for the Lord's Resistance Army, a Christian extremist group that has been fighting a decade long war against the Ugandan government. While the government of Sudan maintains a policy of universal conscription, which requires all men at age 17 to serve in the armed forces, government backed militias have not hesitated in forcing children as young as 10 into service. The most notorious of these militias is the Popular Defense Forces (PDF) who enjoys the support of the President Bashir and his military cadres.
http://www.iifhr.com/Armed%20Conflict%20Program/armsudan.htm

[RivetJoint]

6. Your point?

even if the did NOT have AK-47s, they'd still be hacking up the non-Arbas with machetes.

We need to go in there and clean house.

[seemslikeadream]

8. machetes?

[RivetJoint]

9. Recall Rwanda and Brundi?

[seemslikeadream]

11. Yes same problem machetes?

[RivetJoint]

12. So you're saying that

they did not use machetes and only used guns? You're so far wrong it's laughable. My point: even WITHOUT guns, the hatred is so intense, they would use machetes and clubs to kill; LIKE they did in Rwanda and Brundi AND like they are doing in Sudan.

[seemslikeadream]

15. Sudan: Oil Companies Complicit in Rights Abuses

"Oil companies operating in Sudan were aware of the killing, bombing, and looting that took place in the south, all in the name of opening up the oilfields," said Rone. "These facts were repeatedly brought to their attention in public and private meetings, but they continued to operate and make a profit as the devastation went on."

Conditions for civilians in the oilfields actually worsened when the Canadian company Talisman Energy Inc. and the Swedish company Lundin Oil AB were lead partners in two concessions in southern Sudan. Amid mounting pressure from rights groups, Talisman sold its interest in its Sudanese concessions in late 2002, and Lundin followed in June.

These Western-based corporations were replaced by the state-owned oil companies of China and Malaysia- CNPC, or China National Petroleum Corp., and Petronas, or Petrolium Nasional Berhad-which had already been partners with Talisman and Lundin. Following CNPC and Petronas, a third state-owned Asian oil company, India's ONGC Videsh Ltd., began operations in Sudan.

Statistics from the Sudanese government and the oil companies show how the major share (60 percent) of the US$580 million received in oil revenue by this poverty-stricken country in 2001 was absorbed by its military, both for foreign weapons purchases and for the development of a domestic arms industry.
http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/11/sudan112503.htm

[RivetJoint]

16. Yeah, it's just oil

the people there actually LOVE each other.

[seemslikeadream]

17. They are caught in a war for oil has moved the war into a new league

In the oilfields of Sudan, civilians are being killed and raped, their villages burnt to the ground. They are caught in a war for oil, part of the wider civil war between northern and southern Sudan that has been waged for decades. Since large-scale production began two years ago, oil has moved the war into a new league. Across the oil-rich regions of Sudan, the government is pursuing a 'scorched earth' policy to clear the land of civilians and to make way for the exploration and exploitation of oil by foreign oil companies.

This Christian Aid report, The scorched earth, shows how the presence of international oil companies is fuelling the war. Companies from Asia and the West, including the UK, have helped build Sudan's oil industry, offering finance, technological expertise and supplies, to create a strong and growing oil industry in the centre of the country. In the name of oil, government forces and government-supported militias are emptying the land of civilians, killing and displacing hundreds of thousands of southern Sudanese. Oil industry infrastructure - the same roads and airstrips which serve the companies - is used by the army as part of the war. In
retaliation, opposition forces have attacked government-controlled towns and villages, causing further death and displacement.

Exports of Sudan's estimated reserves of two billion barrels of oil are paying for the build-up of a Sudanese homegrown arms industry as well as paying for more arms imports. Without oil, the civil war being fought between the government of Sudan and the main opposition force, the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) is at a stalemate; with oil, it can only escalate.

The Sudanese government itself now admits that oil is funding the wider civil war. 'Sudan will be capable of producing all the weapons it needs thanks to the growing oil industry,' announced General Mohamed Yassin just eleven months after the oil began flowing out of the new pipeline into the supertankers at the Red Sea port. The government now earns roughly US$1 million a day from oil - equivalent to the US$1 million it spends daily fighting the war. The equation is simple, the consequences devastating.
http://www.christian-aid.org.uk/indepth/0103suda/sudanoil.htm

[RivetJoint]

18. They are "caught"

in a war? Give me a freaking break. The Arabs in Sudan are committing GENOCIDE! With or without oil; their goal is to destory the non-Arab population of the Sudan.

[seemslikeadream]

20. Oil linked to Sudan abuses

Civil war continues in the oil-producing area

The British charity Christian Aid has called on foreign oil companies involved in Sudan to pull out because of what it calls the government's systematic policy of depopulating oil-rich areas.


A strong signal needs to be sent to the government of Sudan, and the companies have major leverage

Mark Curtis
Christian Aid
In a report published on Thursday, it says Sudan's oil exports, which began nearly two years ago, have fuelled the civil war which has already claimed two million lives.

The report says Sudanese Government troops, and militias allied to them, have killed or terrorised tens of thousands of civilians into leaving their homes to make way for foreign oil companies to explore and extract the new reserves.

Christian Aid's policy director, Mark Curtis, told the BBC that the companies needed to use their influence to send a strong signal to the Sudanese Government.

more
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1221618.stm

[seemslikeadream]

19. Sudan, Oil, and African Muslim vs. African Muslim

Southern Darfur, like southern Sudan, is rich in oil. The Chinese National Petroleum Corporation holds the large oil concession in southern Darfur. Chinese soldiers are alleged to be protecting Chinese oil interests.

It is also alleged that the rebels in southern Darfur are getting weapons from outside Sudan. "UN observers say they have better weapons than the Sudanese army, and are receiving supplies by air," according to Crescent International (UK).

The government of Sudan, after agreeing with UN Secretary General Kofi Anan to a 90-day period to end the conflict, was given 30 days under a UN resolution pushed through by the U.S. and Britain.

Sudan, largely undeveloped, and barely emerging from colonial oppression, has been given a virtually impossible task of pacifying an area the size of France. This may be the pretext for yet another U.S.-British intervention for oil
more
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2004/0807-Darfur.html

[seemslikeadream]

22. arms suppliers rushed to both sides like vultures to a carcass

THE HIGH COST OF SMALL ARMS TRANSFERS
Rwanda is only the latest example of what can happen when small arms and light weapons are sold to a country plagued by ethnic, religious, or nationalist strife. In today's wars such weapons are responsible for most of the killings of civilians and combatants. They are used more often than major weapons systems in human rights abuses and other violations of international law. Light conventional arms sustain and expand conflict in a world increasingly characterized by nationalist tensions and border wars. Yet the international community continues to ignore trade in those weapons, concentrating instead on the dangers of nuclear arms proliferation.

In the post-Cold War era, in which the profit motive has replaced East-West concerns as the main stimulus behind weapons sales, ex-Warsaw Pact and NATO nations are dumping their arsenals on the open market. Prices for some weapons, such as Soviet-designed Kalashnikov AKM automatic rifles (commonly known as AK-47s), have fallen below cost. Many Third World countries, such as China, Egypt, and South Africa, have also stepped up sales of light weapons and small arms. More than a dozen nations that were importers of small arms 15 years ago now manufacture and export them. But most of this trade remains unknown. Unlike major conventional weapons systems, governments rarely disclose the details of transfers of light weapons and small arms.

The resulting costs of such transfers are apparent. Small arms and light weapons have flooded nations like Rwanda, Sudan, Somalia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, not only fanning warfare, but also undermining international efforts to embargo arms and to compel parties to respect human rights. They have helped undermine peacekeeping efforts and allowed heavily armed militias to challenge U.N. and U.S. troops. They raise the cost of relief assistance paid by countries like the United States. Yet the international community has no viable mechanism to monitor the transfer of light and small weapons, and neither the United Nations nor the Clinton administration has demonstrated the leadership required to control that trade.

RWANDA'S WAR
No tragedy better illustrates the need for controls than Rwanda, where the U.S. contribution to the present relief effort is expected to reach $500 million, or about two dollars for every U.S. citizen. Rwanda's genocide, which began in April 1994, was preceded by a war launched in Octoberm 1990 by Tutsi guerrillas of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) against the Hutu-led government. Rwanda was already one of the poorest nations in Africa. Although both the government and guerrillas had limited resources with which to buy arms, and their combined 45,000 combatants never comprised a very large market, arms suppliers rushed to both sides like vultures to a carcass
more
http://www.franksmyth.com/clients/FrankSmyth/frankS.nsf/0/6c451d09f1540d7585256b7b00790668?OpenDocument

[RivetJoint]

24. Great job

of posting articles that do not do anything to refute my main premises. Keep it up!

[seemslikeadream]

27. Your main premise!

You are an authority? Show me your credentials.

[RivetJoint]

28. ANYONE can have a premise

I don't need to be an authority to espouse the following premise: "The violence in Sudan is based on ethnic hatred and is leading to genocide; the US should get involved to stop the killing and displacement of millions." Why do I need to be an "expert" and show you my credentials to put forth that premise?

[seemslikeadream]

29. That's true anyone can have a premise

n/t

[RivetJoint]

30. Instead of posting

mounds of tangential articles; why not refute my premise in your own words for a change? Incapable?

[seemslikeadream]

32. OK How's that thing in Iraq going for ya?

Afghanistan? Haiti? Tell me how the US military is going to solve the hate you talk about?

[RivetJoint]

33. it won't solve the hate;

it WILL stop the killing... See (Bosnia and Kosovo.

[seemslikeadream]

35. NATO peacekeepers locked the gates & watched as Serb homes burned

By Aleksandar Mitic for ISN Security Watch

The NATO-led multinational force in Kosovo (KFOR) has stepped up security measures to protect the province’s minorities and prevent a repeat of the March violence that left 19 dead, 800 wounded, and 4’100 Kosovo Serbs homeless. The new security strategy - met with a dose of skepticism by Serbs and others - provides “safe zones” or protected areas for minority communities and gives KFOR troops the right to open fire on anyone violating those zones. The new measures coincide with a change of command in KFOR that saw French General Yves de Kermabon on 1 September replace German General Holger Kammerhoff, who was in charge of NATO troops during the massive anti-Serb violence in mid-March. According to the international community, the violence, which the NATO commander for Southern Europe Admiral Gregory Johnson called “ethnic cleansing”, was orchestrated by Albanian extremists who mobilized masses to rampage through Serb enclaves, churches, and homes. “The standards of those days don’t meet the expectations of the North Atlantic alliance,” Admiral Johnson said during a harsh critique of KFOR’s engagement in March at the command handover ceremony in the provincial capital of Pristina. The March violence prompted the Kosovo Serbs - 200’000 of whom have already fled the province due to Albanian extremist violence since 1999 - to threaten to boycott the upcoming 23 October Kosovo parliamentary elections unless the security situation is drastically improved and guaranteed by NATO and the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK). The security changes also come amid a wave of harsh criticism of NATO’s mishandling of the March crisis and calls to reorganize both its and the UN’s mandate in the troubled province.

‘Catastrophic’ failure
In a late July report, New York-based Human Rights Watch accused KFOR and UNMIK of failing “catastrophically” to protect the minority Serb community, and abandoning it in the face of attacks by an estimated 51’000 Albanians. According to the human rights group, the 17-18 March violence was the “biggest security test for NATO and the UN in Kosovo since 1999”, the date of their arrival in the province following the end of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and the departure of Serbian security forces. “But they failed the test, and in many cases, NATO peacekeepers locked the gates to their bases and watched as Serb homes burned,” the report said. It also slammed the lack of coordinated response by NATO and the UN, for their failure to share information, as well as for their engagement in military terms “rather than in more appropriate police terms”. “The violence should be a wake-up call to NATO and the United Nations. Rhetoric alone can’t protect minority communities or help create a multiethnic Kosovo. What’s needed here is genuine reform of the international security structures”, said Rachel Denber, a Human Rights Watch executive for Europe. The organization called for a “full, independent review of the response of KFOR, UNMIK, and the Kosovo Police Force ‘local police] to the violence”. It also recommended riot-control training and equipment for KFOR and UNMIK police, and a more centralized command structure for KFOR
more
http://www.isn.ethz.ch/infoservice/secwatch/index.cfm?service=cwn&parent=detail&menu=8&sNewsID=9599



failing “catastrophically” to protect the minority Serb community, and abandoning it in the face of attacks by an estimated 51’000 Albanians.
NATO peacekeepers 'unable' to keep lid on violence in Kosovo

CHRISTIAN JENNINGS


ETHNIC violence in Kosovo this spring overwhelmed the United Nations’ mission and NATO peacekeepers to the point of near-collapse, says a damning high-level internal UN report leaked to The Scotsman.

The report, by a five-man team sent from UN headquarters in New York, paints a picture of a mission in crisis.

It says the 18,000-strong NATO force cannot currently maintain safety and security in Kosovo, adding that the UN administration is even incapable of providing security for foreign diplomats and for itself.

The findings have wide- spread implications for the UN’s so-called "nation-building programmes", from East Timor to Haiti.

The report focused on the response of the UN’s mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) to an outbreak of ethnic violence that engulfed the province in March this year, the worst such outbreak in the former Yugoslav province since NATO and the UN arrived in June 1999.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1028692004

[RivetJoint]

36. Another great demonstration

of you Google abilities that mean absolutely nothing...The US stopped the massive killing in Bosnia. Then NATO stopped the smaller-scale killing in Kosovo. Both were attained through military force.

[seemslikeadream]

37. sorry you don't like facts

"UNMIK is in a funk," their report says. "After five years on the ground, progress towards UNMIK’s objectives remains elusive and the mission seems to be nearing the point of overstaying its welcome. There are obstacles on all fronts, and the outlook for the medium term is worse.

"The line staff reflected a sense of futility, compounded by a sense of deep frustration over what they experience as an operation adrift, with an organisational culture that inhibits communication, frowns on candour and stymies initiative.

"UNMIK is seen as aloof and are strangers in the society they govern."

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1028692004

[RivetJoint]

38. What facts???

Has the massive ethnic cleansing in Bosnia stopped? Yes or No?

[seemslikeadream]

40. Maybe you should ask the 200,000 ethnic minorities

who are refugees in Serbia or displaced within Kosovo.

[RivetJoint]

41. Ask them what?

If they are being killed? LMAO

[FlemingsGhost]

39. Yes, I'm sure "cleaning house" will stop the killing.

It ain't "killing" if there is an American flag stitched to the uniform... that's freedom and democracy bursting your head open.

[RivetJoint]

42. We did a pretty good job of stopping

the killing in Bosnia and Kosovo, don't you think?

[FlemingsGhost]

43. Who's "we"? (n/t)

.

[RivetJoint]

44. In both cases it was NATO (primarily the US)

(The UN was unable to stop anything and ended up getting their troops taken hostage). The US provided most of the military force to make the warring factions stop; NATO provided boots on the ground to keep them apart.

[FlemingsGhost]

46. I recall Republicans being opposed to intervening in Kosovo

Seeing a you are using Kosovo as the crux of your premise, permit me to do the same. (Nevermind that we are comparing apples and oranges.)

Considering that now the U.S. government is all GOP, all the time, how would the conflict in Sudan--which by your own observations is a much less mechanized (and organized) affair--motivate those to intervene and further stretch our woefully thin military ranks?

What in the world would move them to even consider it?

(I'll give you a hint: The answer is a three letter word.)

On edit: typo

[RivetJoint]

50. You mean like we intervened in

Rwanda and Brundi? Oh that's right, we DIDN'T! We watched as nearly one million people died.

We are not comparing apples and oranges; ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and Bosnia is no different that ethnic cleansing in the Sudan, except in one Europeans were dying and in the other Africans are. BTW, neither Bosnia nor Kosovo had oil either.

[FlemingsGhost]

51. Just trying to frame a historical perspective.

Given the past, why would a GOP-led U.S. government be interested in intervening in Sudan?

[RivetJoint]

54. The fact that they aren't

doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do.

[SomthingsGotaGive]

45. Your vile bile has prompted me to register and post.

This site as I'm sure you are aware likes it when people back up their claims with facts.

Seemslikeadream has done an outstanding job refuting every one of your hate filled comments with links and facts.

You however have not done anything other than say....

The good ol USA needs to play global cop and kill kill kill until there is peace.

Perhaps what you are trying to say is.....

Kill all the Arabs and then the will be a free and peaceful world.

Now thats something worth talking about.

Instead you want to hide your hate in fancy rhetoric.

[RivetJoint]

47. Hate filled?

he has not refuted crap; just posted a bunch of articles that do nothing to contribute to "how do we stop millions from being killed in the Sudan?"

There are times when one must use military force to STOP ethnic cleansing. We stood by in Rwanda and Brundi and let almost one million people be brutally murdered. We DID use military force in Bosnia and stopped the ethnic cleansing there. Same thing in Kosovo (the ethnic killing there was on a much smaller scale than in Bosnia). So it's ok to use force to stop the ethnic killing in Europe, but not in Africa? I'm not saying kill the Arabs; I'm saying STOP the ethnic cleansing THROUGH the use of military force if need be.

[seemslikeadream]

48. Thank you my friend SomthingsGotaGive

I am honored that you took the time to post. I admit to growing weary
so I leave this thread with

EVERY DEATH CREATES NEW ENEMIES
MORE TERRORISTS
MORE DANGER
MORE DEATH
AND REMEMBER...

HE IS JUST GETTING STARTED...

BUSH'S PLAN FOR PEACE
IS THE PEACE OF THE COMMON GRAVE

http://www.bushflash.com/pax.html WATCH THIS VIDEO TAKES 3 MINUTES


Wumpscut
Totmacher

sie ahnten nichts von mir
von meiner wilden gier
doch als du kamst zu mir
da wurde ich ein tier
kein gedanke an danach
als ich dir die knochen brach

tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot

tot

fuer mein naechstes leben
schoepfe ich neue kraft
ich bin dem toeten ergeben
in der einzelhaft

tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot
tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot

ein dahinsichen
von gottes hand
ich kann dich riechen
und das denken verschwand

tot tot tot tot tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot tot tot tot tot

ich mache dich tot ich mache dich tot
ich mache dich tot ich mache dich tot

sag mir was du willst
dass du meine sehnsucht stillst
ich mache dich tot fuer immerdar
von blut alles rot auf gottes altar

tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot

ich mache dich tot fuer immerdar
ich mache dich tot glaub mir es ist wahr
ich mache dich tot fuer immerdar
ich mache dich tot auf gottes altar

[RivetJoint]

53. So it's okay with

you for us to sit idly by and watch hundreds of thousands die, when military force may save them? At least I know where you stand.

[SomthingsGotaGive]

61. Yes Hate filled.

It can only be described as hate when you suggest we "Smash Sudan"

Maybe you think the Russians should just 'Smash' Chechen's in order to bring peace to their country.

Maybe you think its just the Arabs there that need their houses cleaned.

Violence isn't the answer when peace is what you seek.

I'm interested in hearing your feelings on civilian collateral damage.
How many non-combatants deserve to die to bring peace to a region. 1000, 10000, 100000?

Maybe you believe in 'surgical strikes' where laser guided missiles hit only the bad guys hiding in residential apartment buildings.

Perhaps you think the Innocent people living there will die as part of the greater peace being brought to the country. I guess you think their relatives will thank us.

[RivetJoint]

63. Where did I say "smash Sudan?"

Violence WAS the answer to bring peace to Bosnia, was it not?

[SomthingsGotaGive]

68. Right here....

RivetJoint (383 posts) Tue Sep-07-04 08:24 AM
Response to Original message

1. I'm begining to think


that, together with our European allies, we OUGHT to "smash" Sudan


Did you really forget that soon?

[gottaB]

49. too bad you weren't prompted to think

Do you accept or reject the premise that military forces deployed in peacekeeping operations can prevent violence?

[FlemingsGhost]

52. Military force is violence.

Iraq.

[RivetJoint]

55. And sometimes

violence IS the answer.

[FlemingsGhost]

56. I'll let your own words define your character.

Here's something to think about: Maybe the Arabs in Sudan feel exactly the same way as you. See the fundamental flaw in your logic, yet?

Somehow I suspect not ... Sigh.

Peace, Rivet. You and I have nothing left to debate.

(on edit: punctuation)

[RivetJoint]

59. Fine

It's thinking like yours that led to the deaths of one million Africans while the world stood and watched.

[FlemingsGhost]

60. And it's folks who think like you ...

who carried out the killing.

(on edit: typo)

[RivetJoint]

64. Wrong

I seek to use military force to PREVENT genocide, not carry it out.

[gottaB]

65. Based on Iraq, you would conlcude that all military force is violence?

Kofi Annan, who is an authority on reducing violent conflicts, a defender of international law, an astute observer of the state of interantional affairs, and, of course, a critic of the invasion of Iraq, has called for a larger peacekeeping mission in Sudan. In a report released today he argued:

Also, in the last year, we have seen the spectre of gross and systematic violations of international humanitarian law rear its ugly head once again in the Darfur region of the Sudan. Massive human rights violations, including forced displacement, extrajudicial killings and gender-based sexual violence, combined with malnutrition and preventable disease due to lack of access to food, water and basic sanitation, have led to the death of tens of thousands of people and the displacement of well over a million others, not only internally but also in neighboring countries. We must not wait for confirmation of our worst fears to put the full force of the international community behind an immediate and definitive end to the atrocities. If we fail to act here, we lose not only lives but credibility. The situation in Darfur strikes at the very heart of the ideals of the Charter of the United Nations and the Millenium Declaration.

And, regarding peacekeeping in general, Annan says that the
"jump in the demand for United Nations peace operations is a welcome signal of new opportunities for the international community to help bring conflicts to a peaceful solution." (Annan's report is linked here:Annan sees major challenges to reaching goals set at 2000 Millennium summit).

Are you opposed to all peacekeeping missions on principle? Are the heart and ideals of the Charter of the United Nations not worth defending?

[SomthingsGotaGive]

57. Military Force ?

Peacekeeping as the term suggests is when a military uses its troops to KEEP THE PEACE.

First there needs to be a peace to keep.


What you are suggesting is Peace Making.

And No I don't think A Military force can make peace. Only more war.

[RivetJoint]

58. Bosnia

Kosovo

Next?

[SomthingsGotaGive]

66. Have you been to Bosnia or Kosovo

How about posting a link that suggest that the killing has stopped in that region.

Do you know who started the war ?

I would provide you with links suggesting that the U.S. fomented the war there to gain strategic advantage in the region after the break up of the USSR.

However it's obvious that you didn't read any of Seemslikeadreams posts so I won't bother.

BTW do you find it odd that Al Qaedawas active in the balkans?

Isabel Vincent
National Post


Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network has been active in the Balkans for years, most recently helping Kosovo rebels battle for independence from Serbia with the financial and military backing of the United States and NATO.

The claim that al-Qaeda played a role in the Balkan wars of the 1990s came from an alleged FBI document former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic presented in his defence before the Hague tribunal last week. Mr. Milosevic faces 66 counts of war crimes and genocide.

http://prisonplanet.com/us_supported_al_qaeda_cells_during_balkan_wars.html

[RivetJoint]

69. I served in both Bosnia and Kosovo

on the ground in Bosnia; in the air over Kosovo. I SAW the results of years of ethnic cleansing. The Bosniacs would have been totally wiped out if we had not intervened.

Killing has not stopped anywhere iin the world, but genocide sure as hell was stopped in Bosnia.

Yes, I KNOW who started the war. It was NOT the US.

[SomthingsGotaGive]

70. Still no proof

More hearsay. More Hate - The Bosniacs ?!?!

So who started the war and why.

[RivetJoint]

72. What's the hearsay part?

[reorg]

76. interesting that you would openly admit to have been part

of the illegal invasion of Kosovo.

What is your opinion about the "collateral damage" your colleagues caused? What is your opinion about the residue of DU munitions spread all over Serbia? What is your opinion about the destruction of the civilian infrastructure of this country?

As to Bosnia - were you aware at the time that your employer was - in violation of the UN security council arms embargo against all combatants in the former Yugoslavia - arming Bosnian Muslims supported by "al Qaeda" fighters, as were later the KLA?

What is your opinion about US support for "mojahedin" fighting for the secession of Bosnia, and later the secession (still ongoing legal niceties notwithstanding) of Kosovo?

Uh, and did you know at the time that there were several competing plans to build a pipeline through the Balkans in order to transport oil from the Caspian to the Mediterranian sea, and later Chevron was successful with their project which is now almost completed?




>>Richard J Aldrich, Monday April 22, 2002, The Guardian

... For five years, Professor Cees Wiebes of Amsterdam University has had unrestricted access to Dutch intelligence files and has stalked the corridors of secret service headquarters in western capitals, as well as in Bosnia, asking questions.

His findings are set out in "Intelligence and the war in Bosnia, 1992-1995". It includes remarkable material on covert operations, signals interception, human agents and double-crossing by dozens of agencies in one of dirtiest wars of the new world disorder. Now we have the full story of the secret alliance between the Pentagon and radical Islamist groups from the Middle East designed to assist the Bosnian Muslims - some of the same groups that the Pentagon is now fighting in "the war against terrorism". Pentagon operations in Bosnia have delivered their own "blowback".

... In both Afghanistan and the Gulf, the Pentagon had incurred debts to Islamist groups and their Middle Eastern sponsors. By 1993 these groups, many supported by Iran and Saudi Arabia, were anxious to help Bosnian Muslims fighting in the former Yugoslavia and called in their debts with the Americans. Bill Clinton and the Pentagon were keen to be seen as creditworthy and repaid in the form of an Iran-Contra style operation - in flagrant violation of the UN security council arms embargo against all combatants in the former Yugoslavia.

... Arms purchased by Iran and Turkey with the financial backing of Saudi Arabia made their way by night from the Middle East. Initially aircraft from Iran Air were used, but as the volume increased they were joined by a mysterious fleet of black C-130 Hercules aircraft. The report stresses that the US was "very closely involved" in the airlift. Mojahedin fighters were also flown in, but they were reserved as shock troops for especially hazardous operations.

... Weapons flown in during the spring of 1995 were to turn up only a fortnight later in the besieged and demilitarised enclave at Srebrenica. When these shipments were noticed, Americans pressured UNPROFOR to rewrite reports, and when Norwegian officials protested about the flights, they were reportedly threatened into silence. ...


Richard J Aldrich is Professor of Politics at the University of Nottingham. His 'The Hidden Hand: Britain, America and Cold War Secret Intelligence' is published in paperback by John Murray in August.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/0,2763,688327,00.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x66548#66580

[RivetJoint]

78. What court has declared the Kosovo operation

illegal?

[reorg]

81. Nobody needs to "declare" something illegal that clearly is

- as acknowledged by all authorities in the field, BTW. Please inform yourself.

(...)

Article 1, paragraph 1 of the United Nations Charter reads:
Purpose: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace

Article 2, paragraphs 3, 4 and 7 read:
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state…

The charter is clear that UN members are to refrain from aggressive actions or making threats concerning use of force. In addition, the UN and members are required to honor the sovereignty of others nations and to refrain from interfering in domestic problems. Nations are permitted to use force for their own defense or in collective defense.

The North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 reaffirms the UN commitment to peaceful, non-aggressive resolutions to disputes. In articles 5 and 6, the treaty defines collective defense and the territories covered by that defense.

Kosovo is recognized internationally as a province of the sovereign nation of Yugoslavia. Yugoslav actions in Kosovo are, by definition, domestic actions. Yugoslavia did not attack (in this limited case) or present an imminent or direct threat to any other nation.

(...)

http://www.usafa.af.mil/jscope/JSCOPE00/Bowen00.html

[reorg]

83. Humanitarian Hypocrisy

Humanitarian Hypocrisy
Professor Robert Hayden
Director, Center for Russian & East European Studies
University of Pittsburgh

In October 1998 NATO faced a dilemma: (1) while its member states were threatening air attacks (2) against Yugoslavia in response to Yugoslav attacks on Kosovo Albanians, they also recognized that Kosovo is clearly within the sovereign territory of Yugoslavia. On March 24, 1999, NATO resolved this dilemma by committing the first unprovoked, opposed military aggression in Europe since Soviet troops invaded Hungary in 1956. The attacks were clearly contrary to international law and to the UN charter. (3) The aggression took the form of intensive bombing of the Yugoslav "infrastructure," the first such massive use of air attacks in Europe since World War II. As of May 23, after 60 days of bombing, NATO had mounted 7,000 air attacks on more than 500 targets, with munitions alone costing about $20 million per day. While Yugoslav military casualty figures in the first 60 days of the attacks were estimated at being "in the hundreds," NATO had in that time killed as many as 1500 civilians. (4) Further, in the third week of May NATO began to commit textbook war crimes, aimed at depriving the civilian population of Serbia of water and electrical power, and explicitly not aimed at military forces in Kosovo. (5)

(...)

The moral sleight-of-hand involved in humanitarian intervention is revealed by Havel, who finds the values of human rights to be powerful because people are willing to die for them. (36) He thus seems to echo Gandhi, who is reputed to have said that while there were many causes that he would willingly die for, there are none that he would kill for. NATO, however, is not willing to die for human rights, but rather to kill for them, which is, after all, what humanitarian intervention is all about -- and what Havel applauds.

(...)
-------------------------------------------------------------

Footnotes:

(...)

3. See Bruno Simma, "NATO, the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects." European Journal of International Law, April 1999 (World Wide web edition). (see: http://www.ejil.org/journal/Vol10/No1/ab1.html)

(...)


http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/hayden.htm

[seemslikeadream]

79. Thank you so much reorg

My appreciation is beyond words.

[RivetJoint]

80. We've noticed

[reorg]

82. Hey, I saw you held your own for quite a while, so

a little support seemed just in order :-)

Peace.

[gottaB]

67. So you reject the premise?

Your answer isn't clear to me.

[SomthingsGotaGive]

71. My answer is clear.

Yes I reject your premise

[RivetJoint]

73. So it was the right thing to do to let

one million Tutsis die in central Africa?

[SomthingsGotaGive]

74. Until you answer a single question I've posed...

I will not be baited by your obvious attempt to use an example of u.s. inaction to justify continued violence and killing.

How many civilians can die in a peace making operation before you would feel uncomfortable.

10% 20% 50%

[RivetJoint]

77. Depends

How many lives are at risk? During peace-making operations in Bosnia, we (NATO) killed a few score in order to save scores of thousands. To me, that was worth it.

[gottaB]

75. You don't distinguish between lawful and unlawful applications of force?

[seemslikeadream]

7. he proliferation of illegal small arms and its impact on violence and secu

Section One :The proliferation of illegal small arms and its impact on violence and security: Subregional perspectives


Nowhere is this more starkly illustrated than by the conflicts, actual or incipient, that describe an arc through East and Central Africa. Though these conflicts and their antecedents are generally treated on a state by state basis and though, indeed, many of their dynamics are principally internal to the political economies of the countries involved, it is also essential to consider them in a regional light. From Sudan, through Uganda to the Great Lakes and into the Democratic Republic of Congo, and then to the neighbouring states of Congo-Brazzaville, the Central African Republic and Angola, civil war or the threat of conflict have become virtually endemic.

Government-to-dissident group transfers. Foreign governments supply weapons to destabilise dissident groups in neighbouring countries, for example Sudan’s alleged support of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda to counter Uganda’s support for the Sudanese Peoples’ Liberation Army.

Northern Kenya, which is poorly administered by the state, is difficult to access and is surrounded by countries at war: Somalia, southern Sudan, Uganda and, more recently, Ethiopia. Trafficking of all types, particularly light weapons, passes easily through the country’s porous borders. Originally determined during colonisation, these have never prevented economic exchanges between states, nor pastoral communities from moving their herds across state boundaries. The pastoral communities, considered by some anthropologists as ‘warrior societies’, have literally been militarised by the rush of weapons which neighbouring rebellions have introduced. Traditional conflicts have become increasingly violent, sometimes with the surreptitious assistance of the state.

Although illicit weapons are sold in Kenya by unscrupulous policemen and soldiers, wars in Somalia, Sudan, Uganda and Ethiopia contribute significantly to arms trafficking. Kenya, a relatively stable country in the region, serves as a destination for fleeing soldiers as well as profit-making guerrillas.

The wars in Uganda, Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia have had a significant effect on Northern Kenya, both in terms of human flows (i.e., refugees) and commercial flows (i.e., weapons smuggling, in particular). The marginal situation, economically and politically, of North Kenya promotes all forms of illegal traffic. Kenyan authorities are only a presence — and that for want of a more effective occupation. They are unable to enforce the law and, in particular, were unable to enforce an amendment to the Firearms Act of August 1988, which promoted stricter control on the carrying of firearms, including air-rifles, and which had set punitive sanctions against lawbreakers, including ten years imprisonment. In the province, police forces have no grip on illegal activities. For example, they only managed to confiscate an estimated 3 per cent of all contraband weapons and arrest 6 per cent of the traffickers.

more
http://www.iss.co.za/Pubs/Monographs/No30/SectionOne.html

[RivetJoint]

10. So in other words,

these people would NOT be praticing genocide BUT for the "proliferation of illegal small arms?" Please.

[seemslikeadream]

13. FOREIGN OIL COMPANIES

Foreign oil companies operating in Sudan have been complicit in this displacement, and the death and destruction that have accompanied it

[RivetJoint]

21. No, the

fuckheads killing innocent women and children are guilty here. Them and only them.

[seemslikeadream]

23. ARMED CONFLICTS REPORT 2003

Arms Sources:

There is growing evidence that the Khartoum government is using oil revenue to buy new and heavier weapons. In January 2002, Sudan signed an agreement with Russia in which Sudan was given rights to manufacture Russian battle tanks in exchange for oil concessions. Other recent arms suppliers include China, Iraq, Libya, former Soviet bloc states (especially Khazakhstan), Yemen, and increasingly, Iran. Opposition groups have received military assistance and weapons from Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Uganda.



"Sudanese government oil revenues rose from zero in 1998 to almost 42 percent of total government revenue in 2001. According to the government, 60 percent of the US $580 million received in oil revenue in 2001 was absorbed by its military for foreign weapons and a domestic arms industry."

"The external actors most directly involved in arming the Government of Sudan have been China, former Soviet bloc states, South Africa and Iran, while Iraq has been a key provider of technical assistance and military training, and Malaysia has provided crucial funds for arms purchases. ... Iran’s role as a direct arms supplier increased as the government faced escalating military challenges from the opposition in 1997. Another country that has supported the government of Sudan, at least until 1995, is France, which pursued a policy unique among western nations. Its support has included sharing satellite intelligence with Sudan on SPLA movements in 1994, as well as providing military training and technical assistance, and assisting the government of Sudan in negotiating access to neighboring francophone states to carry out attacks on the SPLA. ...

For their part, the Sudanese opposition groups, operating under the umbrella of a coalition known as the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), have received political, military and logistical support from key neighboring states. Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Uganda appear firmly behind efforts to overthrow the current Sudanese government and install the opposition in its place in Khartoum. They have been engaged in arming and training Sudanese opposition forces ...."

more
http://www.ploughshares.ca/CONTENT/ACR/ACR00/ACR00-Sudan.html

[RivetJoint]

25. And that has what to do

with ethnic hatred?

[unionjack]

84. Seems Like A Dream....

.....you'd do well to think about conceding this one mate. When you have to try as hard as you just did to dodge the questions you gotta wonder if you're not just, plain wrong.

Sure oil is a prime mover here, but that doesn't alter the fact that armed intervention will stop the genocide and hand wringing won't.

Would you support armed intervention by a vastly superior force provided it WASN'T supplied by US/UK ?

[gottaB]

2. The Bare Realities of DarFur

By Mahgoub El-Tigani

A new book by the Sudanese writer Hamid Suliman al-Haj, a renowned political opponent of the Sudan's dictatorial regimes since 1957 up to the present day, is announced in the al-Midan Journal (August 6, 2004).
....

Wad' al-Nuqat fi al-Hurof (The Bare Realities of DarFur) includes storming evidence on the direct responsibility of the NIF's civilian and military state leaderships and supportive Arab militias for the ongoing horrors against the non-Arab people of DarFur. Government, much greater than the militias it established and systemically manipulated, is "squarely responsible" for the whole situation and all of the heinous catastrophes related to it.

Mr. Hamid's documentary evidence indicates the ongoing horrors can never be reduced to "tribal conflicts," "limited administrative problems," or "greedy intrusions by foreign powers," as the government feverishly propagates nowadays: the horrors were planned and executed by state authorities, in the first place, to eradicate the physical existence of specific populations of DarFur.

The Bare Realities of DarFur....

[leesa]

14. Hey! Hey! Stay in line. We don't want to invade countries out of order

Iran is next. Geez. Pushy.

[Cravat]

26. Africa is not South Central.

You can take the toughest, hardest, Crip/Blood to the Sudan and they will not be prepared for the level of indifference to violence that the average Sudanese deals with on a daily basis.

I have spent a few years working for Uncle Sugar in a variety of bad places. I have seen cops in Kabul gut shoot kids to disperse a crowd. I have seen the mines in the churches of the Balkans. Few places compare to central Africa. The tribal nature of the conflict makes it almost impossible to control. That, plus a near 100% underemployment rate and a large young population, will guarantee war with or without firearms or oil. The weapons are usually the blade or the club. These people are poor. A 50 dollar AK is far too expensive for the average villager. Plus, ammo is more expensive in the Sudan than in the states. The prices I remember were around one dollar for 10 rounds of 7.62. One of the more common weapons that I have seen in use is the old British Enfield. This is a bolt action, low cap long rifle. When they aren’t killing each other they use it to hunt. These rifles were given out/sold to the Africans over 60 years ago and are still in use today. So even if we stopped manufacturing ALL small arms systems today they would still be butchering each other with firearms for the foreseeable future. And tell me again how we ban the machete?

Unfortunately, genocide is an answer. They will still kill each other when all the non muslims are gone but the village elders will not provide wholesale support like they do now.

[saigon68]

31. Kick

[Gyre]

34. They're high on something

or just got done watching "The Mouse That Roared", and got an idea for some sweet old US taxpayer funded "foreign aid". Pathetic loser leaders with a captive citizenry.

Bottom line: They got nothing we want, so we're not going there. But we might send them some obsolete M1 Garands we've got in some national guard armoury somewhere so the Janjaweed can kill 'their' citizens and any stray journalists more efficiently. The whole thing is despicable.

Gyre

[seemslikeadream]

62. The Dogs of War - Africa - It is not a simple story

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=9558&mesg_id=9558