My dad and I were discussing current events this evening and he pointed out to me that movie actors and others want us to stop genocide in the Sudan but dont support our country on the war against terrorism. I think we should do something about the suffering of innocent people in the Sudan AND fight the war on terror.
2006-09-27 13:20:08 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
People want to stop the genocide in Sudan but also want it to be done without coming into conflict with the Sudanese government. The 'peace nicks' would soon appear in their droves if a war was proposed which faced determined opposition from the Sudanese government. Preparations for the substantive war that would be required would take time and inevitably could not be carried out in secret. The motives for the invasion would be questioned, there would be alarm at the number of casualties that might occur, there would be questions about how the aftermath might be managed, about whether it was in our interests and about any withdrawal strategy, some world powers might see it as in their interests to make trouble and oppose the move. It is easy to propose solutions to all kinds of problems, sometimes not so easy to manage the practical difficulties arising.
2006-09-27 13:50:16 · answer #1 · answered by Robert A 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sudan should be dealt with by the United Nations. Most people don't support the war on terror because it is against there party agenda to support the right.
2006-09-27 13:23:31 · answer #2 · answered by GloryDays49ers 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Which movie actors don't support fighting terrorism? What they are opposed to is the horrible decisions Bush has made in fighting the war. Who says they are horrible? Well, as it turns out, the consensus of every intelligence agency in the country is that Bush's invasion of Iraq has created MORE TERRORISTS, and has made our country LESS SAFE. They also conclude that Bush's policies have created a worldwide atmosphere of hatred toward the US that has helped the terrorists recruit new members and create new cells we don't even know about. So, basically, if your dad is supporting George Bush, then he is supporting the terrorists that Bush has made stronger. Those who oppose George Bush are the true Americans who actually want to make our country SAFER.....
2006-09-27 13:29:02 · answer #3 · answered by lamoviemaven 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well... the war on terror is one thing... but Iraq, where most of our troops are... seems to be another thing...
We have more troops in a country with little terrorist links than we have in all the other countries with terrorist links combined... apparently that's how you fight a war on terror, go where they will come to you? God forbid we go to them?
and Sudan is a mess... and apparently no one cares about them... it's been 10 times worse than Saddam at his worst there... yet the government seems to not want to bother with it...
I agree with you... but I think we need to start taking the war on terror to the terrorists and do something about darfur...
2006-09-27 13:24:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
so which you think of a all out conflict against Pakistan will end terrorism in India for stable. Yeah, that's not likely to take place. As Pakistan is a nuclear armed u . s . a . as-nicely is India, if those 2 countries have been to bypass to conflict you may wager your existence they are going to the two use their nuclear palms, in no way strategies of numbers lifeless civilians and solders on the two section.
2016-10-18 02:36:19 · answer #5 · answered by shine 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one is against the war on terrorism. There are those of us who r against the war in Iraq.
2006-09-27 13:31:26 · answer #6 · answered by Sarah 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
genocide should be stopped but I don't think the war is about that ;)
2006-09-27 13:28:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
well if you look at it we are kind of commited to stopping religous AND cultural violence in Iraq and Afganistan
2006-09-27 13:22:58 · answer #8 · answered by ben s 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋