Hollywood demands [Bush] action in Sudan, yet wants out of Iraq. Aren’t both plagued by religious murderers?

Question

Hollywood demands [Bush] action in Darfur Sudan, yet wants out of Iraq. Aren’t both countries plagued by religious murderers?

And in Darfur, UN workers have been raping the underdogs to boot.

Answer 1

The reason is Bush went to Iraq. Shoot if the radical liberals ever agreed with anything Bush did I'd know it was the second coming. If Bush committed suicide right now Hollywood radicals would be complaining he didn't finish out his term.

Answer 2

Idiots demand lots of things.

But if they actually took the time to shut up and look at the facts, they would realize that the situation in Darfur is actually more rife with possibilities of expanded conflagration and human tragedy than Iraq ever was or is.

First, the Sudanese government said that ANY UN force that violated its border would be considered an invasion and an act of war. So, Hollyweirdos want another war?

Second, we have no way to get troops or supplies or equipment to Sudan except by airlift over other countries. So, our forces would be limited, their equipment would be limited to what can be airdropped in, just like it is in Afghanistan. This limits how many boots we can put on the ground and keep supplied.

Third, we would need permission to overfly other countries' airspace with military forces. Those other countries happen to be Muslim. We'd need to park aircraft carrier groups off their coasts and fly missions from there. This would leave our naval forces vulnerable to attack, and could very likely escalate the problem, causing general Muslim uprisings throughout the region.

Fourth, the military situation would turn out like Afghanistan or Iraq. Even if we took down the government and hit the Janjaweed militia hard, they would just melt into the population and attack us with IEDs and suicide bombers. Many jihadist Muslims would also come from neighboring states to fight us - Egypt, Libya, etc.

Without the UN taking charge and leading a multinational effort, then there is no hope for a peaceful resolution. A US led effort would cause problems these braindead script-readers fail to understand or appreciate.

Answer 3

I understand your confusion, Saddam murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people and Hollywood didn't give a ****.
Neither did the UN, Now the same is happening in more places than just Sudan. And still the UN can't/won't help. How is Bush supposed to do anything? Even if he wanted to, the members of the UN would not go along with it and if he went "alone" well we know what would happen. Its a sick vicious cycle.

Answer 4

Hollywood has plagued President Bush for about 6 years now and Hollywood has raped the American population for decades at the box office and music stores. No wonder kids pirate movies and music.

Answer 5

In the Darfur region government backed militias are engaging in a process of genocide, killing, raping, and starving millions of innocent women and children. The victims want and desperately need outside help.

In Iraq, a civil war exists due to a power vaccum created by a failed US military strategy. The civil war is supported by insurgency from Syrian and Iranian Islamic extremists. A majority of Iraqis do not want or need outside military intervention.

Please dont politicize the terrible atrosities that millions are suffering from in Darfur to attempt to gain some insignificant pro-right wing political advantage. If you actually witness what is happening in Darfur, any attempt to garnish political points for the right wing over this issue will leave you sleepless at night.

There in lies the differences.

Answer 6

HOLLYWOOD?
Instead of running of around the world adopting babies one at a time and presenting this accomplishment on the nightly news for publicity purposes to look so self-righteous, MAYBE Madonna and Angelina could use their millions to get some live footage of persecution and genocide around the world. THEN we would have some REAL daily news to watch and of course that would put pressure on the UN and other world leaders to help
What stev wrote, goes double for me!

Answer 7

To Maxx P above: i don't be attentive to what the hell you're babbling approximately, yet of direction and clearly, Biden has been lively in this situation for years (he's been over there various circumstances): "Joseph Biden has won an “A+” for helping and balloting in prefer of all significant Darfur legislations. This member of Congress is a champion of the reason and has taken needed action to end the genocide in Darfur." of direction and clearly, being a Dem Senator in a Repub controlled congress and Bush President, he could not try this plenty approximately it for the previous six years, different than whinge and demand our dope of a President to take some action. assessment to Iraq is only lazy and stupid, the venture in Darfur could be a humanitarian help venture of the form which we've successfuly carried out earlier, and there (unlike Iraq) could be a sparkling purpose and time-physique. for sure additionally, in this occasion we would be a area of a international UN rigidity, which makes an massive distinction from Iraq. under U.N.-backed agreements authorized final fall, a hybrid rigidity of twenty-two,000 African Union and U.N. peacekeepers are to be deployed in Darfur to guard and grant relief for 2.5 million Darfurians who've been compelled from their properties and at the instant are constrained to camps. "We ought to set a not ordinary cut-off date for Khartoum to settle for a hybrid U.N.-AU rigidity," Biden suggested.

Answer 8

People in Hollywood are retards. Just watch Team America

Answer 9

The second charge is most disturbing. You have evidence of that, right?

As to the first, no one seems to care about Darfur

Answer 10

Same religion, might add.

The liberals have a problem when it comes to justifying action in Darfur, and you have nailed it.