2006-11-21 06:40:26 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sudan has paid off the French, the Chinese and the Russians. That is three veto's against any sort of effective action.
Besides if other countries really care about this they would get off their butts and do something instead of whining about how the US is not solving the problem for them.
2006-11-21 07:33:25 · answer #1 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UN exists to prevent another WW. It's unlikely that Darfur or Rwanda will become such, so I expect that the'll document, watch, and talk about it, but nothing more.
2006-11-21 06:54:02 · answer #2 · answered by Sage B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UN will not do anything because the is no money to be made . The UN will sit by and watch these people get slaughtered unti the US goes in and stops it. Then the UN will say we are occupiers, and invaded a country without being prevoked. The UN is completely useless.
2006-11-21 06:45:07 · answer #3 · answered by FRANKFUSS 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely...its just the same. Talk is easy but action that requires people to be put in harms way, guaranteed death of many and going against a sovereign country can't be taken lightly. But, while all that is weighed out genocide continues all to the advantage of those committing the atrocities.
2006-11-21 06:46:09 · answer #4 · answered by wallsatlarge 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They like being in those front row seats as observers. Someone else can be responsible for acting to stop the madness. That is the usual U.N. recipe for continuous and total failure.
They should already be moving their things to Caracas as Chavez suggested. You cannot kick their sorry as_ses out of NY soon enough.
2006-11-21 10:17:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you the US government is not so secretly working with the government causing the problems in Darfur, in the name of stopping terrorism of course?
2006-11-21 06:45:09 · answer #6 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Probably too busy devising a new way to make some side cash since "food for oil" was exposed.
2006-11-21 06:49:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No!
2006-11-21 06:43:26 · answer #8 · answered by kissmybum 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋