Yet not to protect our resources in Iraq? Darfour offers the USA nothing. Only a badge of compassion for Angelina Joli and the nitwit BONO - (Bonehead). Furthermore, the more that die there the fewer that will be relocated to the the USA by both treasonous parties - Dems and Republicans...
2006-11-22 02:44:08 · 5 answers · asked by hillarydemplanforwar 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I am liberal and a Dem and I don't support military action in Darfur. While what is going on there is HORRIBLE and deserves the attention of the world community, nation building and military intervention to preserve peace NEVER works. The sentiments that led to war will never change. Sadly, conflicts of that nature must be settled internally.
2006-11-22 02:46:42 · answer #1 · answered by texascrazyhorse 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Are you sure they want to commit OUR resources to Darfur? Maybe they want to get the international community to give a damn and take action. To tolerate genocide anywhere makes it mroe likely in other places. Maybe places YOU might care about.
2006-11-22 11:08:11 · answer #2 · answered by kreevich 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not about committing our troops to the area, it is more about getting a group of countries together to get involved and see if there is a rational way out of the situation. These genocidal behaviors of countries are where the US should get involved and not in countries that just have oil. We should be more compassionate in the world and less about nation building.
2006-11-22 10:51:28 · answer #3 · answered by Docbrown 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because they keep forgetting that when the 'international community' does something - it means that all of the people dying will be American.
2006-11-22 11:48:19 · answer #4 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah.............
2006-11-22 10:46:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋