I'd bet the answer is NO.
If you are being slaughtered do you say to the International organization that has been providing food and aid as well as man power, "we don't want you guys here. You help us, but not enough, so please leave."
If we don't support the UN how the hell can we turn around and call it weak? America is "supposed" to be the world's moral compass, but certain citizens believe an organization meant to provide aid to those around the world is just some silly idea.
You didn't hear Bush say what was happening in Sudan was tragic until Kofi Annan kept repeating that the world can't sit by and do nothing. After that, Bush got on the phone and requested a larger UN peace keeping force be allowed in Sudan.
The UN is doing what it can and I'm sure the people dying appreciate all they can get.
2006-12-19 12:38:39 · 8 answers · asked by Mrs. Bass 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Moral compass does not mean invading a country and replacing its power structure. It also doesn't mean policing another country.
What it does mean is it backs the UN when they are on peacekeeping missions to try and save starving and dying people. When we turn our back on the UN we are also turning our back on all the people that the UN helps and protects.
2006-12-19 12:45:54 · update #1
The people of Darfur are desperate for help and I am sure would appreciate more. I am so sick of mindless Bush zombies comparing Iraq to Darfur. They are apples and oranges! We went into Iraq based on lies and unclear intelligence, without UN approval and now thousands are dead and the country is mired in civil war BECAUSE OF OUR INVASION!!!!! Darfur's government is allowing and encouraging the Janjaweed to commit genocide. The UN and the US should intervene. This is a COMPLETELY different situation, there are no lies or unclear intelligence, the evidence of ethnic cleansing is broadcast into our comfy homes every day!! But because the people who are being tortured, raped and murdered don't control the OIL , Bush doesn't give a flying S**T! We need to get the hell out of Iraq and into Darfur!!
2006-12-19 12:54:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
As long as the government of Sudan says they will fight any UN troops that come into Darfur---there is little they can do. The UN could go in and they would need so many soldiers to topple the Sudan government--------they do not have them. They are already scattered too thin.
Bush? He already has screwed up so much-he has no say in going into another country--he is burnt toast.
2006-12-19 12:48:51 · answer #2 · answered by Shossi 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
"America is "supposed" to be the world's moral compass, but certain citizens believe an organization meant to provide aid to those around the world is just some silly idea."
And yet, we hear time and time again about people complaining about America being the world's police.
We just can't win. We do nothing, we're heartless bastards. We send in troops, we're warmongers.
2006-12-19 12:43:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
The UN was a failure in the Bosnian war as it's been a failure in every major military action it has ever been involved in around the world. They couldn't defend themselves against the Boy Scouts because they don't want to shoot anyone. If Darfarians want to stop dying then tell their rebels to stop figthing the Sudanese govt. troops. That's why they are in all the trouble there to begin with. The Govt. troops want to stop the rebels and the people are getting in their way. Stop the rebels and the killing will stop.
2006-12-19 12:50:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
So are you advocating invading* Darfur? Under United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution? Like the UNSC Resolution that we used to invade Iraq? Why would it be better to invade Darfur? And have we tried 10 years of sanctions yet (like Iraq)?
* Sending troops into a sovereign nation is an invasion. The people who are doing the killing don't want us there, they have guns, they are not going to welcome us with open arms, they have a reason why they are doing it (as disgusting as it is to us). How is this different from Iraq?
2006-12-19 12:44:09 · answer #5 · answered by Yo it's Me 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think they would be desperate beyond anyone's imagination for any shred of help they could get...
too bad it seems that no one really cares... including many U.N. member nations...
this could be Bush's Rwanda...
2006-12-19 12:43:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes. The entire population of Darfur exist solely to wait for someone to help them.
2006-12-19 12:41:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Probably.
2006-12-19 12:46:44 · answer #8 · answered by JudiBug 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋