English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Why is there a genocide in Darfur?

Russia could send peacekeeping troops to the Darfur region in Sudan RIGHT NOW…But won’t
The genocide is on a scale similar to the Jewish Holocaust of Hitler, yet many people say that there is not a "real threat” to us or our country. Darfur is in Sudan and therefore Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir is the local HITLER.
So I repeat my question…

Why is there a genocide in Darfur?

2007-01-30 01:54:49 · 4 answers · asked by Dan the car man 5 in News & Events Current Events

4 answers

.
it is nothing short of a travesty that nobody helps. movie stars have to plead governments and still nothing is done. there is no economic interest in sudan, like most other poor countries in the world. africans are viewed as inferior to westerners and we don't have the stomach to watch genocide. rwanda could have been prevented, just read 'shake hands with the devil.' we sit in our cars and listen to the local news every morning, with little mention of places like sudan, somalia, or haiti.

2007-01-31 10:55:27 · answer #1 · answered by satzema 2 · 2 0

Because no one is stepping up to the plate. When we were in Bosnia and Somalia, how many Chinese or Russian troops were involved? It appears the US and the European countries are the only ones attempting to bring peace. Yet, a forth of the world's population live in China.

How about the other oriental countries? There are a lot of people and resources out there, and yet, they contribute little or nothing. Are the countries too poor? Do they not care? Why have the UN if the US is the major player?

I'm sorry. It appears I have asked more questions instead of answering yours. Genocide is wrong! But, without true world participation, we have to pick and choose our battles.

2007-02-02 23:53:59 · answer #2 · answered by jack-copeland@sbcglobal.net 4 · 0 0

The US could send peacekeeping troops to the Darfur region in Sudan right now... but won't. The US could send peacekeeping troops to Southern Sudan a few years ago, where and when there was really a Genocide on a scale similar to what Hitler did- and for God sake, NOT ONLY to the Jews-but wouldn't, like it wouldn't send troops to Rwanda, when there was a Genocide there. The US had "more important" things to do: To enforce sanctions on Iraq, which killed more then half a million Iraqis, and of course, to help the Islamic regime of former SS troop, Izetbegovic, in Bosnia, to fight against Serbs and moderate Muslims who rebelled against Izetbegovic, and to accuse the Serbs of "war crimes".

2007-01-30 03:42:23 · answer #3 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 2 0

for the reason that early 2003, Sudanese government forces and protection rigidity observed as “Janjaweed” have been engaged in an armed conflict with rebellion communities observed as the Sudanese Liberation military/stream (SLA/SLM) and the Justice and Equality stream (JEM). As portion of its operations against the rebels, government forces waged a scientific campaign of “ethnic cleansing” against the civilian inhabitants who're individuals of the same ethnic communities through fact the rebels. Sudanese government forces and the Janjaweed militias burned and destroyed 1000's of villages, brought about tens of 1000's of civilian deaths, displaced thousands and thousands of folk, and raped and assaulted 1000's of girls persons and ladies.

2016-10-16 07:21:42 · answer #4 · answered by Erika 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers