Are the U.S. and Britain... ?

Question

seeking a pretext for intervention in order to take advantage of Sudan's oil?


The word genocide has been thrown in left right and centre and everyone is adamant on 'intervention'.
Meanwhile, the international community remains largely silent about Uganda. There the Lord of Resistance has killed tens of thousands of people, often mutilating their bodies, displaced more than 1.6 million people in northern Uganda, kidnapped thousands of children, forced many to become soldiers or sex slaves.
Do you not find this strange?

Finbarr i'm not cynical it just seems a little convenient to me. What Sudan, and Darfur in particular, needs now is humanitarian assistance.

My mistake

Mucky cut the sarcasm i'm not questioning the obvious military superiority of britain and america. They would still need a legitimate reason to take such action. Otherwise they would just be 'condemned'.

Answer 1

Your assessment for the Lords Resistance Army in Uganda is completely off mark. And the figures are in the hundreds and there is a peace deal on at the moment. That is not to say that the US is not keen on Sudanese oil. That one is correct.

Answer 2

There are numerous situations around the world meriting humanitarian intervention, which is best routed through the UN. However, as the Un is painfully slow and politically compromised, that won't work. Equally, the responsible parties should be held to account in the International Courts, to which the US wont submit so lots of others won't submit either. The intervention in Bosnia was not driven by oil so perhaps it's too cynical to see oil behind every decision. Iraq was principally about oil but was messed up from the outset by ignorance and incompetence. The price for the errors is too high. Every death from violence and deprivation is a tragedy which could and should have been prevented.

Answer 3

This is only only an opinion.
I believe they are more concerned that some
entity will release a Nuclear Weapon and that
American's are far too dependent on foreign
oil that keeps us in our cars and provides energy.
It seems they can only handle one crisis at a time.

The good news is that Africa is getting alot of attention
in other ways here in the US. Uganda, there are old ties & wounds there. Diamond companies are evaluating their suppliers. People know there is oil and resources in your land. That will bring more folks onto your shores. I think your
neighbors and others have been also getting involved. Even
the Persian Journal reports of incidents in Sudan.

For the moment they seem distracted but fear not. Someday
hopefully in our lifetime we will see resolutions to so many of these tragedies.
* If a Nuclear Weapon is released your terrorists may have something else to worry about If the Iranians don't back down and agree with a stabilization plan who knows what will happen. They are in a tangle with the UN and even their
Chinese & Russian friends (Iran News.com)

Answer 4

You must be kidding! Our President doesn't need a pretext for intervention in any countries business! He has the power of the Military & Industrial Complex behind him & even though the new Congress says a lot, I really don't think they will do a lot! They all feed from the same hand!
The problems in Uganda were going on before we went into Iraq, why we didn't do anything to help them instead of going to a country that clearly didn't want us there is anyone's guess.
Evidentlily our government felt it would be easier to get to Iraq's oil than the oil in Sudan!

Answer 5

yeah, if you look at all countries and rated them as to who needs 'intervention', iraq probably would be way way low down on your list, from a humanitarian viewpoint. even countries like Burma - spend 50-60% GDP on military and 19p per person per year on healthcare. They have oil and gas, and western companies like elf make over billion a year on it. Controlling a countries business is more important than anything else for the west. It sucks dick. Iraq didnt have any WMDs or anything like that. Its a big farce. The US just wants their economy free to big business western investors, though this does prevent a certain level of tyrany in those countries, and may eventually lead to democracy (in a convoluted way).

Answer 6

No.
It would be far easier to simply seize the oil feilds of a current major oil producer.

Answer 7

You want us to stop fighting Islamic countries who have stated quite clearly they want to destroy the U.S., and support an Islamic government that is guilty of the same atrocities you state for the Lord of Resistance?

That's silly.

Answer 8

Kool Aid anyone?

Answer 9

The Sudan.... where even our soldiers fear to tread. I think not.

Answer 10

nah this is normal foreign policy for both th UK and the US and has been happening for pretty much a century.