How can someone be so into politics? What do you think of his beliefs?

Question

umm..THIS IS WHAT HE WROTE

So this guy i like, i knew he liked politics but not THIS MUCH. ahh lol hes a really studious guy and doesnt seem like the type that would have a girlfriend

"Everyone needs to stfu about Darfur"

[Ugh, I was typing this and accidentally refreshed the window, losing it all. Starting again...]


Seriously.

How do you propose to 'stop the genocide' ? I'm sure that phonebombing your Liberal congressman won't help, I mean, she's most definitley already lobbying for action in Darfur.

But, what action could the U.S. take?

They could send troops to Darfur, to protect the people and displace an oppresive government.

Sounds good, right?

Kind of like displacing an oppresive dictator who repeatedly commited genocide against his own people , had torture prisons just for children, and repeatedly sprayed mustard gas over large regions of his country. A dictator who was suspected of having WMD's by 90% of the world's intelligence, and a dictator who the UN HAD AGREED TO WAGE WAR ON.

Yes, after Saddam (And yes , I'm talking about Saddam in case you haven't picked up on it yet) blocked UN Weapons Inspectors, the UN did allow an invasion. However, some countries wanted to wait a little longer, and the U.S. invaded, displacing an oppresive dictator.

Did the American public rejoice that an oppresive government who was commiting genocide was gone ?

No, they complained, and whined.

So, now that there's another "genocide", the U.S. is allowing the UN to take care of it.

Hmm. So , what else could we do for Darfur?
Ooh, we could give them bushels of money, right?

... Wrong.

Just like how when Hurricane Katrina happened, and people thought they should 'send cans of food and diapers', because they heard on the news that people couldn't get those.

Which was wrong.

During Katrina, the problem was not that there was a shortage of diapers, but that the areas were flooded, and trucks carrying these materials couldn't reach them.

In Darfur, no amount of pleading or money will make the genocide stop. Sorry, but the world doesn't run on wishes and pretty thoughts.

So, seriously. Stop 'protesting Darfur', you're doing nothing except making noise.

[Thus concludes my little Darfur thing. The first one was better, but oh well. Stupid refresh key. ]




so what do you think of his beliefs? how could he have known all of this is beyond my knowledge..probably reads a politic book to bed?

Answer 1

Well, I personally would have use the Oil for food program as my example instead of hurricane Katrina but...in essense he seems passionate about the lack or actions or the appropriate actions in a vary unstable area of the world.
The main problem is, some people in America have seen the history we have played, and we have acted many times as the worlds saviours by offering help to the oppressed. On the other hand some think we need to just put America in a dome and protect it, keep our borders safe and not care about how the rest of the world is tearing itself apart. That hasn't what America has been all about but some think its tie for a change. There's also alot ot be said that America has only seemed to help out certain countries that offer some future tactical or financial benefit. Thus the on-slaughts of Africa not being intervened with.
But, despite all the chaos in the world, the wars, the problems, and injustices, it might be wise to let your friend know that yes, these things are happening, perhaps they need to be addressed, but your largely correct in the fact that even though one person can make a difference or even get invovled to some point, the mess's of the world should not be causing a war or problem in your living room. Encourage them with the fact that they might know more than you, and you recognize they are passionate about it, but worring yourself sick in your livingroom is unhealth physically as well as the psychological strain on a relationship.
Because your not the enemy.

Answer 2

The genocide in Darfur was still going on while Nancy Pelosi was obsessed with blaming Turkey for a genocide that occurred 90 years ago. That's about how long it takes democrats to turn off their blind eye. Of course it is politically incorrect blame muslims for a genocide so soon after it happened. Under the unwritten rules of political correctness, it's much more proper to spit on the grave of Jerry Falwell or blame Pat Robertson for unkind words about Hugo Chavez.

Edit: to the first answerer (formerly me): what's the prize for discovering a yahoo bug? 2:00 am, I just lost 1 hour.

Answer 3

I think the coments of eelfins above pretty much summarizes my feeling.

If we were to have gone into Darfur instead of Iraq, the Democrats would deny having voted for the action and be demanding the we get out immediately.

Edit: Interesting what the DST change is doing. eelfins was the first response but somehow the clock change put me answering an hour earlier and ahead of him/her. Interesting.

Answer 4

Just had to comment on your long winded ramblings by allegedly your BF.
The American people don't rejoice when we go to war!
The American people believed we were justified in stopping Saddam.
We, and the rest of the world were lied to about Iraq.
The American people are mad as Hell and we're not going to stand for it much longer!
American people have been the most giving people the world has ever known, and personally I could care less about giving any more!

Answer 5

What is wrong with you? This guy deserves better than someone who thinks "everyone needs to stfu about Darfur," and YOU deserve to stop watching FOX news and getting angry at people who want to do good in the world. Is that REALLY how you'd like to spend your life? Angry at those who try to change the world for the better?