It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Britain to send troops into Sudan

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Source
It seems that somebody has finally taken notice of the dramatic situation in the Darfur region of Sudan. It's still not clear if the troops will be operating under UN sanction or will have some other kind of international mandate. On more mundane terms, it does not bid well for the newly-born European rapid reaction force: until now only Britain has sent her troops around the world, while all the other countries have sit idly watching. This is no Iraq: it's not about occupying a country or guarding oil wells. It's about ensuring that a war-stricken population get the most basic humanitarian aids: food, medicines and water. Mr Chirac and mr Schroeder will need a new excuse.




posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kakugo
Source
This is no Iraq: it's not about occupying a country or guarding oil wells. It's about ensuring that a war-stricken population get the most basic humanitarian aids: food, medicines and water. Mr Chirac and mr Schroeder will need a new excuse.


Its doubtfull that the Sudan will be purchasing any Airbus planes or other items from the EU anytime soon. Where is thier moral outrage over the conditions in Africa?. However, you cannot simply point the finger of blame at those two countries either. Why has the UN failed to take the lead in this?



posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Well, my little "pointed finger" was addressed to these two nations because they are part of the EU's Rapid Reaction Force too. Maybe they'll join Britain in next few months and send their troops too, but it's inacceptable that they have not taken the first step. I personally doubt that the Royal Marines or the Paras will have French or German troops at their side when they'll enter Sudan. About the UN's role: you are totally and completely right, but this is something that needs a separate topic.



posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by Kakugo
Source
This is no Iraq: it's not about occupying a country or guarding oil wells. It's about ensuring that a war-stricken population get the most basic humanitarian aids: food, medicines and water. Mr Chirac and mr Schroeder will need a new excuse.


Its doubtfull that the Sudan will be purchasing any Airbus planes or other items from the EU anytime soon. Where is thier moral outrage over the conditions in Africa?.

Where is the Moral outrage of the United States?

These people are being exterminated by thugs and criminals. An arab minority that runs roughshod over the country and allows paramilitary militias/lynchmobs to displace, rape, and commit mass murder amoung the native black population. Its revolting.

The UN stalls on it, because to call it genocide would require a certian class of action. The EU is incapable of doing it, and the only nations that are capable in the world don't want to do anything. America is the most powerful, america is the most capable, it must do something. Forget the somalia episode, or at least rember that the ideals and involvment there were just and that the men who died died honourably and for a grand cause.

Why has the UN failed to take the lead in this?

Because its irrelevant, weak, indecisve, and corrupted by the influences of countries that aid and abet these atrocities in and around darfur.



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 09:19 AM
link   


I personally doubt that the Royal Marines or the Paras will have French or German troops at their side when they'll enter Sudan

You are right. They will not. We are already there.
See?

[edit on 28/12/04 by tsuribito]



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 10:11 AM
link   
FredT , i can understand what your saying about the UN but you have to remember the UN is based upon disscusion.
I see this as one of the primary faults of the UN, back in its high day wars where more.....simple.
They didnt really have alquida and the such running around or small nations doing what they do now.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join