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.

 

The Genocide in Darfur

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 12:53 AM
link   
For decades, the Sudanese of Darfur, Africa have been starving. They have been plagued by Drought, and political corruption. Millions and millions are dying in Darfur at the hand of the government who are standing by and doing nothing except assist in their demise.

They have installed the Janjaweed which is their form of a militia which has been raiding their homes for years now. Those lucky enough to escape their rath have been scattering in the mountain sides with their only source of food being wild animal.

At this link below their is some information on the situation ongoing, along with some pictures.

I warn you they are graphic.

Darfur Genocide

I would write pages and pages on the subject here, but rather than do so, I will post sections where you can find your own information and where we can all work as individuals to reach a goal together.

Save Darfur... Send a Letter to Bush






In the above images you can see where Khartoum is located at, this is the nearest city state to Darfur, this was once reachable by train which was abolished by the government many years ago. Now this is only made by a long trip by road, which are washed out seasonally by the terrential rains they do endure from time to time.

Now these people are in need, and is this even in the news? Some light should be shone on these people and assitance is required. Food is not enough, supplies is not enough.

Just go to google and search for Darfur. There you can learn all about the droughts they have sufferred. The corruption of the government that only profitted from the misfortune of his people.

If we can not save these lives, we atleast owe them the respect to acknowledge what has happened to them.




posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 03:43 AM
link   
It's aweful what's going on there, but with Sudan's neighbours and the major power's on the continent looking the other way (as they've done with Zimbabwe) and with the Americans, understandably, not wanting to get involved on the ground in Darfur facing off against Muslim militia, this sort of thing's gonna be a daily occurrence in Darfur.

mod edit: removed quote of previous post



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 08:18 AM
link   


It's aweful what's going on there, but with Sudan's neighbours and the major power's on the continent looking the other way (as they've done with Zimbabwe) and with the Americans, understandably, not wanting to get involved on the ground in Darfur facing off against Muslim militia, this sort of thing's gonna be a daily occurrence in Darfur.


As it has been for years!

Do you think this is kept out of the American media due to the lack of help they have offered? Why make this so public when so little is being done. They would only be making themsevles look bad.

Human Rights Watch on Darfur

HRW has called this the worst human rights and humanitarian case in the world today. Yet never any media coverage.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by chissler


It's aweful what's going on there, but with Sudan's neighbours and the major power's on the continent looking the other way (as they've done with Zimbabwe) and with the Americans, understandably, not wanting to get involved on the ground in Darfur facing off against Muslim militia, this sort of thing's gonna be a daily occurrence in Darfur.


As it has been for years!

Do you think this is kept out of the American media due to the lack of help they have offered? Why make this so public when so little is being done. They would only be making themsevles look bad.

Human Rights Watch on Darfur

HRW has called this the worst human rights and humanitarian case in the world today. Yet never any media coverage.


It's the same in Europe as it is in the States and Canada. Darfur's been off the frontpage for a while, what with the Iranian nuke issue taking center-stage. That's just the nature of the game in the news business.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 08:47 AM
link   
I am US Air Force stationed in Germany. The US is in no way turning its back on the people of the Darfur region. I know for a fact we are helping out, even the little media attention that it is getting. We have sent 7 missions in the past 18 months, (me on one of them), to the region with heavy lifters (C-5s, C-17s), and ferried thousands of pounds of food, supplies, and African Union troops to try and curb the violence.

It is not the glorious step of sending troops in there to stop it, but we are a little tied up at the moment with two wars, and eyeing another. Of course the media isn't going to cover the good things that are happening, because how would that catch the average person's eye? The public wants to see violence, hate, and persecution. These are the things that make the news.

Go to www.af.mil and search for Sudan. You might read an article or two about me...



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chicken on a Stick
I am US Air Force stationed in Germany. The US is in no way turning its back on the people of the Darfur region. I know for a fact we are helping out, even the little media attention that it is getting. We have sent 7 missions in the past 18 months, (me on one of them), to the region with heavy lifters (C-5s, C-17s), and ferried thousands of pounds of food, supplies, and African Union troops to try and curb the violence.

It is not the glorious step of sending troops in there to stop it, but we are a little tied up at the moment with two wars, and eyeing another. Of course the media isn't going to cover the good things that are happening, because how would that catch the average person's eye? The public wants to see violence, hate, and persecution. These are the things that make the news.

Go to www.af.mil and search for Sudan. You might read an article or two about me...





Ecstatic to here that!

Would you mind expanding on some of the things you saw. Are the Janjaweed a common site in the area or do they attack unsuspecting.

I will deffinately check that site out right now. I understand no matter what we do for these people, its never going to be enough. But I am glad to hear atleast an effort has been put forth.

chicken if you don't mind I would love to hear some more of what you saw while stationed.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Didn't see a whole lot. Loaded up supplies and troops, did a hot landing, kicked the doors open, kicked everything out, and took off again. LOL. We were based out of another country.



posted on Apr, 30 2006 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Has anybody been following all of the recent press on the current situation in Darfur? I watched a George Clooney interview where he was over witnessing the tragedy that is their lives.

I am glad to see these people getting some of the attention they deserve, as hopefully through this recent spotlight it can shine some light and possibly make a difference in their daily life.



posted on Apr, 30 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   
I, for one, would love to see the violence stop in the Darfur region. Who wouldn't? But how can the United States lead a role to end the violence in this troubled region? Again, it would probably be construed by many as an "escalation in the American War against Islam".

Instead, I pose another question.....Many of the Islamic nations have large, well equipped military forces. Are humanitarian efforts outside of the aegis of the Muslim faith?

Or, for that matter, what about European countries such as France and Germany. Don't these nations have any humanitarian interests? Could they not intervene just as well as the United States? What about the United Nations? Can't UN forces be used to impose a peace upon this troubled region?

This is not meant to excuse the United States from their global "humanitarian responsibility" but, frankly, the presence of American troops would, most likely, be construed as increased aggression against the Islamic World and might be more provocative than helpful. If anything, I can easily foresee that an American involvement in Darfur could alter the situation in that troubled region and become a Somali - like situation.



posted on Apr, 30 2006 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Here's an intersting question.

Why should the US be permited to invade the darfur? The US invaded iraq, where a dictatorial regime was engaged in acts of genocide and mass murder, and was openly opposed to the US. Everyone thinks that that is wrong.

So why is it that the same peopel that are so incredibly hostile to the logic of hte iraq and coming iran war, are so much in favour of action in the darfur?

What if, say, the US had invaded the sudan, destroyed the arabist governmnet, and replaced it with a more republican one, at the first hints of acts against the native black muslims, before there was much international and television interest in it?

If reorganizing the middle east along more democratic and liberal lines isn't an acceptable goal for the US to 'spend' its soldiers upon, how is getting bogged down in an internal civil war between anarchic factions of militias, guerillas, and terrorists, a good idea in the sudan?


Now, keep in mind, I, personally, think that we should be protecting the Fur, but it can't help but to comment on the fact that the same people against Iraq are for Sudan, and, equally perplexing, the same people that are for Iraq are against action in the Sudan.


Also, as an aside, anyone notice that pattern of probably US inolvement in global affairs is paralleling that of the British Empire? Iraq, the Sudan, South Africa, etc. Is it because these things are part of the anglo-americna sphere of recognition, whereas places like Rwanda are simply to removed from the anglo experience to count?


Anyway, very sobering to note that, while we debate, people are being herded into camps, raped, and killed.



posted on Apr, 30 2006 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by benevolent tyrant
I, for one, would love to see the violence stop in the Darfur region. Who wouldn't? But how can the United States lead a role to end the violence in this troubled region? Again, it would probably be construed by many as an "escalation in the American War against Islam".

Agreed.




Instead, I pose another question.....Many of the Islamic nations have large, well equipped military forces. Are humanitarian efforts outside of the aegis of the Muslim faith?

Appears to be so, benevolent tyrant.


The only Muslim nation contributing to the emergency feeding program is Libya, with a donation of $US4.5 million.
Genocide by famine: Darfur aid halved





Or, for that matter, what about European countries such as France and Germany. Don't these nations have any humanitarian interests?

The only European countries that have given anything are:


Norway, Ireland, Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium donated a total of $US5.5 million and Canada gave $US3.9 million.
Genocide by famine: Darfur aid halved

Europe long proclaimed "Never Again," but that all went down the drain when they stood by and watched Bosnia unfold till the US prompted action. Now they watch Sudan, which begs the question, What happened to "Never Again"?




Could they not intervene just as well as the United States?

Certainly they could. The question is will they and when?





What about the United Nations?

I will abstain from commentary on the United Nations, being I stated all I needed to say last night on them, here.




Can't UN forces be used to impose a peace upon this troubled region?

Hardly. Impotent and defunct. Btw, where are the Chinese and Russians at in this equation? Are they not apart of the Big Five of the Security Council?




This is not meant to excuse the United States from their global "humanitarian responsibility" but, frankly, the presence of American troops would, most likely, be construed as increased aggression against the Islamic World and might be more provocative than helpful. If anything, I can easily foresee that an American involvement in Darfur could alter the situation in that troubled region and become a Somali - like situation.

Agreed.







seekerof

[edit on 30-4-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 12:02 AM
link   
What about the United Nations? They are just dropping the ball as usual. There is no way American troops in Darfur would be seen as anything but imperialism. Finally others beside myself see and take note of the hypocrites in the world. It is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Back to the U.N. though, this body needs to actually do something for once. Just not like Sierra Leone. The mercenaries that were there had things pretty much under control then the U.N. told them to get out, replaced them with more people yet everything went to hell in a handbasket. Maybe it isn't good business for the U.N. to not have conflicts. Hell, if there weren't any there wouldn't be a need for the United Nations. I for one cannot see how other nations can just sit back and let this crap continue.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Are ya'll who are calling on an American invasion of Dafur because
of a genocidal government there going to also admit that invasion
of Iraq was necessary due to its genocidal government?

Those who demanded that America NOT invade Iraq because the
UN didn't want it ... are you going to conceed Dafur because the
UN isn't calling on people to invade there either???

hmmmmm???



posted on May, 6 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Are ya'll who are calling on an American invasion of Dafur because
of a genocidal government there going to also admit that invasion
of Iraq was necessary due to its genocidal government?

Who is? There's a difference between INVADING a country and providing AID. I know the word 'invade' also contains the word 'aid', but don't get the two confused.
I'm just messing with you.



Those who demanded that America NOT invade Iraq because the
UN didn't want it ... are you going to conceed Dafur because the
UN isn't calling on people to invade there either???

Again read above, aid not invade. But, really, should we just sit around letting a genocide occur. There must be SOMETHING we can do.



posted on May, 6 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Since when did providing aid in Darfur be recognized as an invasion?

We are attempting to save lives here, and provide support to those who are in need. Invasion is something the people of Darfur know all to well, aid is a welcomed site they have not come to know.


Originally posted by Nygdan
Why should the US be permited to invade the darfur? The US invaded iraq, where a dictatorial regime was engaged in acts of genocide and mass murder, and was openly opposed to the US. Everyone thinks that that is wrong.

So why is it that the same peopel that are so incredibly hostile to the logic of hte iraq and coming iran war, are so much in favour of action in the darfur?


Its my hope that who ever enters Darfur, tries to play a strong defense in order to create a strong offense. Rather than attacking, come in and defend.

War is not going to save Darfur, these people need prevention more than anything.

An eye for an eye will make us all blind, war is the last thing Darfur wants to see.

Providing aid in Darfur, should not be recognized as an invasion.



posted on May, 6 2006 @ 11:21 PM
link   
The genocide in Darfur is an Arab vs non- Arab situation. Ethnic cleansing. When did we hear that before?

Ethnic cleansing should be at the top of human atrocities.

We, the US, should be involved. But so should the rest of the world. There is never an excuse for ethnic cleansing.

George Clooney should be thanked for his efforts, imo.

Anyway, the reality is that the gov't of Sudan supports the Janjaweed. How many here would support regime change? That's what is needed.

People there are starving to death. Starving to death. How can that happen in our world today?



[edit on 6-5-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on May, 9 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   
This has been happening for decades. The Janjaweed have been raiding Darfur and murdering the innocent for as long as most from Darfur can remember. It has been something they have learned to deal with.

It is only recently this is being put in the mainstream media.

Government corruption caused the droughts of the past to claim more lives than imaginable. In the harvest seasons, the government was claiming much more than they were actually harvesting. So when things seemed to be really bad, in actuality they were even worse. With the raids increasing, more people were being dispersed into the mountain side. Which left alot of crops unplanted, due to the fact they had nobody to do the labour.

On the outside it looks like the extreme droughts Darfur went through were the cause to so many deaths, but on a second look its clear the corruption inside the government led to alot of these deaths.



posted on May, 9 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   
I agree we should send aid but I also wonder where our NAACP Jessie Jackson and old Louie Ferricon are in these times or by helping these poor blacks not a profit making venture for them?
JanJaweed is also the drug that these people are given that help them cope with the stress of going around chopping up women and children. Government sponserd drugs at its best and we wonder what is going to happen in Mexico.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
There's a difference between INVADING a country and providing AID


Many times you can't provide aid without invading, or at least sending
in VERY heavy military support.

The world sends billions in aid to Africa and yet much of it never reaches
the people because the war lords steal it. Same thing happened with
the tidal wave. The world sent in billions and sent in food and relief
supplies .... where'd it go? Much of it was stolen.

And then we have the Palestinians. The world send billions ... where
is it?? A whole bunch is in Arafats Swiss bank accounts!!

Hey, I'm ALL FOR helping out. But just throwing money at a situation
doesn't usually work well. Controls have to be established. And many
times that means taking out the bad guys before the help goes in.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 09:41 AM
link   
FlyersFan is exactly right.

Sending aid over is going to do very little. The small portion that is not stolen is only a bandaid to an open wound. It is a temporary solution, these people need something more permanant. I do not want to see bloodshed, the last thing we need is another Iraq.

Like I said in a previous post, we need a strong arm to come in and play some defense for the people of Darfur.







 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join