The world continues to look away. Don't.

[Heracles 417]

Congo, Rwanda, Sudan. Always the same story.

The thought that we can reason with these people is not reality. Especially when it seems to be a sport.

Christine Schuler Deschryver, who works for a German aid organisation and has been a staunch and stubborn advocate for victims, says the perpetrators are difficult to identify. "All of them are raping women," she says, "It is a country sport. Any person in uniform is an enemy to women."

Here is an example from another nation.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7096814.stm

Saudi Woman jailed for being raped

A 19 year old Saudi woman has been sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in prison for being pack-raped fourteen times, by a group of seven men.

How can we rely on the international community when so many are keen on turning a blind eye? Especially when such claims are denied or even viewed as being the norm by nations in the international community. While people are being butchered, raped, tortured, hunted like animals etc, should we just wait to get an international consensus on a solution? Unfortunately once a life is taken it can not be brought back. Clearly time is not on our side.

Edited November 27, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I highly recommend watching "Tears of the Sun". While being a movie it paints a picture of what is going on down there as we speak. Excluding the rescuing part..

Yeah I saw that. Unfortunately. A nasty piece of imperialist p*rn. Little different from a 70's movie called Dark of the Sun - of which it seemed to be a direct rip-off.

That said - Rambo IV really takes the biscuit as far as that goes.

I don't think anyone should be 'looking for answers' in fictional hollywood movies that inevitably reduce the 3rd world to the level of a caricature.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You have got to be kidding me. So what ?

The International community needs to be involved and so does America. The reason the genocide went as far as it did in Rwanda was due to the fact that

America failed to call it out as ' genocide' while talking about being committed to end genocide. It was nothing but political rhetoric , as in let's not call it that so we don't have to do anything.

If you see someone get their head bashed in do you just stand by and turn your head because of pressure from people that cry scapegoat or do you do the right thing ? I honestly can not grasp your view point. I hope the International community will grow some balls to stop this insanity.

All the talk about being committed to end genocide is a joke......too little is being done and as I am typing this more lives of human beings are

taken.......meanwhile save the whales is moving forward.......amazing how they all come together for everything but human beings.....dare I say African

human beings. And yes, there is no political interest like oil there and that is one reason among many.

Why is it always America's responsibility to deal with? There are 194 countries out there. Going on your example. If I jumped in and consequently killed the perpetrator of someone being bashed. As it stands today, by virtue of world opinion, I would most likely end up being the bad guy for killing the perpetrator.

Do you think the animals committing these heinous crimes can be reasoned with? They need to be hunted down and killed. I do not think the US is stupid enough to get caught up in this sort of situation again; as is the case with Iraq. EG Terrorists deliberately bomb women and children there yet the Americans are to blame for somebody else's actions. Thanks to the many who condemned the US for going to Iraq, America must now sit by and watch these innocent people be slaughtered.

I would like to know what all of those anti-war anti-any action have to say about Sudan. Maybe they can come up with some non-military solutions rather than talking #######..

It isn't "America's sole responsibility", but as the worlds sole remaining economic and military superpower that supposedly prides itself on its freedoms we are sort of in the best position to lead by example.

Omoba isn't wrong - you can't talk about how we must 'end genocide' without taking any sort of real action to actually follow through. Bill Clinton I believe has actually acknowledged this as the biggest failure of his tenure as President. Unfortunately most of it is rhetoric - because foreign policy tends to be driven first and foremost by the self-interest of the countries involved. Hell - Europe and the US watched the former Yugoslavia tear itself apart for years before we went into Kosovo.

For all the trumpeting about Iraq - I don't think we were there for the Iraqi people, and (IMO) they were pretty far down on the list of priorities as far as justifications go. Africa has been butchering its people for decades, and this goes on with the barest wringing of hands from people who assume that just because the famine/war/genocide isn't in the news anymore that it somehow is no longer happening.

[StillThePrettiest 3]

...Omoba isn't wrong - you can't talk about how we must 'end genocide' without taking any sort of real action to actually follow through. Bill Clinton I believe has actually acknowledged this as the biggest failure of his tenure as President. Unfortunately most of it is rhetoric - because foreign policy tends to be driven first and foremost by the self-interest of the countries involved. Hell - Europe and the US watched the former Yugoslavia tear itself apart for years before we went into Kosovo...

I liked all your comment, Number 6, but just singled out that one part above as something I wanted to respond to

you're right about Clinton, by the way - I've seen the/an interview where he addresses that... all hindsight, of course, but at least he had the decency to talk about it

I'm most interested in the part I've made bold - it's so interesting, because on one level it's an 'of course!' sort of statement, and on another it's very profound... I guess it comes down to how each country sees itself, and its place in the world, and whether it then takes action ONLY to avert even worse possibly happening later (the (simplified) reason the US joined both World Wars, for example), or if there's a level of altruism there... acting just for the sake of others

I think both are valid, but the latter is more problematic; it is - or can be, at least - such a thankless task, and it's so easy for it to ge contaminated and compromised by other less-than-good reasons sneaking in

anyway, theory aside, I think this situation in DRC is beyond urgent; I think we should all be urging our governments to take whatever action is possible...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

As far as ‘action’ goes, we always seems to come down war being the only solution. Trouble is I’m not sure that it is the only solution, or even the best one for that matter. Take Iraq for instance – we have (arguably) improved that countries security, but it has been a painfully slow process; and one which has not (so far) been reciprocated by similar, permanent political improvements to ensure long-term stability and progress.

The fact is that we can’t go to war with everyone, or indeed right the world’s wrongs by military means. It’s a crude solution to often very complex problems and when people say “last resort” that’s exactly what it should be.

That’s not to say that not supporting interventionism idea amounts to doing nothing. I know, for example, that not so long ago UK supermarket chain TESCO was importing fresh produce from Zimbabwe (a country, that cannot feed its own population due to the mismanagement and breaking up of its agricultural infrastructure by the govt). I’m a little out of the loop with the story so I’m not sure whether or not that its still going on – but it seems clear to me that this is exactly the sort of thing we should be trying to do away with as far as ensuring some standard of ethical conduct in our foreign policies.

Also 3rd world debt-relief, but that's a whole issue unto itself.

[Ta Ta 1]

I would like to add that UN soldiers, the supposed protector of war torn countries have raped a multitude of woman and children refugees.

The UN at this time is too weak to get the situation in DRC and Sudan under control obviously. It has done good in many countries , see Sierra Leone, but is lacking.

Humanitarian aide can only do so much to help the people and often can't go where they are really needed. The dictators don't seem to be interested in diplomatic talks. So what else is there but military force to remove these idiots and give the country a fresh start ?

Sierra Leone has come out of a decade long brutal war where thousands had their limbs chopped off.

This past September democratic elections were held and the country was an example to the rest of Africa. Sure, there were some hot spots

but all in all it can be done.

[Ban Hammer 13,344]

I would like to add that UN soldiers, the supposed protector of war torn countries have raped a multitude of woman and children refugees.

The UN at this time is too weak to get the situation in DRC and Sudan under control obviously. It has done good in many countries , see Sierra Leone, but is lacking.

Humanitarian aide can only do so much to help the people and often can't go where they are really needed. The dictators don't seem to be interested in diplomatic talks. So what else is there but military force to remove these idiots and give the country a fresh start ?

Sierra Leone has come out of a decade long brutal war where thousands had their limbs chopped off.

This past September democratic elections were held and the country was an example to the rest of Africa. Sure, there were some hot spots

but all in all it can be done.

and engaged in prostitution.

[Ta Ta 1]

Yes Charles and worse. Though the UN supposedly deals with perpetrators I doubt it will be severe enough. Zero tolerance needs to be enforced

heavily and without hesitation.

Number6 we seem to have the same POV in regards to the DRC and Sudan crisis.

I am all for sanctions instead of military action as well but in this case I don't think it would help at all.

Economic sanctions would not bother them in the least, why should they.....they don't care about the economy or food supply for their own people through this venue of trade. They are starving anyway. From an ethical standpoint yes it should be considered to bring a point across.

I abhor war. But I abhor the atrocities committed by these countries even more.

In the end it is all about power and wealth for a lot of corrupt African leaders. Who controls the diamond fields in DRC is the heartbeat of the entities

that struggle for the upper hand. That and tribalism.

What helped in Sierra Leone was the biggest peace keeping presence ever in Africa by the UN. Would it help in DRC and Sudan ?

I don't know.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yes Charles and worse. Though the UN supposedly deals with perpetrators I doubt it will be severe enough. Zero tolerance needs to be enforced

heavily and without hesitation.

Number6 we seem to have the same POV in regards to the DRC and Sudan crisis.

I am all for sanctions instead of military action as well but in this case I don't think it would help at all.

Economic sanctions would not bother them in the least, why should they.....they don't care about the economy or food supply for their own people through this venue of trade. They are starving anyway. From an ethical standpoint yes it should be considered to bring a point across.

I abhor war. But I abhor the atrocities committed by these countries even more.

In the end it is all about power and wealth for a lot of corrupt African leaders. Who controls the diamond fields in DRC is the heartbeat of the entities

that struggle for the upper hand. That and tribalism.

What helped in Sierra Leone was the biggest peace keeping presence ever in Africa by the UN. Would it help in DRC and Sudan ?

I don't know.

You’re probably right there. All I think this highlights is that every situation is idiosyncratic and our 'help', such as it is - and such as we choose to define it - has to considered, awarded and measured on a case-by-case basis. In doing so we should perhaps avoid the tendency to promote crude fix-all solutions (like war) right off the bat. I do get rather tired of the idea that criticism of the war in Iraq is somehow hypocritical when considering, limited military responses in relation to other situations (like Kosovo or Darfur).

Edited November 27, 2007 by Number 6

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

*looks away*

[StillThePrettiest 3]

Also 3rd world debt-relief, but that's a whole issue unto itself.

interesting you say that; it's the field I work in