Bush imposes new sanctions on Sudan

I can't speak for him - but that is what I would do. I would also send a detail of 300 or so special forces armed to the teeth and backed up by the biggest, baddest air support we can muster to protect the refugees.

By doing that you can say for sure it will become another iraq.
Lool at what is happening in iraq, plus sudan's goverment will never accept it, they fear bush is after their oil too.

Originally posted by infinite
any action should involve the European Union.

Especially the British. Sudan is a former colony and think we should do what we did in Sierra Leone back in 2000. The British should send in troops to stop the genocide.

The EU should stay out, I don't want them to do it in the name of all of us, if great britain wants to do it it should not get the Europian Union involved or are we becoming just like the bush administration.

Originally posted by pepsi78
The EU should stay out, I don't want them to do it in the name of all of us, if great britain wants to do it it should not get the Europian Union involved or are we becoming just like the bush administration.

Why not?

the EU does have a good record on Africa, still needs improvement. As the former colonial rulers of Africa, Europe has a understanding of how sensitive this issue is.

Originally posted by infinite

Originally posted by pepsi78
The EU should stay out, I don't want them to do it in the name of all of us, if great britain wants to do it it should not get the Europian Union involved or are we becoming just like the bush administration.

Why not?

the EU does have a good record on Africa, still needs improvement. As the former colonial rulers of Africa, Europe has a understanding of how sensitive this issue is.

Hi Infinite -

And yet, France, Germany and quite possibly, Belgium are still giving aid and support to Khartoum, knowing full well about what is going on in Darfur. Until
the EU can bring all of it's member countries together in condemnation of the genocide and terrorism being perpetrated in Sudan, the status quo will never change.

It is encouraging to see Tony Blair and the British government following the US lead by imposing it's own economic and financial sanctions, but as long as Sudan is doing buisness with member countries of the EU and China, I don't see it making much of a difference.

Originally posted by pepsi78

Originally posted by infinite
any action should involve the European Union.

Especially the British. Sudan is a former colony and think we should do what we did in Sierra Leone back in 2000. The British should send in troops to stop the genocide.

The EU should stay out, I don't want them to do it in the name of all of us, if great britain wants to do it it should not get the Europian Union involved or are we becoming just like the bush administration.

So, let me make sure I understand you. You think it's o.k. to just sit back and let another million or so human beings be raped, assaulted and murdered. Or you don't think it should be happening and would be happy if someone put a stop to it, as long as it doesn't involve your country. Or maybe you think that it doesn't really affect your life so it's not really an important issue. Why don't you explain it more clearly, because it seems to me that what you are saying is any interference in what the Sudanese government and the janjaweed are doing in Darfur would be viewed by you as wrong, even though it prevents the massacre of innocent men, women and children. Which is it?

So, let me make sure I understand you. You think it's o.k. to just sit back and let another million or so human beings be raped, assaulted and murdered. Or you don't think it should be happening and would be happy if someone put a stop to it, as long as it doesn't involve your country. Or maybe you think that it doesn't really affect your life so it's not really an important issue

If I didint care I would not post in this thread.
Go in and do what? spread insurgency? it's a civil war.
I'm against the sanctions, and I'm against troops going in, but if they do it I don't want the EU to be part of this, because I live in the EU I don't want the Europian Union to be viewed a shameful place that is partener in crimes with others.

The african union should handle this, they should be suported by giving them the equpiptment needed, if some one should handdle this it should be people that are african.

. Why don't you explain it more clearly, because it seems to me that what you are saying is any interference in what the Sudanese government and the janjaweed are doing in Darfur would be viewed by you as wron
even though it prevents the massacre of innocent men, women and children. Which is it?

Well isn't it also wrong to go in because they have oil?
Don't you find it a bit strange that every country that bush wants to save has oil?
Have you noticed that the somalian problem is older and that no one have solved that? no one helped them, gee..I wonder.

The only corect way to solve this is to support the affrican union troops, other forms will be viewed as intervention for intrest and of course side chosing, sort of those are bad they are good, since bush has already aided the rebels for aid.
The only way this will work and won't become a second iraq is for the africans to sort out their problems with out going there and dictating who is the bad guy and who is the good guy, african troops should recive better equiptment so they can become more efficent.
Plancing sanctions and sending in NATO or who ever represents greedy intrests wanted by greedy bastards.....I don't want to be associated with such intrests.




[edit on 30-5-2007 by pepsi78]

This is a complex war between farmers and herders. The government is protecting the farmers, the United States is the only country in the world declaring this a genocide. The government is being destabilized so the war can spread and 'terrorists' can be planted. The U.S. will then invade, supported by the population who has been brainwashed with this genocide propaganda. People are dying there and it is horrible, but it's civil war.

Here's a list of Official Supporters of the Claim of Genocide:

* International Association of Genocide Scholars, 19 February 2004
* Committee on Conscience of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, 6 June 2004
* US Congress (House Concurrent Resolution 467), 22 July 2004, passed 422-0 in the House and by unanimous voice vote in the Senate, declaring state-sponsored genocide by the proxy militias known as Janjaweed. Therefore each member of the 108th Congress has technically declared that the situation in Darfur is a genocide. All but three members of the 109th Congress voted in favor of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, a law signed by President Bush in October 2006 that restated the findings of genocide. Additional individual statements by members of the US Congress are noted below.
* US Sen. Russell Feingold, 22 July 2004
* US Secretary of State Colin Powell, 9 September 2004
* US President George W. Bush, 9 September 2004 Restated declaration in June 2005 and in a meeting with activists from the Save Darfur Coalition, 28 April 2006
* Jewish World Watch, 16 September 2004, in a sermon by Rabbi Harold M. Schulweis.
* US Sen. John Kerry, prior to 16 September 2004
* US Sen. Joseph Lieberman, 2 March 2005
* US Sen. and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, 15 April 2005
* US Sen. Barack Obama, 22 July 2005
* Genocide Intervention Network, 21 November 2005
* US Sen. Hillary Clinton, 16 March 2006
* French foreign minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, 6 September 2006 - New President of France Nicolas Sarkozy is a friend of Bush, France has made sanctions
* Physicians for Human Rights (date unknown)
* U.S. Committee for Refugees (date unknown)
* Africa Action (date unknown)
* Justice Africa (date unknown)
* Africa Confidential (date unknown)
* Yad Vashem (date unknown)
* Genocide Watch (date unknown)

I'm going to check these organizations.

Here's a list of organizations Not supporting the claim of genocide:
* United Nations: Stated that mass murders of civilians have been committed by the Janjaweed, but not genocide
* African Union: In the 2004 the Chair of the AU's PSC said that "abuses are taking place. There is mass suffering, but it is not genocide."
* Amnesty International: "The grave human rights abuses ... cannot be ignored any longer, nor justified or excused by a context of armed conflict."
* Médecins sans Frontières: Director Jean-Hervé Bradol called the term genocide "inappropriate" and deputy emergency director Dr. Mercedes Taty said "I don't think that we should be using the word 'genocide' to describe this conflict. Not at all. This can be a semantic discussion, but nevertheless, there is no systematic target -- targeting one ethnic group or another one. It doesn't mean either that the situation in Sudan isn't extremely serious by itself."

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Watch this video of the Sudanese ambassador to the U.S please:
C-SPAN, John Ukec Speaking

Originally posted by pepsi78
I'm against the sanctions, and I'm against troops going in, but if they do it I don't want the EU to be part of this, because I live in the EU I don't want the Europian Union to be viewed a shameful place that is partener in crimes with others.

What the.....??

You don't want the EU to be "viewed a shameful place that is partner in crimes"..

So you want the EU to ignore a genocide?

Blair to issue ultimatum on Sudan

guardian.co.uk

Sudan is a former UK colony, a tough stance from us will be a good thing

but its hard to do anything when the Russians and Chinese are pulling apart everything we do.

i never knew this

430 British troops and military observers are involved in UN peacekeeping missions in Cyprus, Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Kosovo, Sudan, Georgia and Sierra Leone.

fco.gov.uk

The UK could increase its peace keepers in Sudan and we do have a base in Kenya too.

I do understand why our government is abit worried about sending troops into a former colony.

Wingman77 that is why I stop posting here because people are so blind to the truth in Dafur is no funny, as long as our country said is the government of the area fault people just fall for it as usual, pity.

You understand exactly what is the situation in that area.

US is trying to destabilized the area so countries like China can not get roots in their economy.

China buys two thirds of the Sudan’s oil.

Before US started to arm the rebels it was only about 3 to four groups of the them now is about 16 groups of rebels fighting their own country man and killing each other, but hey with what is going on in Iraq right now I guess that is what our policies are good for, genocide..

Infinite our government has agendas, you have seen them in Iraq and you can not go blind and no see that the Sudan is nothing more than another game for our governments.

Why is oil always a factor, they want to sanction 30 companies and guess what is in their minds, oil exploration.

The claims are that they supply arms to fight but at the same time US is supplying arms also to rebels.

Wars are such a profitable business specially to keep undesirable nations not friendly to our countries so the control of oil is only in the hands of the right people.

Our politicians in our governments are the most despicable terrorist in the world.

And people still can not see the reality of these unnecessary wars because the people been killed is brown people that happens to have oil.

It seems that our nations policies lately is oil control first, people last.

Shame, shame, shame.

So that's what it's really about then? China and Russia being with no need for US oil prices so the US want's to set up another straw man to potentially cut the alternativelly sought oil supplies to China and Russia?? really seems like childish antics or potenital the death throws of a oil monopolising superpower. Ha and just the other day i was reading how the UK and BP get back into Libya

'Prime Minister Tony Blair, announcing a $900 million contract returning BP Plc to Libya after more than three decades, said British companies will reap ``huge'' new contracts there because leader Muammar Qaddafi has joined the fight against terrorism'.


What a totally fair and just world we live in

Originally posted by wingman77

Watch this video of the Sudanese ambassador to the U.S please:
C-SPAN, John Ukec Speaking

I saw the entire interview live, at least I take the time like you to see the two side and then make conclusions.

Originally posted by pepsi78
Muaddib let me get this straight, there are people there starving kids included.
You agree to place economic sanctions that would put an end to any posibility to help at all , medical aid included for those in suffering.

Did you actually bother to read at all what is happening over there?....

The government of Sudan has sanctioned a Jihad in which Arab militias are allowed to murder and starve to death these people....

You think that placing sancitons against the government of Sudan and the Arab militias is going to be bad for the people who are being raped, starved to death and murdered?......

Originally posted by pepsi78
He wants to turn this in to a second iraq, in stead of presuring sudan by imposing economic sanctions they should pressure the rebels to sign an agreement.
Sudan is already starving of hunger, further economic sanctions will kill alot of people, just like when iraq was under sanctions, alot of children died because of those sanctions.

Pepsi78...every one of your claims only show that you have no idea what is going on over there..

Why don't you spend an hour or two reading through some of the links i gave, and doing your own research if you don't trust the links I provided...maybe then you might understand what is really happening over there.....

[edit on 31-5-2007 by Muaddib]

I've heard both arguments and I'm not sure whether or not sanctions will do more harm then good..but it is my opinion that can and should have done alot more. I'm afraid that whatever we do know will either be ineffective or we will be looked at suspiciously (which we deserve to be) but that is our governments fault for not stepping in sooner when we had nothing to gain. (but that good feeling of saving innocent men, women and children..but its all about oil, money and control)

Originally posted by marg6043
...................
This is also how the enemy is made, born and nurture for future generations of US haters.

Then the next American generation with short memories can look and ask What has we done for them to hate our nation so much.

History will repeat itself. . .

Marg....do you have any idea what has been happening over there since 1983 when the first Jihad was sanctioned by the Sudanese government?...

C'mon Marg...you should be doing some research instead of making claims without knowing what has been happening in that region.

Oh yes, there are rebels over there, but I guess according to you it is alright for the government of Sudan to sanction jihad against the black Christians, and tribes of black people in the south, which the Arab Militias murdered over 2 million people in the first sanctioned jihad by the Sudanese government, which started back in 1983 and ended about 2003, which is allowing the Arab militias, (who are Islamic extremists) to do the dirty work of the government of Sudan.

On the second jihad, so far the amount of people murdered have been over 150,000-250,000 that we know of, after the second jihad was called by the Sudanese government. This second Jihad, starting in 2003 was also sanctioned by the Sudanese government, they are now going after all blacks of Darfur and southern Sudan...they are not going just after the black Christians anymore.

Do you actually think it is alright for the government of Sudan to sanction jihad and seek either the conversion of everyone into Islamic extremism, or the extermination of those people who don't want to submit?

The history of that region with Jihad did not start with the current Sudanese government. This region has been plagued by such "Jihads" since the year 640 AD, it has been continuing until today, and it doesn't seem to be any end to it by the way it is going.

Here is a site which has a history of the struggle this people had to endure against Islamic extremism and Jihad.
www.historyofjihad.org...

[edit on 31-5-2007 by Muaddib]

Muaddib

Just do not close your eyes to the reality of what is behind any region of the world that our government and allies are interested and happen to have oil.

Do not even think that our nation doesn't have any hands on the Sudan, because they are up to their necks in it.

As long as the area reminds unstable and violent is good for business.

Discusting corporate greed!!!!!!!!!!

What are you talking about Marg?... stop making up stories which are not true... The reason why there is so much suffering in that part of the world is Islamic Extremism... You should be the one that has to wake up....

Marg, sometimes i really have no idea where or how you make up such stories.

[edit on 31-5-2007 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
The reason why there is so much suffering in that part of the world is Islamic Extremism... You should be the one that has to wake up....

I don't make stories my friend I just do not fall under the party lines of lies, lets blame the entire world woes to the Islamic extremist so we can look clean as newborn baby.

Muaddib sometimes I wish you would not be so blind. . .

Pity.

You keep saying Jihad as if this has been declared a religous war and it has not.
It is not about Muslims vs non muslims

This is a controversial conflict as the media portrays the conflict to be between Muslims and non-Muslims, but this is not the case. Both groups in the conflict are in fact Muslims so the conflict does not have any interreligious grounds

Wikipedia.

It cannot be stressed too strongly that what is happening in Darfur is not a religious conflict. Both the “African” and “Arab” communities in Darfur share the same Muslim faith

An African professor who visited Darfur also noted bluntly: “The Khartoum regime does not consider African Darfurians to be human beings.”

Some have mischaracterized what is occurring as a “tribal war”, presumably in an attempt to reduce the need for an international humanitarian intervention. Those opposed a similar initiative in Bosnia in the mid-1990s spoke then of “ancient hatreds” to justify continued inaction.

Link
.

The conflict between Darfur and the Sudanese government is a racially based conflict. The Arab government is trying to "ethnically cleanse" the African population of Darfur. It is not a religious conflict, as both of the groups are Muslim.
Link

If it was a religious conflict, the Muslim government would not be killing fellow Muslims in the West. The issue is NOT religion, they said. It is NOT robbery or banditry, as the government would have people believe. It is an issue of marginalization.
Link

It seems to be more of an issue of race and control over the land then a "jihad" or killing of just those who are christian.