• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sudan fears US military intervention over Darfur

Wait. so you say we should go into any place that we have no interest in, but stay away from any place that has our national security interests in?

We should go to both or neither. If my country wants to go to Iraq for oil and is willing to sacrifice British troops to that **** then they could send them to stop a genocide.
 
We should go to both or neither. If my country wants to go to Iraq for oil and is willing to sacrifice British troops to that **** then they could send them to stop a genocide.




Both or neither?


So are you saying if the US invades Dafur you will support the Iraq war then?
 
Both or neither?

So are you saying if the US invades Dafur you will support the Iraq war then?

I wouldn't see it as a invasion to begin with. I'd see as humanitarian mission to stop a genocide that UK and NATO should help aid.

I wouldn't support Iraq ever i was just making my point
 
I wouldn't see it as a invasion to begin with. I'd see as humanitarian mission to stop a genocide that UK and NATO should help aid.

I wouldn't support Iraq ever i was just making my point



Ahh so there was no humanitarian effort in liberating millions of people in Iraq and afghanistan?
 
Ahh so there was no humanitarian effort in liberating millions of people in Iraq and afghanistan?

Sure there was ...
Amongst oil taking, destroying the countries infrastructure and ensuring Christian and minority Iraqis are persecuted due to the fact their support system was removed and hundreds of thousands displaced, plunging the country into a civil war ... Do i go on?
 
Sure there was ...
Amongst oil taking, destroying the countries infrastructure and ensuring Christian and minority Iraqis are persecuted due to the fact their support system was removed and hundreds of thousands displaced, plunging the country into a civil war ... Do i go on?




If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us
in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down
and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon
you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.


—Samuel Adams



Maybe we just view the world and liberty different than you.
 
... that is why it wouldn't work

Then surely thats more to do with our attitude to the rest of the world then whether whether the country is muslim or not? We,ve hardly been shy about doing the same to non muslim countrys.
 
Then surely thats more to do with our attitude to the rest of the world then whether whether the country is muslim or not? We,ve hardly been shy about doing the same to non muslim countrys.

Partly attitude but lets not remove part of that responsibility on Muslims themselves. Non Muslim countries don't react the same way Muslim countries do when it comes to attempts to forcing democracy, the western Gov. are generally stupid when it comes to Muslim/Islam and its reactions
You could see by the guess that Iraq war would be over in weeks was ridiculous. If they even picked up a book on Iraq's history, they would have realised the quagmire they'd be dragged down into.
 
Laila, you're not making much sense and it is because your comments are incompatible with one another.

If you're going to argue that the humanitarian crisis in Darfur warrants US involvement, then you must also argue that the humanitarian crisis in pre-war Iraq also warranted US involvement. You cannot be intellectually consistent otherwise.

It appears that your resistance to intellectual consistency here is that you disagree with the war in Iraq. Such disagreement can be reasonable, but your disagreement with Iraq even as a humanitarian exercise undermines your argument for US involvement in Darfur.

Seriously...what is this fetish with Darfur? Liberals and Democrats in the US incessantly argue that Darfur warrants immediate and even unilateral military action despite the fact that there are no US interests at stake there. Meanwhile, despite there being acual interests in Iraq and substantial interests regionally, after things got tough in Iraq, these same weasels started backtracking and arguing that the US unjustifiably went to Iraq unilaterally.

I can only presume that the inconsistency is caused not by a legitimate or valid foreign relations philosophical argument but simply a hatred of Bush. I'm nearly convinced that had there been a Democrat in office that many of these people would have had no problem with the war in Iraq.
 
I am not sure what we could really accomplish in Darfur.

I mean, without totally taking over the entire area and maintaining our presence for generations.

Sucks, but what can we do?
 
I am not sure what we could really accomplish in Darfur.

I mean, without totally taking over the entire area and maintaining our presence for generations.

Sucks, but what can we do?

Improved economic conditions will lead to peace.
 
Improved economic conditions will lead to peace.

And how do we accomplish that without pissing off the majority of the U.S. citizens?

More often than not people are getting on board with the whole "sweep your porch before you sweep your neighbors' " philosophy.
 
I am not sure what we could really accomplish in Darfur.

I mean, without totally taking over the entire area and maintaining our presence for generations.

Sucks, but what can we do?

Back up the existing operation thats defending aid workers and refugee camps [or attempting to]
 
Partly attitude but lets not remove part of that responsibility on Muslims themselves. Non Muslim countries don't react the same way Muslim countries do when it comes to attempts to forcing democracy, the western Gov. are generally stupid when it comes to Muslim/Islam and its reactions
You could see by the guess that Iraq war would be over in weeks was ridiculous. If they even picked up a book on Iraq's history, they would have realised the quagmire they'd be dragged down into.

Thats my point though. To a certain extent the recent history of western intervention has been characterized more by forceing dictatorship on muslim democracys [as in Iran and Pakistan] then visa vera.
 
And how do we accomplish that without pissing off the majority of the U.S. citizens?

More often than not people are getting on board with the whole "sweep your porch before you sweep your neighbors' " philosophy.

Foreign aid and aid from other countries. If that was really the philosophy we wouldn't be sending the aid that we already do.
 
Foreign aid and aid from other countries. If that was really the philosophy we wouldn't be sending the aid that we already do.

Wouldnt aiding the Sudanese government be somewhat counter productive? Especially considering that by all accounts the U.S is training the SPLM.
 
Last edited:
Like the public really has that much of a say. :(

You think it would have that much say in this? Also, if we do the minimum of what we could like Dave suggested it wouldn't be particularily taxing on our military. It wouldn't take many US soldiers to guard a refugee camp.
 
I hope military action is taken by UN/NATO and US on Darfur. Its horrible what is occuring there. It should take precedence than anything happening in Middle East.

I do notice the general trend to bombard my television on Palestinians dying but none on Africans :/

Ideally it should be the UN working together with the AU, but the AU is about one of the least useful international organizations in the world.
 
You think it would have that much say in this? Also, if we do the minimum of what we could like Dave suggested it wouldn't be particularily taxing on our military. It wouldn't take many US soldiers to guard a refugee camp.

You sure about that? Last time our boys went over that way we ended up comin back pretty quick.

I'm not saying don't help them, I hate to see troubles like this in the world. I just don't know if I can believe in anything changing over there without us heavily investing resources.
 
Back
Top Bottom