Should we intervene in Darfur?

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,391
Tokens
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-ed-darfur10may10,1,7326577.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california

There is a compelling humanitarian need, and few countries or institutions willing and able to step forward.

Helpless women and children born into the situation are being massacred. Our homeless bums that have it the worst here have it much, much better compared to these people.

Although maybe I shouldn't worry...the U.N.'s looked into the whole dealio and they're sure it's not genocide. Cool with me. God bless international concensus and helpful U.N. votes like China and Russia.

The only way Darfur gets better (not perfect, but better) is military action. "Peacekeeping" won't work (see: Rwanda). The only country positioned to do anything militarily is the US. Nobody else has the troops or the balls. Not France, not Russia, God knows not Canada after their defense minister Gordon O'Connor said their military is "stretched too thin to help" (doing what, who the fuck knows). And having just been browbeaten 8 ways to Sunday for Iraq, there's no way in 'heck' there will be American troops going in anytime soon. The US electorate won't tolerate it.

There were lots of bad things about Iraq but potentially the worst is this: the reaction to the Iraq war means that there is now no plausible way for the US military to act unilaterally for at least ten years I'd bet. Anywhere. Even for good reason.

Anyhow, the fact that we have these discussions about "should we intervene" in a place like Darfur etc...just proves the U.N. is one of the world's most miserable failures ever since this is exactly the kind of situation they are supposed to be handling. If you're on the wrong side of the fence in Darfur...run like hell. Nobody's coming today, tomorrow, or ever. The U.N. is going to talk, talk, talk...until actually doing something is a moot point. Then they'll talk some more. They may even vote by the time the entire civilization in Darfur is wiped out.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
8,951
Tokens
Do They Have Oil In Darfur?

If they don't have oil, why would we invade them, I mean, nation-build them?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
6,057
Tokens
CAPN CRUNCH said:
If they don't have oil, why would we invade them, I mean, nation-build them?
This response is getting very lame and not funny. I think it was YOU who previously mentioned this in the older Darfur thread. Haiti doesn't have oil, but we've gone there. We've been a bunch of other places too where there wasn't oil. Be serious for once?
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
22,231
Tokens
Levi:

Bush aint gonna invade ... he is gearing up for the ONE ON ONE LOON BOTTLE BETWEEN HIMSELF AND THE IRANIAN NUTCASE
 

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
8,951
Tokens
levistep said:
This response is getting very lame and not funny. I think it was YOU who previously mentioned this in the older Darfur thread. Haiti doesn't have oil, but we've gone there. We've been a bunch of other places too where there wasn't oil. Be serious for once?
Bush has not gone to Haiti, that was Bill Clinton. Where has W gone that does not include oil or heroin? Why is this response lame?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
8,951
Tokens
doc mercer said:
Captain Crunch:

YOU'RE DOING A HECKVA JOB!!!
Please, do me a favor - when they come and get your ass, and you know they will. Be a man and don't cry like a little girl! :lolBIG: Keep up the good work Brother!:party:
 

Triple digit silver kook
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
13,697
Tokens
CAPN CRUNCH said:
If they don't have oil, why would we invade them, I mean, nation-build them?

In fact, Sudan does have some oil. Of course, its small in comparison to Iraq & Iran, but there is oil in Sudan.

China has their straws dipped into Sudanese oil and has inked some pipeline deals.

If there wasnt any oil in Sudan, I doubt we would hear much about the problems in Darfur.

:pope:
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,391
Tokens
If they don't have oil, why would we invade them, I mean, nation-build them?

Which complaint is it? First, it was blood for oil. Then it was lining Cheney's pockets via Haliburton. Then we moved on to having no interests in Iraq and fake intelligence. I can never keep track of the whine du jour.

Anyhow...Iraq was a strategically significant country with a tinpot dictator and a history of fomenting trouble outside its own borders. You Left wing moonbats can parse "strategically significant" to mean whatever you like: we went in for oil, Jr, wanted to avenge daddy-o, the Jews in the neo-con conspiracy hate Iraq...whatever. For the sake of argument Iraq was "strategically significant". In went the US.

Getting back to the topic...if the U.N. were to act and cajole countries into sending troops, that action alone might be enough to stop what's happening in Darfur. But it can't even do that.

Fucking pathetic.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
22,231
Tokens
CC:

I am the Chuck Wepner of this forum .. the infamous "Bayoun Bleeder" who the movie Rocky was inspired by

They keep throwing them body shots ... they keep throwing me in the hole but DOC WONT STAY DOWN!!!
 

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
8,951
Tokens
JDeuce said:
If they don't have oil, why would we invade them, I mean, nation-build them?

Which complaint is it? First, it was blood for oil. Then it was lining Cheney's pockets via Haliburton. Then we moved on to having no interests in Iraq and fake intelligence. I can never keep track of the whine du jour.

Anyhow...Iraq was a strategically significant country with a tinpot dictator and a history of fomenting trouble outside its own borders. You Left wing moonbats can parse "strategically significant" to mean whatever you like: we went in for oil, Jr, wanted to avenge daddy-o, the Jews in the neo-con conspiracy hate Iraq...whatever. For the sake of argument Iraq was "strategically significant". In went the US.

Getting back to the topic...if the U.N. were to act and cajole countries into sending troops, that action alone might be enough to stop what's happening in Darfur. But it can't even do that.

Fucking pathetic.
So Cuba wasn't already strategically significant? How 'bout Korea? What happened to their invasions/nation-buildings? P.S. Clinton tried helping out in Africa and you righties destroyed him politically for this. Now, you guys have a heart? Give me a break!
 

Triple digit silver kook
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
13,697
Tokens
By Peter S. Goodman, The Washington Post
LEAL, Sudan, Dec 23, 2004 — On this flat and dusty African plain, China’s largest energy company is pumping crude oil, sending it 1,000 miles upcountry through a Chinese-made pipeline to the Red Sea, where tankers wait to ferry it to China’s industrial cities. Chinese laborers based in a camp of prefabricated sheds work the wells and lay highways across the flats to make way for heavy machinery.
Only seven miles south, the rebel army that controls much of southern Sudan marches troops through this sun-baked town of mud huts. For years, the rebels have attacked oil installations, seeking to deprive the Sudan government of the wherewithal to pursue a civil war that has killed more than 2 million people and displaced 4 million from their homes over the past two decades. But the Chinese laborers are protected: They work under the vigilant gaze of Sudanese government troops armed largely with Chinese-made weapons — a partnership of the world’s fastest-growing oil consumer with a pariah state accused of fostering genocide in its western Darfur region.
China’s transformation from an insular, agrarian society into a key force in the global economy has spawned a voracious appetite for raw materials, sending its companies to distant points on the globe in pursuit of them — sometimes to lands shunned by the rest of the world as rogue states. China’s relationship with Sudan has become particularly deep, demonstrating that China’s commercial relations are intensifying human rights concerns outside its borders while beginning to clash with U.S. policies and interests.
Sudan is China’s largest overseas oil project. China is Sudan’s largest supplier of arms, according to a former Sudan government minister. Chinese-made tanks, fighter planes, bombers, helicopters, machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades have intensified Sudan’s two-decade-old North-South civil war. A cease-fire is in effect and a peace agreement is expected to be signed by year-end. But the fighting in Sudan’s Darfur region rages on, as government-backed Arab militias push African tribes off their land.
China in October signed a $70 billion oil deal with Iran, and the evolving ties between those two countries could complicate U.S. efforts to isolate Iran diplomatically or pressure it to give up its ambitions for nuclear weapons. China is also pursuing oil in Angola.
In the case of Sudan, Africa’s largest country, China is in a lucrative partnership that delivers billions of dollars in investment, oil revenue and weapons — as well as diplomatic protection — to a government accused by the United States of genocide in the western region of Darfur, and cited by human rights groups for systematically massacring civilians and chasing them off ancestral lands to clear oil-producing areas. The country once gave safe haven to Osama bin Laden, is listed by Washington as a state supporter of terrorism and U.S. companies are prohibited from investment there.
Part of a broader push by China to expand trade and influence across the African continent, its relationship with Sudan also demonstrates the intensity of China’s quest for energy security and its willingness to do business wherever it must to lock up oil.
From Kazakhstan to the Middle East, past pursuits have ended in failure as Chinese firms have been aced out by the multinational titans that dominate the energy business. Japan appears set to claim Siberian stocks that China once thought were in hand. The U.S.-led war in Iraq has thrown Chinese oil concessions in that country into doubt.
The pressure to find new sources of oil has grown as China has swelled into the world’s second-largest consumer and as production at the largest of its domestic fields is declining. According to government statistics, China’s imports have grown from about 6 percent of its oil needs a decade ago to roughly one-third today, and are forecast to rise to rise to 60 percent by 2020.
"China confronts foreign competition," said Chen Fengying, an expert at the China Contemporary International Relations Institute, a Beijing-based institute affiliated with the state security system. "Chinese companies must go places for oil where American European companies are not present. Sudan represents this strategy put into practice."
China National Petroleum Corp. owns 40 percent — the largest single share — of the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Co., a consortium that dominates Sudan’s oil fields patch in partnership with the national energy company and firms from Malaysia and India.
From its seat on the United Nations Security Council, China has been Sudan’s chief diplomatic ally. In recent months, the council has neared votes on a series of resolutions aimed at pressuring Sudan’s predominantly Arab government to protect the African tribes under attack in Darfur and stop support for militias by threatening to sanction its oil sales. China has threatened to veto such actions while watering down the threat of oil sanctions.
"China has a long tradition of friendly relations with Sudan," Wang Guangya, China’s ambassador to the U.N., said in a recent interview in New York. He confirmed China’s veto threats, though he dismissed as "categorically wrong" suggestions that oil interests were a factor, asserting that the resolutions would have eliminated the Sudan government’s incentive to cooperate. China — itself often criticized on human rights issues — has a philosophical predisposition against outside pressure.
But Chinese diplomatic experts say oil interests clearly played a role in Beijing’s actions at the United Nations.
"Oil from Sudan makes up one-tenth of all of China’s imported oil," said Zhu Weilie, director of Middle East and North African Studies at Shanghai International Studies University, who has links with the Foreign Affairs Ministry. "If we lose this source, how can we find another market to replace it? China has to balance its interests."
Sudan is not a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, but it was granted observer status in August, 2001, a sign it is being recognized as a significant oil producer. Its proven reserves are currently 563 million barrels, double what they were three years ago.
In an interview in Sudan’s capital, Khartoum, Energy and Mining Minister Awad Ahmed Jaz praised his Chinese partners for sticking to trade issues.
"The Chinese are very nice," he said. "They don’t have anything to do with any politics or problems. Things move smoothly, successfully. They are very hard workers looking for business, not politics."
Human rights advocates and opponents of the Sudanese government portray China’s role in different terms: Just as colonial powers once supplied African chieftains the military means to maintain control as they extracted natural resources, China is propping up a rogue regime to get what it needs.
"The Chinese calculation is to consolidate and expand while Sudan is still a pariah state," said John Ryle, chairman of the Rift Valley Institute, a Nairobi-based research group that focuses on East Africa.
One of the poorest countries in the world, Sudan has long aimed to extract oil riches, but lacked the necessary capital. It needed the help of deep-pocketed outsiders. In the 1960s and 1970s, Chevron Corp. took the lead. But as the civil war flared in the south in the 1980s, Chevron abandoned its concessions. During the early 1990s, the Canadian firm Arakis Energy Corp. took up the task, later selling out to a larger Canadian company, Talisman Energy Inc.
China National Petroleum Corp., still owned by the Communist Party government, bought into the Sudan consortium in 1996. It joined with Sudan’s Energy Ministry to build the country’s largest refinery, then last year invested in a $300 million expansion that nearly doubled production, according to a report in the Shenzhen Business Post.
The consortium’s Heglig and Unity oil fields now produce 350,000 barrels per day, according to the U.S. Energy Department. Separately, CNPC owns most of a field in southern Darfur, which began trial production this year, and 41 percent of a field in the Melut Basin, which is expected to produce as much as 300,000 barrels per day by the end of 2006. Another Chinese firm, Sinopec Corp., is erecting a pipeline from that complex to Port Sudan on the Red Sea, where China’s Petroleum Engineering Construction Group is building a tanker terminal.
Sudan’s bloody North-South conflict began long before China arrived, but oil has dramatically increased the stakes as well as the government’s ability to pursue the battle. The war is a struggle over the resources of the south, pitting the mostly Muslim, Arab elite that runs the government in Khartoum against the largely Christian and animist African tribes who live in the lower half of the country.
For years, the government lacked the arms to vanquish the Sudan People’s Liberation Army, the rebel group that controls much of the south. With the dawn of oil production in 1999, Sudan’s government began collecting $500 million a year in revenue. About 80 percent went to buy weapons, said Lam Akol, who was Sudan’s transportation minister from 1998 to 2002, and is now a rebel commander. Over the same period, Sudan’s military budget has doubled, according to the International Monetary Fund. A study by PFC Strategic Studies concluded that the Sudan government could collect as much as $30 billion in total oil revenue by 2012, with the potential for much more if exploration succeeds.
As the oil began to flow, Sudan relied on Chinese assistance to set up three weapons factories near Khartoum, Ryle said. Human rights groups say oil receipts have helped pay for a government-led scorched-earth campaign to remove mostly ethnic Nuer and Dinka tribes from around the oil installations. The goal is to deprive the rebels of a base of support in their bid to attack the industry and undermine the government’s oil revenue.
A report by the U.S.-funded Civilian Protection Monitoring Team, which investigates attacks in southern Sudan, asserted that government troops have "sought to clear the way for oil exploration and to create a cordon sanitaire around the oil fields."
"This government has always waged war against civilians," said Jemera Rone, Sudan researcher for Human Rights Watch in Washington. Aided by an influx of newly purchased helicopters, a government attack in Ruweng county in October 2001 displaced 80,000 people, according to a Human Rights Watch report. The next year, government troops again used helicopters, killing 24 people during an attack on an emergency food distribution center.
The Nuer people who now live in Leal were at the center of this contested area. They used to live in a town called Nhialdiu, but on February 26, 2002, it was effectively wiped off the map, in an attack confirmed through interviews with more than a dozen survivors and rebel commanders. Mortar shells landed at dawn, then came helicopter gunships, directing fire at the mud-walled huts. Antonov airplanes dropped heavy bombs. Roughly 7,000 government troops, mixed with pro-government militias, then swept through with rifles and more than 20 tanks.
"Any human being who could not get away was killed, even children," said the chief of Leal, Tunguar Kuiyguong, who lost three of his 10 children that day. The soldiers made off with 10,000 head of cattle, which are the fundamental currency of Nuer life — the payment for brides and the source of meat, milk and pride.
Even as people fled, walking more than seven miles to settle on a treeless plain, the bombs continued to rain down and the helicopter gunships buzzed in pursuit. "We would see the helicopters and try to hide in the grasses," said David Majang. People stripped off their colorful robes to try to blend in with the scrub.
Today, people in Leal try to coax crops from unproductive soil. They line up at wells drilled by an aid organization for water and await the next shipment of food aid. "Oil has brought devastation to our lives," said Stephen Mayang, a father of three whose legs were badly hurt during the attack.
China National Petroleum Corp. refused repeated requests over the past 10 months for an in-person interview to discuss its operations in Sudan.
Last week, in a telephone call, a spokesman said the company bears no responsibility for the war. "We do our own business," he said. "Nothing else."
But field reports produced by human rights groups describe a connection between the people extracting the oil and those waging the war. Some of the helicopter gunships used in the attacks on civilians are Chinese-made, according to Akol, the former Khartoum transportation minister, who like many in the rebel command served in the government during attempts at reconciliation. The helicopters, he said, have frequently been based at airstrips maintained by the oil companies — a statement consistent with the findings of Canada-based World Vision when it interviewed survivors of attacks and defecting government soldiers in 2001.
"The Chinese have every reason not to lose these oil fields and that is why they are committed to fighting the war by supplying the Sudan government the wherewithal," Akol said.
A recent report published in the state-controlled China Business News quotes a Chinese foreign affairs official as saying that Beijing "cooperates with the Sudan government" on security and has asked Khartoum to "send troops" to areas in which Chinese companies operate.
The exit of Canada’s Talisman company from Sudan was largely a reaction to public pressure. China National Petroleum has felt similar pressures. In April 1999, the company announced plans to sell shares on the New York Stock Exchange — the first Chinese state-owned firm to land on the Big Board. It was to be the largest initial public offering in the exchange’s history, valued at $10 billion. But human rights groups said the deal would be the effective use of U.S. financing to aid the killing of innocents in Sudan. Eventually, CNPC restructured the transaction. It sold $2.9 billion in a newly created subsidiary, PetroChina, asserting that none of the money would be used in Sudan.
Ultimately, it may be peace that presents the Chinese firm with its greatest challenge. Under the terms of an agreement still being negotiated, oil contracts are supposed to remain secure. But three commanders of the southern Sudan rebel group said in interviews that the SPLA will seek to punish China once the rebels gain a formal decision-making role in the government.
The stakes could be considerable: Peace would allow the world’s major energy companies to enter Sudan’s oil patch. Moreover, roughly two-fifths of all known reserves — oil worth more than $16 billion — are now in rebel-controlled territory, according to the study by PFC, the strategic analysis group.
"The suffering of the people is on the hands of the Chinese," said commander Deng Awou. "The agreements for the Chinese company may be terminated."
 

Officially Punching out Nov 25th
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
8,482
Tokens
I met a guy from the Sudan who lives in my neighbourhood. He came to Vancouver about 2 and a half years ago. The stories he tells about the killings are shocking to say the least.
I think troops should be sent the help, the UN should have sent troops a couple years ago.
When the dust settles we are going to hear about much worse atrocities than we ever found in the Mid East and Comparible to Rwanda
 

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
8,951
Tokens
Thank You Woofy. It seems we have a new partner in the oil business who has blood on its' hands. No wonder we're not going in - we fear confrontation with China. Very interesting.
 

Triple digit silver kook
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
13,697
Tokens
CAPN CRUNCH said:
Thank You Woofy. It seems we have a new partner in the oil business who has blood on its' hands. No wonder we're not going in - we fear confrontation with China. Very interesting.

Actually the oil boys here are probably pissed off the Chinese beat them to the oil bonanza in Sudan.

What better reasons than "humanitarian aid" and "promoting democracy" to put boots on the ground in Sudan and get at some of that oil before the Chinese get it all?

:smoker2:
 

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
8,951
Tokens
DAWOOFDADDY said:
Actually the oil boys here are probably pissed off the Chinese beat them to the oil bonanza in Sudan.

What better reasons than "humanitarian aid" and "promoting democracy" to put boots on the ground in Sudan and get at some of that oil before the Chinese get it all?

:smoker2:
We're probably out of troops!:cryingcry
 

New member
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
6,676
Tokens
CAPN CRUNCH said:
We're probably out of troops!:cryingcry


CC every post you and turd spammy did in this thread did not contribute 1 thing at all. Look at Woof he found a great article that was on the topic of this thread and posted it. With sources too. Yet you and Turd Spammy can somehow find a way to turn what is happening in that place into a rip Bush post.


Answer the damn question YES or NO should something be done about Darfur. You are getting wose by the day. If you want to play poke and stroke with Doc all day jut start your own thread and get the ky jelly ready and have fun with it. All you do is encourage turd spammy than bitch and whine when he gets banned. Please try to bring something better to the forum.


Yes something should be done with force to put a stop to this. I would think all you liberals would be for that. You are the party for the poor people ? right......... hahahahahah you pukes always think you know best yet you know nothing in how to help people. 2 checks a month is not help BTW.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,120,413
Messages
13,581,454
Members
100,980
Latest member
greetingshouse.co.uk
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com