PDA

View Full Version : Darfur crisis



HornyPope
08-30-2007, 07:53 PM
Like four million people are dying every month and you can't even take two minutes to make a thread about it?

BustedKnuckles
08-30-2007, 07:59 PM
And if you thought so why didn't you create this thread earlier?

HornyPope
08-30-2007, 08:10 PM
I'm not a liberal. I don't really care.

XYlophonetreeZ
08-30-2007, 08:22 PM
Was this supposed to be a real thread or an attempted parody of typical Darfur activists? I honestly can't tell.

Anyway, it's getting plenty of attention but the reason's fairly obvious why Iraq is getting more. It isn't as raging of a question of political debate and we're not actively fighting a war there.

And the crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has been going on much longer and senseless deaths and rapes* continue especially in the eastern portion of the country to this day, but nobody's even bothering to count the deaths down there, if you want to talk about a neglected crisis.

*OK, OK. All rapes are senseless. I know.

HornyPope
08-30-2007, 08:42 PM
Was this supposed to be a real thread or an attempted parody of typical Darfur activists? I honestly can't tell.

You're not supposed to tell. I masked this thread flawlessly so to hide the possible inclanations of the nature of my message.

Sin Studly
08-30-2007, 09:43 PM
*OK, OK. All rapes are senseless. I know.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that. Some rapes have pretty sensible reasons. Like, if you want to have sex with somebody and they won't let you.

BustedKnuckles
08-30-2007, 10:19 PM
I wouldn't go so far as to say that. Some rapes have pretty sensible reasons. Like, if you want to have sex with somebody and they won't let you.

Perspective.

HornyPope
08-31-2007, 07:18 PM
Women might not like it, but men do. Something's gotta give.

sKratch
09-01-2007, 01:01 PM
I haven't had time to make a thread because I've been too busy saving Darfur.

Offspringfan67
09-23-2007, 01:12 PM
its hard to say i mean america is doing a lot to trying to help iraq establish its goverment i just dont think right now we have the will or the firepower to help

wheelchairman
09-23-2007, 02:29 PM
its hard to say i mean america is doing a lot to trying to help iraq establish its goverment i just dont think right now we have the will or the firepower to help

Wow you're naive. But you're also young, so it's probably not your fault.

Offspringfan67
09-23-2007, 02:45 PM
i mean, look at the US, were trying to help iraq, israel and other places, and now a country in the midts of a genocide is asking for our help. i dont want to anger the people causing the genocide cause they might declare war on us, then usa will be fucked

wheelchairman
09-23-2007, 03:32 PM
i mean, look at the US, were trying to help iraq, israel and other places, and now a country in the midts of a genocide is asking for our help. i dont want to anger the people causing the genocide cause they might declare war on us, then usa will be fucked
I know what you meant. It's just naive. It's the way you formulate it.

We don't want to anger the Janjaweed (the people committing the genocide in Darfur) yet we went to Iraq without the request of the government, knowing full well that we would anger the government we were trying to overthrow (naturally).

You are comparing two completely different situations.

Much like the former Iraqi government, the Janjaweed have no real method of being able to attack Americans in America. So that's not truly a reasonable fear. Furthermore I believe a peace-keeping mission is being sent to Darfur anyways, an international force consisting largely of African peace-keepers.

But what you fail to question is the past. Why are we "helping" Iraq? Why are we helping Israel? (notice the lack of parenthesis). Also how much are we helping Israel, I haven't researched it but I don't think there are a lot of American soldiers. In fact, I believe there are probably more American soldiers in Germany or South Korea. Although that's just a guess.

So why Iraq, who didn't want help, and Israel who did(naturally they are American allies and we do help them by some means, not only in troop support), but not Darfur who does?

What's the fundamental difference? Do we have too many soldiers in Iraq and Israel (who we don't know the number of US soldiers.) That could definitely be one answer. But we didn't invade Iraq to help Iraqis (that was something we said later on. We wanted to get rid of nuclear-missile-manufacturing-plant-vans.)

Do you see why you're statement is naive? It's too simplistic, you aren't asking enough questions but you're giving a lot of answers. What does that mean? You need to read more, know more. Don't ever be satisfied with what you know.

adombomb222
09-23-2007, 07:53 PM
"Everything we see hides another thing, we always want to see what is hidden by what we see, but it is impossible. Humans hide their secrets too well...."
~Rene Magritte

adombomb222
09-23-2007, 08:13 PM
I believe that Darfur is getting a lot of non-profit attention. Maybe not what it needs, sending food and health supplies to an area that has been broken down by genocide doesnít make much since, the Janjaweed would most likely just pillage the cities that received the supplies. A peacekeeping effort would be more effective, however, as Per has said we (U.S.) have its hands in Iraq. I do believe that there is some effort for an international peacekeeping effort to be sent to Sudan. However lets not forget all the other civil conflicts that need attention in Africa as well. If Darfur were to turn into another Rwanda, then it would receive worldwide attention on a large scale. I donít think that people donít know about it, it just that there isnít that large of a scale effort to do anything about it yet, at least from what I can see. The media rather show us video of Iraq and who our next president might be then anything else.

TBD
09-23-2007, 11:20 PM
I blame free trade and Milton Friedman.

coke_a_holic
09-23-2007, 11:32 PM
ITS BECUASWSR THE US HATES BLACK PEOKPLE!!!!!!

Kill whitey.

GBH2
09-27-2007, 08:39 PM
I know what you meant. It's just naive. It's the way you formulate it.

We don't want to anger the Janjaweed (the people committing the genocide in Darfur) yet we went to Iraq without the request of the government, knowing full well that we would anger the government we were trying to overthrow (naturally).

You are comparing two completely different situations.

Much like the former Iraqi government, the Janjaweed have no real method of being able to attack Americans in America. So that's not truly a reasonable fear. Furthermore I believe a peace-keeping mission is being sent to Darfur anyways, an international force consisting largely of African peace-keepers.

But what you fail to question is the past. Why are we "helping" Iraq? Why are we helping Israel? (notice the lack of parenthesis). Also how much are we helping Israel, I haven't researched it but I don't think there are a lot of American soldiers. In fact, I believe there are probably more American soldiers in Germany or South Korea. Although that's just a guess.

So why Iraq, who didn't want help, and Israel who did(naturally they are American allies and we do help them by some means, not only in troop support), but not Darfur who does?

What's the fundamental difference? Do we have too many soldiers in Iraq and Israel (who we don't know the number of US soldiers.) That could definitely be one answer. But we didn't invade Iraq to help Iraqis (that was something we said later on. We wanted to get rid of nuclear-missile-manufacturing-plant-vans.)

Do you see why you're statement is naive? It's too simplistic, you aren't asking enough questions but you're giving a lot of answers. What does that mean? You need to read more, know more. Don't ever be satisfied with what you know.

did you hear that?

i think it was offspringfan's head exploding.