George Wallace
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 184
- Points
- 710
Yes. Especially since we have made a commitment to the NATO Rapid Reaction Force, that was supposed to be prepped to go into Darfur several years ago, or any other Hot Spot deemed necessary by NATO (This has nothing to do with the NATO commitment to Afghanistan or the Balkins.)GAP said:
George Wallace said:
I'll just bet any Liberal out there trying to get reelected, and of course, Jack baby, will be powering up their whine machines for this one. They have made so many "hoof and mouth" statements about Darfur, they have to back this request by the African Union to the UN with everything they have got.
Strange though, After seeing it on CTV, it seems to have gone to ground....nada in any papers I have seen...anybody seeing anything out there??
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
This is all that is envisaged for NATO in Darfur, and I cannot see its changing significantly:
Mark
Ottawa
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1734345,00050006.htm
http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=93896&version=1&template_id=37&parent_id=17
Mark
Ottawa
medicineman
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 5,779
- Points
- 1,110
Funny how badly the AU want this but, unless there is some sort of SCR to allow the troops to go in without the Sudanese government's permission, it's still going to be a non-starter.
I too am awaiting Mr Layton's wind up with baited breath. Should be good for a laugh if nothing else...
MM
I too am awaiting Mr Layton's wind up with baited breath. Should be good for a laugh if nothing else...
MM
medicineman
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 5,779
- Points
- 1,110
That would be almost amusing.
MM
MM
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
It would be an interesting "peacekeeping" mission:
"Bloody battle in northern Darfur"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5165856.stm
Excerpts:
"More than 80 people have been killed as rebels fight each other for territory, according to sources within the African Union peacekeeping mission.
In early May, under pressure from the international community, the Sudanese government signed an agreement with one of the region's rebel movements.
But the deal has not been implemented and security has worsened.
Darfur's Sudan Liberation Army says it took up arms three years ago to fight for greater power and wealth for their people.
Offensive
Now the rebels have split and the SLA are fighting amongst themselves with a brutality that has driven thousands more people from their homes...
Two months ago, in their haste to get a deal, the international community pushed through a peace agreement involving just one of Darfur's rebel factions - that of Mr Minnawi.
The size of that mistake is now becoming clear.
The conflict's victims who still live in overcrowded camps have rejected the deal.
Western donors now find themselves promoting the agreement alongside the Sudanese government and Mr Minnawi's SLA - a rebel force that seems more determined to settle scores than implement the deal."
Mark
Ottawa
"Bloody battle in northern Darfur"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5165856.stm
Excerpts:
"More than 80 people have been killed as rebels fight each other for territory, according to sources within the African Union peacekeeping mission.
In early May, under pressure from the international community, the Sudanese government signed an agreement with one of the region's rebel movements.
But the deal has not been implemented and security has worsened.
Darfur's Sudan Liberation Army says it took up arms three years ago to fight for greater power and wealth for their people.
Offensive
Now the rebels have split and the SLA are fighting amongst themselves with a brutality that has driven thousands more people from their homes...
Two months ago, in their haste to get a deal, the international community pushed through a peace agreement involving just one of Darfur's rebel factions - that of Mr Minnawi.
The size of that mistake is now becoming clear.
The conflict's victims who still live in overcrowded camps have rejected the deal.
Western donors now find themselves promoting the agreement alongside the Sudanese government and Mr Minnawi's SLA - a rebel force that seems more determined to settle scores than implement the deal."
Mark
Ottawa
Blackadder1916
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 2,759
- Points
- 1,160
U.N. Votes To Create Darfur Force
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060831/wl_nm/sudan_darfur_dc_18
By Evelyn Leopold (Reuters) Aug 31, 2006
The U.N. Security Council on Thursday voted to create a United Nations peacekeeping force in Sudan's Darfur region, despite the Khartoum government's strong opposition.
The vote was 12 in favor, with abstentions from Russia, China and Qatar, the only Arab council member.
The troops will not be deployed until Sudan agrees. The United Nations wants to replace or absorb an African Union force in Darfur, which has only enough money to exist until its mandate expires on September 30 and has been unable to end the humanitarian crisis in the lawless west of the country.
The resolution calls for up to 22,500 U.N. troops and police officers and an immediate injection of air, engineering and communications support for the 7,000-member African force.
The measure, drafted by Britain and the United States, is designed to allow planning and recruitment of troops for an eventual handover.
Since the signing of a fragile peace pact in May between the government and two rebel groups, fighting has increased and the Sudanese military has said it wants to move 10,000 troops to Darfur to counter rebels who have refused to sign, raising fears of a full-scale war and thousands of additional deaths.
U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said he was pleased with the council decision. "It is important that we move immediately to implement it fully," he told the council. "We cannot afford to delay."
Is this more p***ing in the wind or can an effective force be raised and deployed? Considering the difficulty there was in getting promises of troops for a beefed-up UNIFIL (Lebanon), who will (or can) step up to the plate on this one?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060831/wl_nm/sudan_darfur_dc_18
By Evelyn Leopold (Reuters) Aug 31, 2006
The U.N. Security Council on Thursday voted to create a United Nations peacekeeping force in Sudan's Darfur region, despite the Khartoum government's strong opposition.
The vote was 12 in favor, with abstentions from Russia, China and Qatar, the only Arab council member.
The troops will not be deployed until Sudan agrees. The United Nations wants to replace or absorb an African Union force in Darfur, which has only enough money to exist until its mandate expires on September 30 and has been unable to end the humanitarian crisis in the lawless west of the country.
The resolution calls for up to 22,500 U.N. troops and police officers and an immediate injection of air, engineering and communications support for the 7,000-member African force.
The measure, drafted by Britain and the United States, is designed to allow planning and recruitment of troops for an eventual handover.
Since the signing of a fragile peace pact in May between the government and two rebel groups, fighting has increased and the Sudanese military has said it wants to move 10,000 troops to Darfur to counter rebels who have refused to sign, raising fears of a full-scale war and thousands of additional deaths.
U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said he was pleased with the council decision. "It is important that we move immediately to implement it fully," he told the council. "We cannot afford to delay."
Is this more p***ing in the wind or can an effective force be raised and deployed? Considering the difficulty there was in getting promises of troops for a beefed-up UNIFIL (Lebanon), who will (or can) step up to the plate on this one?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
That is perhaps the best example of UN impotence I've ever seen.
"We'll pass a resolution over your objections that won't allow us to act untill you've removed your objections. Aren't we tough?"
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the UN is far less then the sum of it's parts.
"We'll pass a resolution over your objections that won't allow us to act untill you've removed your objections. Aren't we tough?"
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the UN is far less then the sum of it's parts.
- Reaction score
- 2,828
- Points
- 940
Pissing in the wind......while assuming that someone else will supply the urine!
The African Union could barely scrape together 7,000 almost completely useless troops......out of an entire continent (with a still rapidly growing population of 680 million). They didn't want outside assistance, saying Africa could stand on its own two feet.
And now they want 22,500 troops and police officers?! :rofl:
While it may be shameful, scandalous (oh, pick any old negative word)....the world simply does not care. Sometimes realistic appraisals are harsh.
Also, as I-6 mentioned "The troops will not be deployed until Sudan agrees."
Fighting increased since the last attempted "peace agreement." And since they now want to redeploy 10,000 troops for further combat operations...they aren't agreeing anytime soon.
As for UN's utility, perhaps the words of that wise philosopher, Al Pacino, are fitting: "I'd take a flamethrower to this place!" (as LtCol Frank Slade, Scent of a Woman)
The African Union could barely scrape together 7,000 almost completely useless troops......out of an entire continent (with a still rapidly growing population of 680 million). They didn't want outside assistance, saying Africa could stand on its own two feet.
And now they want 22,500 troops and police officers?! :rofl:
While it may be shameful, scandalous (oh, pick any old negative word)....the world simply does not care. Sometimes realistic appraisals are harsh.
Also, as I-6 mentioned "The troops will not be deployed until Sudan agrees."
Fighting increased since the last attempted "peace agreement." And since they now want to redeploy 10,000 troops for further combat operations...they aren't agreeing anytime soon.
I don't know what his rush is - - the US has been a strong supporter of the waffling for years. No interest before - - less interest now.
As for UN's utility, perhaps the words of that wise philosopher, Al Pacino, are fitting: "I'd take a flamethrower to this place!" (as LtCol Frank Slade, Scent of a Woman)
North Star
Member
- Reaction score
- 41
- Points
- 330
Um...how long has the Darfur crisis been going on?
So much for fast, effective diplomacy. I bet Khartoum is quaking in its boots.
So much for fast, effective diplomacy. I bet Khartoum is quaking in its boots.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Dallaire critical of Canada's absence in Darfur
CanWest News Service
Published: Saturday, September 09, 2006
© CanWest News Service 2006
Some backround on the situation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict
Even as our Armed Forces confront the Taliban in Afghanistan, Canada can and must do more to stave off humanitarian disaster in Darfur, says Senator Romeo Dallaire.
Dallaire, a retired Canadian Forces lieutenant general, said Friday that Canada has the resources to sustain a 600-person force in Darfur where two million people have been driven from their homes and an estimated 200,000 killed.
Canada's unwillingness to get involved in Darfur shows "absolute, abject lack of leadership," Dallaire told about 100 students and staff at Concordia University in Montreal.
"If a country massively abuses its own people or is not capable of stopping the massive abuse of its people, the international community has a responsibility to protect," Dallaire added.
A member of the UN Advisory Committee on Genocide Prevention, Dallaire was commander of the UN Mission in Rwanda in 1993-94 when it was unable to intervene as 800,000 Tutsis and progressive Hutus were massacred.
Dallaire suggested a racial double-standard was at play in preventing the developed world from intervening in Rwanda as there appears to be in Darfur.
Is there "a pecking order in humanity ... where the black African doesn't count anymore?" he asked. "What happens to three million people who have nothing, to the women who are being raped as they try to get wood outside their compounds?"
Canada told the UN in May that Ottawa supports sending UN peacekeepers to Darfur, but made no commitment of a Canadian Armed Forces role.
Do you think we have the capability? Is it because we are in a "state of armed conflict"?
I read his book, thought it was an amazing story, but could he be almost in the same situation?
CanWest News Service
Published: Saturday, September 09, 2006
© CanWest News Service 2006
Some backround on the situation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict
Even as our Armed Forces confront the Taliban in Afghanistan, Canada can and must do more to stave off humanitarian disaster in Darfur, says Senator Romeo Dallaire.
Dallaire, a retired Canadian Forces lieutenant general, said Friday that Canada has the resources to sustain a 600-person force in Darfur where two million people have been driven from their homes and an estimated 200,000 killed.
Canada's unwillingness to get involved in Darfur shows "absolute, abject lack of leadership," Dallaire told about 100 students and staff at Concordia University in Montreal.
"If a country massively abuses its own people or is not capable of stopping the massive abuse of its people, the international community has a responsibility to protect," Dallaire added.
A member of the UN Advisory Committee on Genocide Prevention, Dallaire was commander of the UN Mission in Rwanda in 1993-94 when it was unable to intervene as 800,000 Tutsis and progressive Hutus were massacred.
Dallaire suggested a racial double-standard was at play in preventing the developed world from intervening in Rwanda as there appears to be in Darfur.
Is there "a pecking order in humanity ... where the black African doesn't count anymore?" he asked. "What happens to three million people who have nothing, to the women who are being raped as they try to get wood outside their compounds?"
Canada told the UN in May that Ottawa supports sending UN peacekeepers to Darfur, but made no commitment of a Canadian Armed Forces role.
Do you think we have the capability? Is it because we are in a "state of armed conflict"?
I read his book, thought it was an amazing story, but could he be almost in the same situation?
Trinity
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
IMO... I think our verbal commitment to Darfur is just that... knowing that
the UN will never act on it.
It makes us look good without having to do anything.
Does Dallaire suggest we invade another country?
At least we have been asked to go to Afghanistan by
the lawful government.
the UN will never act on it.
It makes us look good without having to do anything.
Does Dallaire suggest we invade another country?
At least we have been asked to go to Afghanistan by
the lawful government.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
There are many nations in this world, many with international peace-keeping capabilities and and I agree, our verbal committment, is just that. We can't just go around the world pulling children out of the water and rescuing kittens out of the trees. While I do understand, because of his experience, he more than likely feels very strongly about the situation in the Sudan.
Could this be another Rwanda - the UN failing, yet again, to prevent or provide support against a genocide in the making.
Could this be another Rwanda - the UN failing, yet again, to prevent or provide support against a genocide in the making.
- Reaction score
- 6,068
- Points
- 1,160
I've no doubt his concern is genuine, however, the tone of his article all but proves he's still a slave to the party that made him a senator.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
paracowboy Critical of Dallaire's Presence in Senate
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
What are we going to do, invade Sudan? They have made it abundantly clear the UN is not wanted there!
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060904/sudan_au_060904/20060904/
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060904/sudan_au_060904/20060904/
Similar threads
