They said "Never Again!" . . . but they lied

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MrFun
Geez -- there's too many cold-hearted, excessively rational Dr. Spocks on Apolyton who debate whether we should intervene against crimes against humanity.

No one has yet given a reason for doing so.

[MrFun]

If it's not within the capacity of one or two nations to intervene, then organize a more effective intervention through the UN, or through some other international coalition force.

[Spiffor]

At least one Nation has learned from Rwanda. That's right, that's mine

In Ivory Coast, we had a new Rwanda in the making (and we could still have one if we don't pay attention). As the political turmoil began to be very worrisome, France sent troops to establish a buffer between the two parties. Then, France tried to establish a peace plan between two parties that were definitely not ready for compromise. We are being harshly criticized by both parties, and we are definitely not popular in Ivory Coast. But our action made it possible for two maximalist factions not to slaughter each other

(BTW, I don't know the details, but I think Britain has done something similar in Sierra Leone - I trust our Brits to give you more specifics)

[MrFun]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
No one has yet given a reason for doing so.

The value of human life is immeasurable, isn't it??

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by MrFun
If it's not within the capacity of one or two nations to intervene, then organize a more effective intervention through the UN

It is precisely in the capacity of the UN. The UN is bound by its statuses to intervene wherever a genocide is acknowledged. That's why so many countries rejected the idea a genocide was going on. Yours included, of course.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MrFun
The value of human life is immeasurable, isn't it??

The events talked about in this thread should tell you otherwise.

[Saras]

Somalia happened less than a year before; everyone was unwilling to repeat the disgrace.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Spiffor
At least one Nation has learned from Rwanda. That's right, that's mine

In Ivory Coast, we had a new Rwanda in the making (and we could still have one if we don't pay attention). As the political turmoil began to be very worrisome, France sent troops to establish a buffer between the two parties. Then, France tried to establish a peace plan between two parties that were definitely not ready for compromise. We are being harshly criticized by both parties, and we are definitely not popular in Ivory Coast. But our action made it possible for two maximalist factions not to slaughter each other

What?

France invaded a sovereign country and used its military might to impose its views of right and wrong upon the citizens of another country.

I'm stunned!












That doesnt mean I opposed that action. And yes I know that the UN and US eventually supported the action (some said as an effort to get french support for Iraq).

[Last Conformist]

Stunned? 'Twas not exactly the first occasion in which France intervened in Africa ...

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Spiffor

(BTW, I don't know the details, but I think Britain has done something similar in Sierra Leone - I trust our Brits to give you more specifics)

We certainly did. It was all getting very nasty, so they sent British troops in. They gave the militias a good slapping, and order was established.

That's how you stop genocides.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

This was not a war.

By definition it was a war... it simply also included genocide.

Trite.

So Germany, early in WWII, simultaneously fought a civil war against their Jewish population.



I don't recall ever reading about it that way...

[Uncle Sparky]

There war no genocide. An American scholar (U of Md) said there wasn't and Americans are always right.

I'm guessing because of the high homicide death rates of blacks in US urban centres, White America probably believes they all died of natural causes.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Stunned? 'Twas not exactly the first occasion in which France intervened in Africa ...

there's no sarcasm smiley

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
DD is right. That is what this is about. Why did we do nothing? And worse, we used it to justify an attack on a country were it was not occuring.

Because it would have taken too long to send a force of sufficient size. It was determined that not only would we have had to fly in every bit of equipment and provisions for our forces, but we would also have had to ship in fuel for our gas guzzling Humvies, Bradleys and M1A1s. None of the adjacent countries had the fuel to spare!

In the end didn't we send some covert "encouragement" to the Burundian fources that ultimately pacified Rwanda?

[Imran Siddiqui]

So Germany, early in WWII, simultaneously fought a civil war against their Jewish population.

The Germans never declared a war against a Jewish state. A better comparision is the Japanese atrocities in WW2. It was genocidal (against the Chinese), but also part of the war.