I read the article "Why Darfur intervention is a mistake" and i don't agree with it at all. It says that most of the killing happened 4 or so years ago and the killing has slowed down a lot but that doesn't change the fact that a lot of people did die. I think personally think we should interfere because something has to be done. The article says that its hard to make a "moral distinction" between side because the recent attacks on Khartoum were ordered by the rebels but i think i would be pretty angry too if the government had been killing innocent civilians. I would want to take action against the government too. I'm not saying that we should go in there and start killing people but try and to stop both sides from killing each other. We need to try and settle the conflict and make some sort of peace treaty so that this genocide doesn't continue. It mention that this is becoming Rwanda in slow motion and if we don't do something quick it could easily become worse than that. So my view on this article is i think we should interfere in a way that minimizes killings and works on saving innocent lives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7411087.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7411087.stm
5 comments:
Ben
I like your view on the article. I agree that something needs to be done and that many of us are in the position to help. These senseless killings keep occuring in many parts of the world, even though - after the Holocaust - we said it wouldn't happen again.
The world can be a scary place. I know that we're lucky enough to live a country that doesn't choose who will live or die, that doesn't slaughter its people for no reason. When you read about other cultures, you realize that.
Ben - Who do you think should intervene? An American military movement or an international military coalition? The United Nations or the African Union?
I think that it is all peoples' responsibility to keep all people safe, but it seems like governments always have other priorities.
After doing all of this research, can you see one group who should lead the charge in stabilizing the Sudan?
Monts, I agree with what you are saying to a point. One thing you said I would like to know more about is, like you said helping only the innocent people without taking sides. I have thought about this also, and at first this seemed like a plausible solution. Thinking more closely about the consequences of this action, make one realize how difficult an effort like that would be. How to save innocents by killing thier attackers without making angry both sides, so that you will not be killed
Hi, Ben. I'm glad you're taking Mr. Cavellier's class. The Darfur crisis has been of particular interest to me, and I am certainly no expert about what's been happening there, but I think that some sort of intervention is absolutely necessary. Have you done any research to find out what our presidential candidates plan to do about it? I think it's important for us to select a president who will handle foreign affairs responsibly, and the candidates' positions on Darfur matter to me. What about you?
Ms. Batty
I think Ms. Batty asks a great question--what do our presidential candidates have to say?
What do other world leaders have to say? Why is no one willing to really, truly step in besides Hollywood actors? How are the events in Darfur different that the events of World War II?
Post a Comment