|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 8:56 am
To the People of Gaia:
The first thing Zahara Abdulkarim heard when she woke up one morning in her village was the sound of warplanes. Then, gunshots and screams rained through the air, as bombs rattled her neighbor’s huts leaving nothing but craters. When the 25 year old ran outside, two men came up to her. They were members of the Janjaweed, the militia that has been slaughtering the people of the western Sudanese region of Darfur. One held a whip while the other brandished a knife. A third had a rifle, and stood over her husband’s body. Her home was set aflame as two other men put her to the ground and took turns raping her.
When I heard this, I was shocked. Hundreds of women have been in the exact same position as Zahara Abdulkarim. 400,000 men, women and children have been killed and countless have lost everything. I want to know the answer to a simple question: Why? Why has no one done anything? Why has it gone on so long? It kills me inside that it could have been me, or my family, or my friends. I want everyone to help in my effort to stop this madness. Please, write to your congressman, your senator, the president, anyone that can help raise awareness for this issue. Just think if it was you or your sister or your mother or your daughter in Darfur. Wouldn’t you want someone to help? We all come from a mulititude of places, but together, we can all do something.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:46 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:15 pm
That's an easy question. What's in it for anyone to save an african nation with little or no money? It isn't like Iraq where there is oil for the taking. Wealthier nations just don't want to put the money in because there isn't much to gain.
This is like Rwanda all over again, and it has been going on for some time in Sudan. Not enough people care to do anything about it. And when you are in a place where everyone around you has the same pricklike attitude about the situation...there isn't much you can do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:22 am
not to try and sound cold and heartless but just because you write to a important person in the gov. (ie the president) its not up to him to go to war its up to the u.n. and they wouldnt act on things like this unless its a genocide and they would be as thourogh as possible to try and avoid any and all confrontations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:51 pm
If the UN would get off of it's collective butt and put a stop to the whole thing I'd be all for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 3:02 pm
That's just crazy! I mean come on, some men are such dirty pigs! (no offense to those m good men out there) Sudan needs help badly!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:42 pm
History repeats itself. For those people who thought the Holocaust would never happen again, you were fooled.
It's sad that there isn't more talk about Darfur..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:41 pm
President Bush? HELLO!?!?!?! Wake up!?!?!?! Kill the government over there. This is why I think Kerry should've won the 2004 presidental election.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 10:32 am
We had an assembly at my school about this, most of the people there also signed a patition to attempt to stop it. I've been getting plenty of news reports on this issue... I believe that they stopped the gun shooting for a while though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:34 pm
OMG_its_Carrie! Kill the government over there. Excuse me, but just what you mean by this? Do you really believe that might makes right, or that violence and ousting is the best option? What do we do after we "kill the government?" Institute a new government maybe, one that we like better? If you're not familiar with the history, this is what we've done in various other countries, including twice in Iraq. I can say with conviction that it has never turned out beneficial in the long run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:43 am
dboyzero OMG_its_Carrie! Kill the government over there. Excuse me, but just what you mean by this? Do you really believe that might makes right, or that violence and ousting is the best option? What do we do after we "kill the government?" Institute a new government maybe, one that we like better? If you're not familiar with the history, this is what we've done in various other countries, including twice in Iraq. I can say with conviction that it has never turned out beneficial in the long run. true becuase not every one will be happy with a democracy and democracy isnt for every nation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:34 am
dboyzero OMG_its_Carrie! Kill the government over there. Excuse me, but just what you mean by this? Do you really believe that might makes right, or that violence and ousting is the best option? What do we do after we "kill the government?" Institute a new government maybe, one that we like better? If you're not familiar with the history, this is what we've done in various other countries, including twice in Iraq. I can say with conviction that it has never turned out beneficial in the long run. Twice in Iraq? We only toppled the Iraqi government once. Installing a new government turned out splendidly in post WWII Japan so you can't say that it has never turned out well. But yes, I agree, dboy. Destoying their government isn't such a good idea. Bush especially can't do anything militarily here. How can he? He is being heavily criticized for taking "unilateral action" in Iraq so how could we ask him to unilaterally take action on Darfur?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:01 am
Strideo dboyzero OMG_its_Carrie! Kill the government over there. Excuse me, but just what you mean by this? Do you really believe that might makes right, or that violence and ousting is the best option? What do we do after we "kill the government?" Institute a new government maybe, one that we like better? If you're not familiar with the history, this is what we've done in various other countries, including twice in Iraq. I can say with conviction that it has never turned out beneficial in the long run. Twice in Iraq? We only toppled the Iraqi government once. Installing a new government turned out splendidly in post WWII Japan so you can't say that it has never turned out well. But yes, I agree, dboy. Destoying their government isn't such a good idea. Bush especially can't do anything militarily here. How can he? He is being heavily criticized for taking "unilateral action" in Iraq so how could we ask him to unilaterally take action on Darfur? we might not have "toppled their goverment" once but from what i remember we did try and invade them before
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:50 am
dreams into nights yami Strideo dboyzero OMG_its_Carrie! Kill the government over there. Excuse me, but just what you mean by this? Do you really believe that might makes right, or that violence and ousting is the best option? What do we do after we "kill the government?" Institute a new government maybe, one that we like better? If you're not familiar with the history, this is what we've done in various other countries, including twice in Iraq. I can say with conviction that it has never turned out beneficial in the long run. Twice in Iraq? We only toppled the Iraqi government once. Installing a new government turned out splendidly in post WWII Japan so you can't say that it has never turned out well. But yes, I agree, dboy. Destoying their government isn't such a good idea. Bush especially can't do anything militarily here. How can he? He is being heavily criticized for taking "unilateral action" in Iraq so how could we ask him to unilaterally take action on Darfur? we might not have "toppled their goverment" once but from what i remember we did try and invade them before You must be talking about Desert Storm. We [the United States] and an allied coalition that consisted of 34 nations drove the Iraqi forces out of Kuwait and attacked them within the borders of Iraq as well. The ultime goal was never to remove Saddam from power. Saddam agreed to a cease fire and part of the terms included a disarmament and weapons inspection programe to which he never truely complied and he proceeded to give weapons inspectors the run around for the next 11 years. Quote: Just months after the 1991 cease-fire, the Security Council twice renewed its demand that the Iraqi regime cooperate fully with inspectors, condemning Iraq's serious violations of its obligations. The Security Council again renewed that demand in 1994, and twice more in 1996, deploring Iraq's clear violations of its obligations. The Security Council renewed its demand three more times in 1997, citing flagrant violations; and three more times in 1998, calling Iraq's behavior totally unacceptable. And in 1999, the demand was renewed yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 8:03 pm
Yes, I was referring to Desert Storm, where we did not remove Saddam from power per se, but it was certainly an element of the conflict to trim his hedges, if you get my drift (wow, that was a terrible analogy).
I suppose you could argue that the post-WW2 government of Japan was beneficial, but then again, their new constitution wasn't just the product of Americans, but rather the Japanese editing of the American draft.
In any case, and back on topic, I'm sure we all agree that "killing the government over there" is hardly the best course of action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
![[ k e e l y ]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/dd/e1/3e4a951f32e1dd_flip.png?t=1282675186_6.00_00)
