UN to begin Darfur peace mission

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Lesleycape, Dec 31, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7165443.stm

    This appears to be another case of too little too late. Not only that but the international community are once again dragging their feet on committing troops. Some countries like the US, UK, and Canada are already over committed - but what about the rest of the world - where are they? 8O

    Or are they hoping that the African Union can muster up a force that will save them the trouble? :roll:

    Remember Rwanda? Also remember how well the UN (African troops - Nigerian I believe) did in Sierra Leone, where some of the UN soldiers committed worse atrocities than the Rebels? :x

    I wonder how many more people will have to die in Darfur before the rest of the world is finally guilted into action. :pissedoff:
  2. So you believe that the "rest of the world" is morally obliged to prevent/halt/resolve every African conflict? Why?
  3. Situation normal then for the UN. remember your comments when it all goes to rat sh1t and everyone blames the UN
  4. Send in the feckin French!
  5. approx quote(s) I liked from mock the week:
    Something you will never hear a Frenchman say:
    ''The battle was long and hard .. but finally with grit and determination we won through''

    ''How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Paris?
    - they dont know, they've never tried''

    doubt they will develop a spine anytime soon :wink:

    maybe ze Germans?
  6. Sarkozy's spokesman David Martinon said last Saturday that a rapid UN deployment is essential for the return of peace in the region.

    1100 French troops are busy next door in Tchad and Hervé Morin Minister for Defence is currently there to see in the New Year with them.
  7. The French are the lead Nation for this UN cluster
  8. Those who are members of the UN have an obligation to assist when the UN asks for help. Sadly, many of the members list Darfur, as with many other situations as "Somebody Else's Problem". (Douglas Adams - RIP)

    Look how quickly the UN moved into Bosnia - and how slowly they reacted to Rwanda, which saw the largest genocide atrocity since the Second World War. Some racial prejudice going on there perhaps? Or like you appear to infer, that Africa should solve it's own problems?

    The main problem is that Africa CAN'T solve it's own problems - history has shown us that. :(
  9. Its a bit dodgy for white countries to go into Africa, We don't want anyone calling us racist. After all Zimbawe is left well alone.
    Where's the AN in all this? why don't they sort it out?
  10. Look at Sierra Leone - African 'UN' troops were sent in to keep the peace - they (in some instances) became worse than the rebels - raping, and murdering locals, while all the time being paid by the UN.

    It took the British going into Sierra Leone to finally stabilise the situation - the UN troops were told to leave.

    Ask any citizen of Sierra Leone - and they'll say that they preferred the mainly 'white' British troops to the African troops sent there by the UN.

    There are currently still too many tribal rivalries in Africa to make a AN force viable.

  11. That's the very point. Sub-saharan Africa will never be credibly self-governing or indeed self-supporting in any way which 'liberal' Western thought would like to see it. I see no valid moral justification for expending British or other 'Western' military lives, taxpayers' money or poorly-directed charitable donations to anywhere there while it remains in that state, and you'll be waiting a long time for any meaningful change.
  12. I don't doubt the British army did a better job, But unfortunly it cost soldiers lives. We shouldn't have to go in because other countries have crap armies.
  13. Agreed, however burying our heads in the sand won't achieve anything. 9/11 should have taught us something. Rogue or unstable countries become breeding grounds for disaffected youth - many of whom become easy targets for indoctrination by terrorists, whose main goal seems to be destroying our way of life.

    Prior to 9/11 we ignored such states, or gave meaningless rebukes in the UN, and they came back to bite us in the arse. :(

    Can we really afford not to get involved?
  14. all the ngo's i work with are getting prepped for this.

    i doubt it will end for a long long time


    as others have suggested, it begs the question why bother?
  15. Yes because squaddies lives are quite valueable (not that Labour would agree)
    Its not our problem, let the left wing do-gooders go over there and try and sort it out.