"Newly appointed UN Ambassador Susan Rice - a key Africa adviser to the Clinton administration during the 1994 Rwandan genocide, when then-president Bill Clinton was sharply criticized for failing to act - has pushed for US or NATO air strikes, and even a naval blockade of Sudan's major port to prevent lucrative oil exports."
Oh, she is a piece of work! You should be ASHAMED of yourself, sister!
And Obama!!! MURDERING your BROTHERS in AFRICA?! You should be ASHAMED of yourself, sir!
"Obama weighing options on Darfur; Some in Sudan say a tougher policy expected" by Stephanie McCrummen and Colum Lynch, Washington Post | December 11, 2008
Didn't I already see this someplace before?
Wow! Picking it up kinda late, 'eh, Globe?
NAIROBI - If the election of Barack Obama has been greeted with glee across much of Africa, there is at least one spot where the mood is decidedly different.
In the Sudanese capital of Khartoum these days, political elites are bracing for what they expect will be a major shift in US policy toward a government the United States has blamed for orchestrating a violent campaign against civilians in the western Darfur region.
"Compared to the Republicans, the Democrats, I think they are hawks," said Ghazi Suleiman, a human rights lawyer and member of the Southern People's Liberation Movement, which has a fragile power-sharing agreement with the ruling party. "I know Obama's appointees. And I know their policy toward Sudan. Everybody here knows it. The policy is very aggressive, and very harsh. I think we really will miss the judgments of George W. Bush."
You may be the ONLY ONES, dude!
I find the intrigue all so interesting when we know it is ISRAEL who is running guns in there!
But why would they do that to Sudan?
".... Sudan (a Muslim nation with an independent foreign policy which supports Palestinian rights). To an overwhelming degree, the propaganda campaign behind the so-called “Darfur genocide campaign’ is the Israeli state and its political apparatus in the US, namely the Zionist Power Configuration. Most of the media celebrities, led by prominent Hollywood Zionist director Steven Spielberg, have engaged in an exercise of selective moral indignation – supporting Israel, while ignoring its starvation blockade of Gaza, supporting the US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq while attacking China for its ‘immoral’ oil contracts with the Sudan.
The CPMAJO has focused on the Darfur ‘genocide’ because by doing so it favors the brutal separatists in southern Sudan, armed and advised by Israel, as a means of depriving pro-Palestinian Sudan of a large oil rich region in the south of the country. The Darfur campaign deliberately and systematically excludes any mention of the Israeli Supreme Court’s approval of Israel’s food and fuel blockade and deliberate prevention of the movement of medical personnel in Gaza and the West Bank, its approval of Israel’s practice of torture (‘forceful interrogations’), armed assaults on the vital infrastructure and civilian population centers of Gaza. Hollywood’s Darfur sideshow is a sham propaganda effort at selective humanitarian concern...."
Oh. That explains the jews coverage, too!!!
While the Bush administration most recently advocated the idea of normalizing relations with Sudan as a carrot approach to ending a crisis it labeled a genocide, Obama's foreign policy appointees have pushed for sticks. Secretary of State nominee Hillary Clinton has called for a NATO-enforced no-fly zone to "blanket" Darfur in order to prevent Sudanese bombing of villages.
Why not? They are patrolling the waters off Somalia.
Hey, could that be PART of the PLAN?
Newly appointed UN Ambassador Susan Rice - a key Africa adviser to the Clinton administration during the 1994 Rwandan genocide, when then-president Bill Clinton was sharply criticized for failing to act - has pushed for US or NATO air strikes, and even a naval blockade of Sudan's major port to prevent lucrative oil exports. Rice has vowed to "go down in flames" advocating for tough measures.
And taking Sudan with you, beeeee-ach!
Vice President-elect Joe Biden, who was chosen for his foreign policy experience and pressed early for US intervention to stop the genocide in the Balkans, was blunt during a hearing last year: "I would use American force now," he said.
So is that where the NEXT OCCUPATION is going to be? I doubt it!
We got bigger fish to fry, like Pakistan and Iran!
But it remains unclear how those pre-election views will square with the president-elect, who has outlined a pragmatic, coalition-based approach to foreign policy, while also speaking of America's "moral obligation" in the face of humanitarian catastrophes of the sort that are plentiful in Africa.
By doing what, ADDING TO IT?
And you wanna fulfill a "moral obligation?" Then get after ISRAEL!!!!
So far, Obama himself has been more cautious on Darfur than some of his appointees, advocating tougher sanctions against Khartoum, and a no-fly zone that might be enforced with "help" from the United States. He has not called for direct US intervention.
Obama intends to keep on Bush's Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, who has already suggested the United States would not provide much-needed helicopters to a struggling peacekeeping mission in Darfur, because the United States is stretched too thin in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama has also nominated as national security adviser retired Marine General James Jones, former NATO supreme allied commander, who has suggested NATO's role in Darfur should be training and support to the current peacekeeping mission, rather than direct intervention.
So despite all the TOUGH TALK, NOTHING CHANGES! Whatta shocker!
And specialists close to Obama's presidential campaign said that more generally, the new administration sees a need for diplomatic approaches to security crises across the continent.
I'm ALWAYS for THAT over WARS!!!!!
"We don't have the capacity to pacify these places militarily," said John Prendergast, a Darfur activist and former White House aid during the Clinton administration, citing Sudan and the worsening conflicts in Congo and Somalia. "We need political solutions."
The word "pacify" bothers me; it was/is a euphemism that was used in Vietnam (and before) to describe wholesale slaughter and mass-murder!
As for POLITICAL SOLUTIONS: PREFERABLE ANYTIME!!!!
--more--"
