Rwanda...
In a promise on my earlier post, I wanted to research what happened in Rwanda in 1994. The west (the UN and US under Clinton) basically turned it's back and offered nothing but empty political speak. What happened is proof that maybe the UN is neutered and no longer a viable organization to protect the helpless. (See modern day Sudan for more proof of this). What you see is history repeating itself. Kofi Annan comes out and says (and I paraphrase) "Well, gosh that's just awful what's going on over there, sure wish we could do something, but my hands are tied." For an actual quote, continue reading.
Kofi Annan, head of U.N. peacekeeping, testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the issue of Rwanda:
"When the Belgians left it was clear that the U.N. could not implement the mandate it had, and either the mandate had to be changed, or reinforcements introduced ... I do not know what the Council will decide after they have reviewed and reconsidered the situation today. If the council is going to recommend reinforcement, the reinforcement that goes in has to be well equipped, very mobile, and also able to protect itself. If we do not send in that kind of reinforcement ... then I'm not quite sure they'll be able to bring about a sort of law and order ... that will lead to the end of the massacres ... here we are watching people being deprived of the most fundamental of rights, the right to life, and yet we seem a bit helpless ..."
You sure got that right. You really are helpless. While this massacre went on, the UN and US (again, under Clinton), were arguing about the costs of who would pay for the deployment of peacekeepers and equipment. If the UN can't be counted on to intervene in these types of massacres, they must be dissolved. Period.
"Although disease and more killings claim additional lives in the refugee camps, the genocide is over. An estimated 800,000 Rwandans have been killed in 100 days."
-From Frontline's "Triumph of Evil" special.
Just take a moment and put that in perspective against, say, the Tsunami death toll. That's FIVE tsunami's folks. While the US (under Clinton) and the UN (under Kofi Annan) sat back and argued about the expense of stepping in, 800,000 people were killed. The world paid a much greater expense by not stepping in. The blood of this GENOCIDE (I'll call it that, even though to Clintons administration and Annan's neutered group, Genocide apparently doesn't start until the death counter hits 500,000!!!), is all over the UN/US's hands in my opinion. The link to a timeline of this slaughter is the title of this post. Kofi Annan gives good speeches, maybe it's time for him to resign so he can go on the lecture circuit to give them. I'll help him with a title, "How I failed the world, again". I liked Bill Clinton as a president and I felt he really did some good things. I would see this though as one of his failures. I'm sure he was a bit trigger shy to repeat what had happened in Somalia to US troops, but something needed to be done. Both the US and the UN failed. I wish President Bush wouldn't be repeating the same mistake in the Sudan but it appears that is the case. Take this quote from reporter Phil Cox:
On the heels of the 10th anniversary since the Rwanda genocide left nearly a million people dead in 100 days, Cox said not much has changed.
"The world is not dealing with this. We know it is happening. Ignorance is not an excuse now. And in the light of these commemorations and talk about Rwanda, it comes as increasingly double standards again by the international community,"
The vicious cycle continues. It does make one wonder if the world will ever have a lasting peace.
Kofi Annan, head of U.N. peacekeeping, testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the issue of Rwanda:
"When the Belgians left it was clear that the U.N. could not implement the mandate it had, and either the mandate had to be changed, or reinforcements introduced ... I do not know what the Council will decide after they have reviewed and reconsidered the situation today. If the council is going to recommend reinforcement, the reinforcement that goes in has to be well equipped, very mobile, and also able to protect itself. If we do not send in that kind of reinforcement ... then I'm not quite sure they'll be able to bring about a sort of law and order ... that will lead to the end of the massacres ... here we are watching people being deprived of the most fundamental of rights, the right to life, and yet we seem a bit helpless ..."
You sure got that right. You really are helpless. While this massacre went on, the UN and US (again, under Clinton), were arguing about the costs of who would pay for the deployment of peacekeepers and equipment. If the UN can't be counted on to intervene in these types of massacres, they must be dissolved. Period.
"Although disease and more killings claim additional lives in the refugee camps, the genocide is over. An estimated 800,000 Rwandans have been killed in 100 days."
-From Frontline's "Triumph of Evil" special.
Just take a moment and put that in perspective against, say, the Tsunami death toll. That's FIVE tsunami's folks. While the US (under Clinton) and the UN (under Kofi Annan) sat back and argued about the expense of stepping in, 800,000 people were killed. The world paid a much greater expense by not stepping in. The blood of this GENOCIDE (I'll call it that, even though to Clintons administration and Annan's neutered group, Genocide apparently doesn't start until the death counter hits 500,000!!!), is all over the UN/US's hands in my opinion. The link to a timeline of this slaughter is the title of this post. Kofi Annan gives good speeches, maybe it's time for him to resign so he can go on the lecture circuit to give them. I'll help him with a title, "How I failed the world, again". I liked Bill Clinton as a president and I felt he really did some good things. I would see this though as one of his failures. I'm sure he was a bit trigger shy to repeat what had happened in Somalia to US troops, but something needed to be done. Both the US and the UN failed. I wish President Bush wouldn't be repeating the same mistake in the Sudan but it appears that is the case. Take this quote from reporter Phil Cox:
On the heels of the 10th anniversary since the Rwanda genocide left nearly a million people dead in 100 days, Cox said not much has changed.
"The world is not dealing with this. We know it is happening. Ignorance is not an excuse now. And in the light of these commemorations and talk about Rwanda, it comes as increasingly double standards again by the international community,"
The vicious cycle continues. It does make one wonder if the world will ever have a lasting peace.
posted by Big Scott | 11:54 AM
1 Comments:
Somalia, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Rwanda
They (the UN) fail to do anything time after time after time. What a joke of an organization. Talk talk talk...no action. Organizations can be fixed though with the right leadership. Funny you should mention Clinton, everyone loves him, we know he's a good leader (when he's not lying to a congressional panel), and O'Reilly says he should be the new leader of the UN. I agree.
You're also going to start seeing new developments in the UN oil for food scandal. It is going to get worse before it gets better. And it is going to run deep, and just shows one more reason why we had to do something about Iraq. [You'll have to watch for it though. FNC will be the only ones really reporting on the story. Maybe Chris Matthews too. You won't see it the story in detail on CBsuckS.] Iraq was bribing everyone in the UN not to side with the U.S. or anything else anti-Hussein. So far there is no eveidence Anan himself had links to this, but we'll see. He should be strung up by his ears (that was not a literal statement, or racially motivated).
gotta work dude...later!
Post a Comment
<< Home