They probably figure that if the US isn't taking active measures to overthrow the Islamists there, they don't need to actively support them. They figure the tyranny is strong enough not to need their help at this juncture.
Wouldn't time spent holding one's breath waiting for reparations be better spent actually DOING something to vanquish a real, honest-to-badness, flourishing slave trade?
"What I don't understand is why I haven't seen any rallies or protests by the Left, even though they rallied only last week around the war for Iraq. Yes, the cynical among us may think that it's obvious the left wouldn't care..."
Not sure why he thinks this is about "the Left" dropping the ball. Whatever.
IMHO, Kristof addresses the more obvious (and germaine) question:
"President Bush could mention Darfur or meet a refugee. The deputy secretary of state could visit the border areas here in Chad. We could raise the issue before the U.N. And the onus is not just on the U.S.: it's shameful that African and Muslim countries don't offer at least a whisper of protest at the slaughter of fellow Africans and Muslims."
Well, the "fellow Africans" is just a myth that helps Westerners get over their guilt feelings.
They hate each other just as well as Europeans in the first half of the 20th century.
And as for the "fellow Muslims". Tell it to Saddam.
Slavery in Sudan, hey? I always was amazed where u americans get info from. But u seem to know more about the muslim world than the muslims do, you know like WMD in Iraq. Bush doesn't give a hoot about Sudan cause the neocons don't. You see Sudan is not really a threat to no Likudnik. I highly advice you all to stop watching these sitcoms and Fox news and start reading foreign articles in the net.
They probably figure that if the US isn't taking active measures to overthrow the Islamists there, they don't need to actively support them. They figure the tyranny is strong enough not to need their help at this juncture.
Thanks for linking to my site, Dean.
The issue is getting more and more pressing, and I hope, atleast, the blogosphere won't let it die as easy as the press has.
Oh, and, by the way, I'm a guy.
Oops! Sorry! [blush]
I've been wondering about Sudan ever since I heard they have an active slave trade there.
Yes, an active slave trade.
Wouldn't time spent holding one's breath waiting for reparations be better spent actually DOING something to vanquish a real, honest-to-badness, flourishing slave trade?
Yeah. The slave trade is alive and well in Africa and large parts of the Arab world. It's pretty horrifying.
Ariel Beery states this:
"What I don't understand is why I haven't seen any rallies or protests by the Left, even though they rallied only last week around the war for Iraq. Yes, the cynical among us may think that it's obvious the left wouldn't care..."
Not sure why he thinks this is about "the Left" dropping the ball. Whatever.
IMHO, Kristof addresses the more obvious (and germaine) question:
"President Bush could mention Darfur or meet a refugee. The deputy secretary of state could visit the border areas here in Chad. We could raise the issue before the U.N. And the onus is not just on the U.S.: it's shameful that African and Muslim countries don't offer at least a whisper of protest at the slaughter of fellow Africans and Muslims."
Well, the "fellow Africans" is just a myth that helps Westerners get over their guilt feelings.
They hate each other just as well as Europeans in the first half of the 20th century.
And as for the "fellow Muslims". Tell it to Saddam.
That leaves just the US.
Slavery in Sudan, hey? I always was amazed where u americans get info from. But u seem to know more about the muslim world than the muslims do, you know like WMD in Iraq. Bush doesn't give a hoot about Sudan cause the neocons don't. You see Sudan is not really a threat to no Likudnik. I highly advice you all to stop watching these sitcoms and Fox news and start reading foreign articles in the net.