There is one thing the US can do right now:
End the Helms Amendment that prohibits the use of foreign money for abortions for those impregnated by war crimes. Rape is the oldest war-crime that there is, the forced impregnation of a woman of another society to destroy her, her family and her society.
Leaders of Christian, Jews and Muslims have begged Obama to end the restrictions on funds to help these women - with abortion, with repairative surgery - because rape is the Number One Weapon of Choice by the groups Isis and Boko Haram. Now we see it being used by governments.
Obama has ignored these calls. Oh, no, precious money cannot be used on these women who have no resources, who are the victims of the foulest crimes ever known to humanity, why, the reasoning must go, if we use money to help them, then we would have to use money to help the poorest women in this nation and that would mean getting rid of the Henry Hyde Amendment, a philanderer who couldn't bear to see poor American Women have the freedom to control their own reproduction!
So, here we have the problem: creepy patriarchal men who never met a womb that they didn't want to control, have now met up with the rabid and blood-thirsty, the truly insane and vicious, and what those legal amendments really are when they grow up: war-crimes. Crimes against women. Crimes against society.
End both Amendments now. Today. Both of them must go, the Helms and the Hyde Amendments.
HELP WOMEN, OBAMA!!! TODAY!!!
End the Helms Amendment that prohibits the use of foreign money for abortions for those impregnated by war crimes. Rape is the oldest war-crime that there is, the forced impregnation of a woman of another society to destroy her, her family and her society.
Leaders of Christian, Jews and Muslims have begged Obama to end the restrictions on funds to help these women - with abortion, with repairative surgery - because rape is the Number One Weapon of Choice by the groups Isis and Boko Haram. Now we see it being used by governments.
Obama has ignored these calls. Oh, no, precious money cannot be used on these women who have no resources, who are the victims of the foulest crimes ever known to humanity, why, the reasoning must go, if we use money to help them, then we would have to use money to help the poorest women in this nation and that would mean getting rid of the Henry Hyde Amendment, a philanderer who couldn't bear to see poor American Women have the freedom to control their own reproduction!
So, here we have the problem: creepy patriarchal men who never met a womb that they didn't want to control, have now met up with the rabid and blood-thirsty, the truly insane and vicious, and what those legal amendments really are when they grow up: war-crimes. Crimes against women. Crimes against society.
End both Amendments now. Today. Both of them must go, the Helms and the Hyde Amendments.
HELP WOMEN, OBAMA!!! TODAY!!!
16
I recommend for those criticizing Mr. Kristof to read the column a second time. He has not called for military intervention or boots on the ground. He asked for our government to press other African nations to a) impose sanctions and b) provide tough, hands-on diplomacy. For instance, he said western nations should provide more support for Ethiopia's attempt to broker peace. I certainly agree with his recommendations.
9
VOICE PROTEST After reading Nick Kristof's horrifying piece, I hope that Obama will raise his voice in defense of victims in Sudan, slaughtered because they belong to a persecuted ethnic group. He spoke so eloquently and movingly to honor the memories of those African Americans slain in South Carolina for belonging to the wrong ethnic group. So let him lend his voice to honor the memories of those who perished in the Sudan's ongoing Holocaust. And let us hope most fervently that his voice will be heard and heeded, so that the bloodshed may cease. For the word is more powerful than the sword.
6
"Mind boggling corruption," isn't that the same verdict you recently gave us from Angola? Which African country doesn't suffer from mind boggling corruption? How do we force entire countries to live respectfully and in harmony with their fellow citizens? What commonly accepted beneficial ethos can governments instill in their citizens? How do you change the human heart?
These problems go far beyond the capabilities of governments to fix.
These problems go far beyond the capabilities of governments to fix.
26
President Obama, I hope you do all you can. You'd be my hero.
Even more so if you do more and differently in other areas overseas too before your term is over, which is soon.
Even more so if you do more and differently in other areas overseas too before your term is over, which is soon.
2
Every week, year after year, Mr. Kristof brings us a fresh set of horrors from around the world. Children are burned, mutilated, and raped, families are slaughtered, heads are severed, innocents languish in prison, noble persons are tortured and put to death. Now and then there are stories of heroic efforts, of micro business started by women, miraculous rescues from barbaric militants, Hotel Rwandas. American readers, even the most humane, feel numbed, overwhelmed. Oh god, more Kristof atrocities for us to harrow over. Why is this OUR problem? Why do we have to police the world? How can we begin to do that in the face of governments with human values seemingly so far our values?
Mr. K. begs us to write our representatives, urge diplomatic action. He has been there, he has talked to the suffering. We want to play golf or watch Lady Gaga on You Tube. Why does he have to remind us of these horrors? We can't do anything about them anyway. But we dutifully read his column, if we are liberal and think of ourselves as caring. Our hearts sink. Another sad orphan's face, another sobbing mother.
To get the stability and security we in America now enjoy, our forefathers did all the things which Mr. K. tells us about in Africa and other far flung lands. They wiped out an entire continent of indigenous people. They brutally kidnapped and enslaved an a race of human beings. This is the way land is settled. Who are we to point fingers?
Let us do what we can do.
Mr. K. begs us to write our representatives, urge diplomatic action. He has been there, he has talked to the suffering. We want to play golf or watch Lady Gaga on You Tube. Why does he have to remind us of these horrors? We can't do anything about them anyway. But we dutifully read his column, if we are liberal and think of ourselves as caring. Our hearts sink. Another sad orphan's face, another sobbing mother.
To get the stability and security we in America now enjoy, our forefathers did all the things which Mr. K. tells us about in Africa and other far flung lands. They wiped out an entire continent of indigenous people. They brutally kidnapped and enslaved an a race of human beings. This is the way land is settled. Who are we to point fingers?
Let us do what we can do.
5
With the likes of Boko Haram and Al Shabbab running rampant in Nigeria, Somalia and Kenya this is not the most significant organized ethnic sectarian conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa. The Tutsi and Hutu in Rwanda along with the Zulu and Xhosa divide in South Africa loom larger than the Nuer and Dinka in South Sudan. Indeed the existence of South Sudan is evidence of a much deeper lingering ethnic sectarian dispute in Sudan between Muslim, Christian and pagan faith groups. The Kikuyu rule over the Luo and Obama's Luhya in Kenya.
With Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Morocco locked in the ethnic sectarian civil war conflict within Sunni Muslim Arab secular and royal theocratic oil interests and against Sunni Muslim Turks, Persians and Kurds, Africa has major ethnic sectarian problems, Africa is a bolling human rights cauldron. Then there are the Shia Muslim, Jewish Israeli and Christian conflicts.
No tales of horror can overcome and guide American interests and values beyond our proven inability to resolve ethnic sectarian disputes by military means. Along with an unwillingness to use diplomacy, commerce and humanitarian aid. By focusing on African "tribalism" we tend to forget the bloody legacy of ethnic sectarian European tribal conflict and warfare. Or the American Civil War.
With Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Morocco locked in the ethnic sectarian civil war conflict within Sunni Muslim Arab secular and royal theocratic oil interests and against Sunni Muslim Turks, Persians and Kurds, Africa has major ethnic sectarian problems, Africa is a bolling human rights cauldron. Then there are the Shia Muslim, Jewish Israeli and Christian conflicts.
No tales of horror can overcome and guide American interests and values beyond our proven inability to resolve ethnic sectarian disputes by military means. Along with an unwillingness to use diplomacy, commerce and humanitarian aid. By focusing on African "tribalism" we tend to forget the bloody legacy of ethnic sectarian European tribal conflict and warfare. Or the American Civil War.
2
I am a pacifist, my Dad a WWII Navy Pilot, my brother killed in Vietnam, my uncle shot down over Hanover, SSG E6 waist gunner in a B17, and I 13 years Active Duty, 38 Reserves over all.
My Dad after living through WWII said to me always, "that the saddest day in American history was the day we dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima" - he was a man of honor who would have protested against the use of drones in combat as being "dishonorable".
After reading this however - this is the job for - SEND IN THE MARINES !!
Timothy Shaw, M.D
Madison, WI
My Dad after living through WWII said to me always, "that the saddest day in American history was the day we dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima" - he was a man of honor who would have protested against the use of drones in combat as being "dishonorable".
After reading this however - this is the job for - SEND IN THE MARINES !!
Timothy Shaw, M.D
Madison, WI
6
Another wrenching narrative of rampant savagery and carnage against tens of thousands of innocents in a power struggle between strong men bent on the power to appropriate as much wealth as possible.
Kristof’s notion that somehow “targeted sanctions” and diplomacy will produce peace and credible and equitable governance is unfortunately ludicrous.
Kristof’s notion that somehow “targeted sanctions” and diplomacy will produce peace and credible and equitable governance is unfortunately ludicrous.
7
The problem is that the international community is convinced that somehow people who have been involved in committing atrocities against humanity for decades will all of a sudden stop using such tactics cause we helped them form a new country.
We actually enabled them to be more powerful, more ruthless. It's an open secret that billions of dollars have been siphoned of by Riek & Salva since 2005 and yet the international community thinks that paying corrupt delegates upwards of $1,000/day for negotiations in fancy hotels in Addis Ababa will stop the fighting. It wont!
Unless there is a big stick that is used Riek Machar & Salva Kiir will keep spilling innocent blood and so far there has been no such stick. So far the stick has been sanctioning 6 generals, 3 each from the SPLA and opposition, I happen to have encountered a few of the sanctioned in my work and trust me when I say that sanctions haven't and wont effect their behavior at all.
I hate to say this but the only STICK that can work is being held by CHINA as it imports 90% of the fuel coming out of the Sudan's and the supply has been halved since Dec 2013. This war is about OIL, most of the fighting is in oil rich areas so Mr. Obama or the UN can talk as much as they want but if we want the South Sudanese to listen China needs to be involved.
Simultaneously, grass roots work to empower tribal mechanisms to promote reconciliation through the work of USAID & other partners should continue in war affected areas.
We actually enabled them to be more powerful, more ruthless. It's an open secret that billions of dollars have been siphoned of by Riek & Salva since 2005 and yet the international community thinks that paying corrupt delegates upwards of $1,000/day for negotiations in fancy hotels in Addis Ababa will stop the fighting. It wont!
Unless there is a big stick that is used Riek Machar & Salva Kiir will keep spilling innocent blood and so far there has been no such stick. So far the stick has been sanctioning 6 generals, 3 each from the SPLA and opposition, I happen to have encountered a few of the sanctioned in my work and trust me when I say that sanctions haven't and wont effect their behavior at all.
I hate to say this but the only STICK that can work is being held by CHINA as it imports 90% of the fuel coming out of the Sudan's and the supply has been halved since Dec 2013. This war is about OIL, most of the fighting is in oil rich areas so Mr. Obama or the UN can talk as much as they want but if we want the South Sudanese to listen China needs to be involved.
Simultaneously, grass roots work to empower tribal mechanisms to promote reconciliation through the work of USAID & other partners should continue in war affected areas.
10
Such stories are nothing new; it is simply the story-tellers that change. Today, it's Kristof, fifteen years ago it was the journalists who witnessed outrages committed by Iraqi soldiers again pregnant women in Kuwaiti hospitals. The implication is always the same: we must once again risk the lives of our own soldiers, highly trained men and women upon whom we have been calling for superhuman feats for decades now, in order to somehow rectify the consequences of misguided policies implemented by our government. Sorry, Nick, I'm worn out, and so are our young men and women.
4
Obama needs to read this column. He can pick up the phone and urge Europeans to cut a last minute deal on Greece, which is not facing, and has never faced, the kind of atrocities that Africans face. He can donate close to $2 billion for Syrian refugees housed in Jordan. He can and does let in tens of thousands of Central American illegal economic immigrants fleeing what some call "persecution" because they live in poverty, yet they thankfully know nothing of the kind of atrocities - indeed genocide - that Africans live with every day. And yet this WH does nothing for Africa, the least among us. Susan Rice said she would never turn a blind eye to an African genocide again, yet that is exactly what this administration has done everyday for years in C.A.R. and now South Sudan. Kudos to Mr. Kristof for keeping the worst of the planet's abuses on the American radar screen.
27
In the last 40 years or so haven't we learned anything? While the suffering of people is horrendous it isn't likely that the US intervening is going to do anything but make it worse. Just look at our handiwork elsewhere in that region. That area is decades from stability and nothing we do will change that. Suppressing the hatred that lights these fires doesn't work. Yugoslavia's break-up proved that or the utter chaos of Iraq after we deposed Saddam and put nothing in it's place. "Nation Building" is a nice catch phrase but the only ones who can build a nation are the ones who will live in it. If anything, the European community owns a good portion of this - African borders were drawn by withdrawing colonialists with little, if any, regard to the actual history of the continent. This is all boiling to surface now and we, the US, have no business trying to fix it; especially since, based on our track record, we'll only make it much, much worse. Just ask anyone living under ISIS's beneficent rule.
4
This is not a U.S. only issue, but the United States is probably in the best position to lead. That being, said any could country including mine, Canada, can and should intervene. Problems like this can only be solved by a multi-national effort. Also, where are the African countries in this? Where is the leadership? The willingness to stand up to such atrocities in their own continent? At some point they must also stop being bystanders.
5
And if it wasn't for Nicholas Kristof I would know nothing of this, nor would millions of other Americans. While I hate the story (I will probably have nightmares) I thank God for Mr. Kristof, the Time's most important reporter.
The human capacity to almost instinctively go to an "us versus them" mentality and then follow that thinking up with barbarity is amazing. We see it everywhere around the world when differing ethnic groups live in proximity. It is pervasive infecting even politics in our own country (just not so brutal). I confess I do not understand it nor do I have a clue how to address it, and I certainly don't have a clue about what Obama can or should do in South Sudan. It is a sad state the world finds itself in.
The human capacity to almost instinctively go to an "us versus them" mentality and then follow that thinking up with barbarity is amazing. We see it everywhere around the world when differing ethnic groups live in proximity. It is pervasive infecting even politics in our own country (just not so brutal). I confess I do not understand it nor do I have a clue how to address it, and I certainly don't have a clue about what Obama can or should do in South Sudan. It is a sad state the world finds itself in.
27
Displaced Syrians have received close to $2 billion. We could start with assistance.
Displaced refugees from the ME have received more than 1/3 of all refugee visas to live in the US. We could start with bringing Africans fleeing for their lives to the US.
I don't agree with Obama's illegal bombing campaigns of Syria, Iraq and Libya to stop ISIS, but if he's going to do it to save Middle Easterners, why shouldn't he intervene to save black Africans?
The moral relativism of this WH is sickening.
Displaced refugees from the ME have received more than 1/3 of all refugee visas to live in the US. We could start with bringing Africans fleeing for their lives to the US.
I don't agree with Obama's illegal bombing campaigns of Syria, Iraq and Libya to stop ISIS, but if he's going to do it to save Middle Easterners, why shouldn't he intervene to save black Africans?
The moral relativism of this WH is sickening.
3
Where is our foreign policy? Do we not stand against genocide and crimes against humanity? Where is American leadership? The UN has always been ineffective but I expect more of my own country.
13
Though we are all horrified by the scenes you have reported here, our nation been taught a terrible lesson in the last dozen years. The United States of American cannot stop every barbarism in the world. And it is dangerous to think we can.
7
This is heartbreaking. I hope our President will address these issues on his trip to Africa.
3
Why are we in Iraq, Afghanistan etc.? This says a lot about who we are: "I've got mine and to hell with the rest." I wouldn't mind American boots on the ground in the midst of this kind of ethnic genocide. Every developed nation should be opening its doors to immigrants from these horrors. Is money all we care about?
3
All we seem to hear about is one brutality after another against innocent villagers. I am not into the NRA but perhaps in these cases, we should do all that we can to arm these people so,they can defend themselves.
2
No, the U.S. should NOT interfere with yet another country in a part of the world that we have shown time and again we have no control over.
8
Kristof wants the United States to yet again play the role of the world's police force. We all know how that has worked out.
6
This is sickening. That would go without my saying it. However, where did the 1.1 Billion dollars go? How could that not have helped? I just don't understand.
6
I am overwhelmed by all the catastrophes around the world and can no longer keep track of all the wrongs going on. And, apparently, the United States started them all. The videos in Mr. Kristoff's piece are, at the same time, moving and numbing . A woman, almost certainly younger than she appears with her stooped gait, and speaking of her dead children. A beautiful 11 y.o. girl does not even swat the flies on her face as she speaks. I'm nearly 63 and I've realized for some time now that this is the way the world is going to be for the rest of my life. Crushing.
36
Mr. Kristof:
terrific reporting from very near to the bottom of horrific in-human
behaviors anywhere in the world.
such conditions demand the response "Do Something"
to attempt to shut these repetitive massacres down.
however,
having just stated the obvious,
what exactly is the "something" part that anyone can do?
well-armed tribes vowing to destroy each other with
seeming impunity leave 'outsiders' with very few
actual, working options.
other news agencies have repeatedly reported that
neither "side" has any interest whatsoever in ceasing
hostilities.
what then?
blockade the flow of arms from getting into the country?
really?
at what cost?
and then what?
the genocide in Rwanda only ended when one tribe
destroyed the other.
this is a very pessimistic set of statements to make,
but the conditions and circumstances that you and others
have described leaves us shaking our collective heads in
dismay.
further,
the UN is attempting to shelter, feed, and medically
care for more than 2 Million displaced persons from both of the
major, warring tribes in separate camps.
in addition,
more than 600,000 displaced persons are in
South Sudan as refugees from neighboring countries.
and these "numbers" are more than 6-months old,
surely more are now in need.
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/4e43cb466.html
this pit is huge, overwhelming in its complexity and,
sadly,
without substantial efforts from many outside countries,
these fires may have to burn themselves out.
grrrrrrrr
Yes, the human race is stuck in the cycle of violence, and South Sudan is an example of this cycling finally so out-of-control that the perpetrators are clearly ill. They're self-traumatizing and only know how to externalize their own internal Hell.
Humans can turn this around, but not by sanctions alone. Social structures are also responsible. Transgenerational trauma is responsible. So is collective trauma.
Humans can turn this around, but not by sanctions alone. Social structures are also responsible. Transgenerational trauma is responsible. So is collective trauma.
1
I have no idea what can or should be done by other nations to stop these atrocities. Yet, I agree with Mr. Kristof that contemplating what we might do to alleviate some of these horrors should be weighed.
Meanwhile, back in the U.S., we focus on "atrocities" like Christians who feel their faith is compromised by being compelled to participate in gay marriage ceremonies - and "racism" on campus when people say "everyone can succeed."
The world gone mad.
Meanwhile, back in the U.S., we focus on "atrocities" like Christians who feel their faith is compromised by being compelled to participate in gay marriage ceremonies - and "racism" on campus when people say "everyone can succeed."
The world gone mad.
5
Sadly and tragically nations are the sum total of the dark forces that those who know better are unwilling or unable to defeat.
1
To those who think the world will be better off without the USA as the world's policeman, you are fools. Yes, we are certainly not perfect, and yes we certainly make a mess sometimes, but I have not doubt in my mind that the world would be worse without both our cultural and military presence.
3
Wow. People doing awful things to other people. In Africa no less. Who knew?
Seriously, as horrible as this is it isn't an issue the U.S. can fix, or should attempt to fix. If the UN is unable to intervene there are three options:
1) rescind aid to the government of South Sudan, which would lead to further humanitarian crises and is actually intervening on behalf of the rebels who have committed their own atrocities
2) intervention by a neighboring state (which one and why?)
3) let the situation play out militarily and politically until there is some sort of resolution.
There is no #4) U.S. military involvement, regardless of how many 'tales of horror' Mr. Kristof documents.
Seriously, as horrible as this is it isn't an issue the U.S. can fix, or should attempt to fix. If the UN is unable to intervene there are three options:
1) rescind aid to the government of South Sudan, which would lead to further humanitarian crises and is actually intervening on behalf of the rebels who have committed their own atrocities
2) intervention by a neighboring state (which one and why?)
3) let the situation play out militarily and politically until there is some sort of resolution.
There is no #4) U.S. military involvement, regardless of how many 'tales of horror' Mr. Kristof documents.
6
Young men are committing the atrocities on men,women and children. They are lured into these military groups with promises of food,clothing, shelter and weapons. Then they are given drugs which help shed any inhibitions about hurting and killing others. The United Nations should not allow this to happen.
4
Galvanized to do what? Some more ineffective and incompetent activities? Military action? Just what. Perhaps we need to learn to mind our own business and leave such things to either the locals or their neighbors. Simply we can't and should not be the policeman of the world.
6
Why are these people not properly armed? If they had US-style 2nd Amendment rights, the fiends that prey on them might think twice. Everyone of these people over the age of 12 should have a side arm.
1
It's hard to understand the most popular comments which suggest that this not our problem.
They say Mr. Kristof is over emotional, he wants a war and other absurd assertions.
What he actually said is "but what is most needed isn’t money but tough, hands-on diplomacy to pressure all sides." which is a very measured response.
We desperately need Mr. Kristof to continue to bring the world's suffering and injustice to our attention. He deserves a peace prize.
Just because other countries are not doing anything doesn't mean it is not our responsibility to act.
They say Mr. Kristof is over emotional, he wants a war and other absurd assertions.
What he actually said is "but what is most needed isn’t money but tough, hands-on diplomacy to pressure all sides." which is a very measured response.
We desperately need Mr. Kristof to continue to bring the world's suffering and injustice to our attention. He deserves a peace prize.
Just because other countries are not doing anything doesn't mean it is not our responsibility to act.
90
The West came to rule (most of) the world, at some point, from superior philosophy. True, superior philosophy led to superior guns. But also superior civilization. It has been fashionable, to consider this view as racist.
Forgetting superior civilization (as it was supposed to be racist), has been most convenient to the world's 2,000 multi-billionaires and other plutocrats. All over Africa, potentates have been given a free hand.
To have the rule of law, one needs an empire of justice.
And that means, force. One could see South Africa violate the International Criminal Court’s mandate to arrest the dictator of Sudan. No force, no sweat.
Refusing the empire of Western civilization has been tantamount to leaving a free rein to plutocracy… In all places which were not civilized enough to start with (so much of South America, South and East Asia have survived, civilizationally speaking as they were either very old civilizations, or long weaned from Europe).
Overall, the refusal of the USA to ratify appartenance to the International Criminal Court has been tantamount to flout the concept of international law. The USA has this in common with Sudan and South Sudan.
So what can Obama do? Not much. As long as the USA implicit admits that very important citizens, or practices of the USA have violated, or are violating, or intent to violate international law, anything the USA does in this respect can be viewed as sheer hypocrisy, and evil exploitation of others’ misery.
Forgetting superior civilization (as it was supposed to be racist), has been most convenient to the world's 2,000 multi-billionaires and other plutocrats. All over Africa, potentates have been given a free hand.
To have the rule of law, one needs an empire of justice.
And that means, force. One could see South Africa violate the International Criminal Court’s mandate to arrest the dictator of Sudan. No force, no sweat.
Refusing the empire of Western civilization has been tantamount to leaving a free rein to plutocracy… In all places which were not civilized enough to start with (so much of South America, South and East Asia have survived, civilizationally speaking as they were either very old civilizations, or long weaned from Europe).
Overall, the refusal of the USA to ratify appartenance to the International Criminal Court has been tantamount to flout the concept of international law. The USA has this in common with Sudan and South Sudan.
So what can Obama do? Not much. As long as the USA implicit admits that very important citizens, or practices of the USA have violated, or are violating, or intent to violate international law, anything the USA does in this respect can be viewed as sheer hypocrisy, and evil exploitation of others’ misery.
3
Mr. Kristoff is a consistent advocate for the poor and downtrodden. It is impossible not to sympathize with the individuals whose mistreatment he highlights. At the same time, the U.S. cannot fix the problems that are rampant in the Middle East, in Africa, in South East Asia, and in parts of Central and South America. We should encourage enlightened governments, and try to exert some pressure on poor or nonexistent governments, but we also cannot place economic sanctions on every country where injustice is rampant. We would be imposing sanctions on half of the world. And since much of the inhumanity resides in developing countries, we would then be criticized for isolating ourselves from those countries. Sometimes you just have to say that the countries must fix themselves. Since American power to impact the rest of the world has limits, it would be interesting if Mr. Kristoff would pick the one or two places he would like to see America take action, rather than in every case of injustice.
5
This country took in more than 60,000 Central Americans illegally crossing our borders in less than 1 year at just one crossing point. We house them, feed, them, educate them, even give them money for hair appointments according to a NYT article. Recently, Obama released these people and gave them work permits. We send in commandos to rescue Yazdizis on a mountaintop. We are fighting an illegal, unauthorized bombing campaign on ISIS to save ME populations. But we can't do anything for Africans facing genocide? Sure we can, but this WH has done absolutely nothing for black Africa.
1
Where are the so-called religious organizations in all of this and the aid organizations like the Red Cross, etc., in this situation. Governments cannot solve all problems but it used to be that faith based concerns got involved in the most horrendous messes in order to save people. Now they seem to be dodging taxes and building one huge edifice after another. Where is Jesus?
4
I can only read one Kristof article a month. The descriptions of man's inhumanity to man are just too wrenching to take in. I do caution Mr. Kristof that in his familiar narrative, which includes asking our country or other nations to get involved that in reality our attempts at national building or for that matter any interventions we have attempted in last few decades reveal the complexities involved in finding a "solution" to the deep dysfunctions of other cultures or countries. That is not to say that we do not try to reduce pain and humiliation, but that may be the extend of what a President or international body are able to accomplish.
6
Kristof is calling for "tough, hands-on diplomacy." Why automatically jump to interpret this as a call for "war" and reject his plea outright?
Diplomacy is something through which the US used to exert power. Now there is little interest. Obama could at least feign interest in this crisis, using US clout to alter events.
Diplomacy is something through which the US used to exert power. Now there is little interest. Obama could at least feign interest in this crisis, using US clout to alter events.
6
What "clout"? We can't even influence things that are in our national interest like in Iran, so what do you think we can do against people such as these.
1
Does one expect the lame-duck president to intervene in what would surely be an unpopular military adventure in Africa? Surely the irony would be lost on no one. Obama used his "People" to get elected twice but according to those I work with, has done very little to nothing to help them. Regardless of who is president, the USA needs to focus on a more equitable distribution of wealth and creation of worthwhile jobs for every level of its society, a society that is increasingly riven by disparities of wealth and class that transcend our ever-more-meaningless racial divisions...
4
Given the poverty, gun violence, voter suppression and ongoing problems with health care, income inequality and racism in this country, I would like those issues to 'galvanize' Obama and not trouble in another faraway country where we would be wasting the lives of our troops. There is an outrageous epidemic of mass murder in the U.S. because of the availability of guns. Enough with being outraged by mass murders in the rest of the world when we can't even protect our kids in their elementary schools!
49
Given the concern you show for what is occurring in the United States, surely you can't be serious by suggesting we ignore the suffering of any group of people anywhere.
Mankind has a responsibility to assist those less fortunate, wherever they are, for to ignore them means ultimately our selectivity will result in such a tremendous disparity, that the long suffering masses will come after us with a vengeance.
We are all on this ship together, with no lifeboats, nowhere to run to, so we had best let those whom we have deliberately kept in steerage onto to the upper decks, and real soon.
Mankind has a responsibility to assist those less fortunate, wherever they are, for to ignore them means ultimately our selectivity will result in such a tremendous disparity, that the long suffering masses will come after us with a vengeance.
We are all on this ship together, with no lifeboats, nowhere to run to, so we had best let those whom we have deliberately kept in steerage onto to the upper decks, and real soon.
15
At least Kristof is not blinded by ideology when it comes to identifying issues in Sudan. He can see the difference between a real problem and those on the liberals' laundry list of complaints.
2
I think we have proven that we're not very good at solving problems like this. We always seem to make them worse. Our own, non-life threatening difficulties seem too hard for exceptional America to solve.
1
One might argue that all borders are artificial, and one would have a point. But some things are more artificial than others.
The borders in Europe are largely the result of centuries of warfare and borders moving back and forth. In Europe, borders correspond with ethnic reality (with few exceptions here and there).
In Africa and the Middle East, colonial officers (French and British) drew lines on a map that hardly correspond with ethnic reality. Many tribes were deliberately cut apart and told that they were now nationals of two, three or sometimes even four countries! And surprise, surprise, it hasn't worked. The legacy of colonial divide-and-rule.
A commonly used argument against redrawing borders (as should be done without further western interference) is that it would cause instability. Well, let's have a look at the situation today, is there stability? I think not. Sudan, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Mali, Central African Republic etc... and in every case there is trouble because one tribe benefitted from the borders drawn, and another did not.
It is quite remarkable that people like Nicholas Kristof seem unable to grasp this simple fact. It should be abundantly clear now that primary allegiance for many people in Africa is tribal, not national.
Local elites are usually installed/supported by the west, to sell resources cheaply to western companies, local people do not benefit at all. The malignant IMF especially guilty of causing this.
The borders in Europe are largely the result of centuries of warfare and borders moving back and forth. In Europe, borders correspond with ethnic reality (with few exceptions here and there).
In Africa and the Middle East, colonial officers (French and British) drew lines on a map that hardly correspond with ethnic reality. Many tribes were deliberately cut apart and told that they were now nationals of two, three or sometimes even four countries! And surprise, surprise, it hasn't worked. The legacy of colonial divide-and-rule.
A commonly used argument against redrawing borders (as should be done without further western interference) is that it would cause instability. Well, let's have a look at the situation today, is there stability? I think not. Sudan, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Mali, Central African Republic etc... and in every case there is trouble because one tribe benefitted from the borders drawn, and another did not.
It is quite remarkable that people like Nicholas Kristof seem unable to grasp this simple fact. It should be abundantly clear now that primary allegiance for many people in Africa is tribal, not national.
Local elites are usually installed/supported by the west, to sell resources cheaply to western companies, local people do not benefit at all. The malignant IMF especially guilty of causing this.
34
But Europe also has had centuries of warfare and brutality, despite borders that you assert correspond with "ethnic reality." No. Borders are just lines on a map, and European colonists are not responsible for borders that Africans now choose to uphold. Besides, the case of South Sudan is the very antithesis of your claims. It is an example of a redrawn border that was designed to correspond to ethnic reality (Arab Muslims in Sudan to the north, Black Christians & animists in South Sudan). Sorry, but It is ethnic rivalry and nationalistic ambition, whether within borders or across borders that produces violence - do you remember the border between Germany and Poland in 1939? - and redrawing of maps is neither the cause nor the solution to violence.
Those elites you speak of are beginning to see how the worldwide inequality will eventually affect them, as people everywhere come to understand how they are nothing more than workhorses for these .01%ters.
It's always been about control of resources, and the only way to keep that control is through subjugation of the masses.
The day of reckoning is fast approaching.
It's always been about control of resources, and the only way to keep that control is through subjugation of the masses.
The day of reckoning is fast approaching.
The other side of the one country-one ethnicity situation is that there are 1500-2000 languages/ethnicities in Africa. Are you suggesting that there should be 1500-2000 countries in Africa and 800 countries on the island of New Guinea, now Papua Province of Indonesia and Papua New Guinea?
1
Shall we now again hear how the US must fix this problem. Will we now here how the Sudenese leaders aren't responsible but we are. Will we now here that the brutality now bein visited on the black residents by the Arab government has nothing to do with race or religion because only White Americans or the Bristish can be accused of racism.
No doubt we will be told the US must fix this. The world wants us to pour ourselves out to fix everything but we cannot do it. Our meddling won't cure a thing if the leaders don't change and the people who support them aren't show up for what they really are. Unfortunately we won't and Obama certainly won't do that.
The devastation of the black residents of Sudan is appalling but no one will grapple with the reasons for it because to do so would be to break the new taboo --no one is guilt unless it's the Americans. Everyone has some grievance and therefore is excused.
No doubt we will be told the US must fix this. The world wants us to pour ourselves out to fix everything but we cannot do it. Our meddling won't cure a thing if the leaders don't change and the people who support them aren't show up for what they really are. Unfortunately we won't and Obama certainly won't do that.
The devastation of the black residents of Sudan is appalling but no one will grapple with the reasons for it because to do so would be to break the new taboo --no one is guilt unless it's the Americans. Everyone has some grievance and therefore is excused.
19
The United States helped to midwife this country into existence and then has not spent resources and energy to help guarantee that these atrocities are mitigated and a stable government emerged. While we cannot be our brother's keeper all over the world, we do have a special obligation here. Please President Obama help recalibrate U.S. priorities regarding South Sudan!
8
It might be a country, but it is not and likely never will be a nation.
Why not be our brother's keeper, until the brother learns to fend for himself.
I'm so sick of hearing that adage; to me it's just another gratuitous cop-out.
Time to put aside differences and opt to help, wherever it's necessary.
I'm so sick of hearing that adage; to me it's just another gratuitous cop-out.
Time to put aside differences and opt to help, wherever it's necessary.
2
We always have a special obligation everywhere. No foreign government no foreign leader in the their world is ever held accountable.
The US needs to tell the countries surrounding the SUDAN THAT HTIS IS THEIR BATTLE.
The US needs to tell the countries surrounding the SUDAN THAT HTIS IS THEIR BATTLE.
When little boys are castrated and are allowed to run around crying until they die of blood loss; it is time for an emergency United Nation military force to intercede and I would expect the USA to help greatly. Do not turn your back on humanity. War is a way of making a "killing" in arm sales by the military industry and a whole bunch of black military projects in all parts of this God forsaken world.
25
Little girls have been being raped for decades in African countries. NOW, when little boys are victimized it is time for UN intervention?
What about the girls who are raped and burned alive?
If the conditions is as bad as this article indicates then we have to do something
It is obvious that we have to use military force.
The question is how much.
This I can't answer but I believe it can be done with few soldiers on the ground if we have limited goals.
We should not go in with the goal of changing their government.
Even if we could we have no right to.
Our goal has to be to protect people who can not protect themselves
I don't know why the government are attacking villages and killing people seemingly for no reason.
This article contains no information on the why
I would like to know the why but no matter what the why is at the very least
we have to create an area where these people can live without fear of attack.
This area can be a a small area and therefore should not need a large military presents especially if we are no threat to their government..
It is obvious that we have to use military force.
The question is how much.
This I can't answer but I believe it can be done with few soldiers on the ground if we have limited goals.
We should not go in with the goal of changing their government.
Even if we could we have no right to.
Our goal has to be to protect people who can not protect themselves
I don't know why the government are attacking villages and killing people seemingly for no reason.
This article contains no information on the why
I would like to know the why but no matter what the why is at the very least
we have to create an area where these people can live without fear of attack.
This area can be a a small area and therefore should not need a large military presents especially if we are no threat to their government..
1
The US created South Sudan, near single-handedly. It was done for two reasons: 1) competition with China for oil that China then controlled; and 2) to get at the government of Sudan that we seemed unable to get any other way.
We created a "new country" where there were none of the makings of a country. All they had was oil in the ground, that in time could pay for a government. But they had nothing for the start of a government, or institutions of any kind.
We created a free-for-all, with oil money for the prize.
A known war criminal running Sudan, armed by a China we just robbed of $25 billion of infrastructure it put into getting that oil, were the major contestants, with little to oppose them.
To oppose them we tried nation building. That always seems to work out just like it did this time.
We sent them whole unit sets of everything needed by an army, we got from Ukraine, selling off its old Soviet Army unit sets. Ukraine can't use them well now, and the rabble we gather up to present with that in South Sudan even less so.
As Kristof says here, the US created this. What Kristof does not say is the the US nation building project of South Sudan was ours alone, and this mess is our alone. This is all how our bright idea turned out.
We created a "new country" where there were none of the makings of a country. All they had was oil in the ground, that in time could pay for a government. But they had nothing for the start of a government, or institutions of any kind.
We created a free-for-all, with oil money for the prize.
A known war criminal running Sudan, armed by a China we just robbed of $25 billion of infrastructure it put into getting that oil, were the major contestants, with little to oppose them.
To oppose them we tried nation building. That always seems to work out just like it did this time.
We sent them whole unit sets of everything needed by an army, we got from Ukraine, selling off its old Soviet Army unit sets. Ukraine can't use them well now, and the rabble we gather up to present with that in South Sudan even less so.
As Kristof says here, the US created this. What Kristof does not say is the the US nation building project of South Sudan was ours alone, and this mess is our alone. This is all how our bright idea turned out.
39
There is absolutely no sense in which the "US created this," or that the "US nation building project of South Sudan was ours alone."
South Sudan fought a decades-long civil war against Sudan. It's not like the US had to trump up a lot of grievances in order to cause them to fight. It shows appalling ignorance not to recognize the substantial causes the South Sudanese had in seeking independence--certainly not just oil wealth, or whatever boilerplate conspiracy theory you want to peddle.
The US provided some training to leaders of South Sudan. The US has recognized the current government, and US presidents have worked with Salva Kiir. That's it. On the other hand, in a piece of moral confusion the US can legitimately be blamed for, it also provided northern Sudan with arms in the 1970s to combat Ethiopia, which was almost certainly bad for South Sudanese liberation.
I mean, seriously, when does the desire to criticize America become apologetics for Sudan?
South Sudan fought a decades-long civil war against Sudan. It's not like the US had to trump up a lot of grievances in order to cause them to fight. It shows appalling ignorance not to recognize the substantial causes the South Sudanese had in seeking independence--certainly not just oil wealth, or whatever boilerplate conspiracy theory you want to peddle.
The US provided some training to leaders of South Sudan. The US has recognized the current government, and US presidents have worked with Salva Kiir. That's it. On the other hand, in a piece of moral confusion the US can legitimately be blamed for, it also provided northern Sudan with arms in the 1970s to combat Ethiopia, which was almost certainly bad for South Sudanese liberation.
I mean, seriously, when does the desire to criticize America become apologetics for Sudan?
7
All neoconservative nation building projects are catastrophic failures. As always, the common theme is oil. Neoconservatives, their favorite corporations and the local elites benefit, everyone else suffers because of neoconservative greed and arrogance. You'd think that trying to prop up the failed state that is Iraq should have taught them a lesson, but instead it told them to try again, with Jebbie.
Vote Jeb = vote war for oil.
Vote Jeb = vote war for oil.
3
Perhaps you found the error we were involved in this country when we should have not been. Correct the error by allowing them to settle their own affairs.
2
The United States must not be urged into continuing a role as a global policeman. The United States, in the final analysis, is not wanted and that is demonstrated by Iraq and Afghanistan and the United States is ineffective which again is demonstrated by Iraq, Afghanistan and the destabilization of the Middle East. Should Mr. Kristof, whose work is admirable, care to look to the United States he could find, if not the horrific violence and crimes against humanity, needs at home that should be fought in preference to once again looking outward while rotting at home.
8
we can do more than one thing at a time. i don't buy your "ignore the problems out there because we are rotting at home" take. Wall Street is thumping along and the rich in this country are getting richer all the time. it is both arrogant and heartless to suggest that Mr. Kristoff could do better by not covering this kind of brutality (wherever it may occur), and simply keep his attention here at home. the state sponsored brutality of the kind mentioned in this article is a global humanitarian issue that deserves more focused attention, as Mr. Kristoff strongly suggests.
2
It is easy to be horrified. Outrage is cheap when you are talking about castrated children. But before we intervene - if we intervene - we must understand what is going on and most importantly, why. People always act for a reason, and this reason is the product of a specific history, which may be opaque to outsiders but is very real and urgent to those who are caught in it. Mr. Kristof describes the warring sides as "tribes" as if it were a sufficient explanation for the atrocities but this is just a cheap stereotype. Were the North and the South in the Civil War "tribes"? Of course not; and neither were the Tutsi and the Hutu of Rwanda. There was a complicated political and social history behind the Rwandan genocide and once you learn about it, you realize that shutting down the anti-Tutsi propaganda machine before the outbreak would have been a much more efficient way to prevent mass murder than sending in the troops. Before I react with the predictable hand-wringing, I want to know why the people of South Sudan are killing each other. Without such knowledge, emotions are worthless.
25
a cold take by a self styled emotion-deprived intellectual. why isn't "warring tribes" sufficient to explain what happened to the people in Mr. Kristoff's article? it's his story and he conducted the interviews, perhaps you could appreciate the reporting you get and show this journalist a little more respect instead of lecturing us with your supposedly accurate view of things from on high.
1
Getting involved in other's civil wars is always tricky business. Somalia, Vietnam.
The answe always is the people of ......are killing each other because the US is bad. That is as far as the analysis goes. We never grapple with the religious and race and tribal hatred that fuels these wars. We always say something bad is happening.. It must be the AMERICANS FAULT. They must fix it. More money, more troops, more outrage at the US. Send their leaders to Paris or Gemeva to sit and talk about how the US needs to fix it.
It's infuriating and frustrating. It's down right foolish and people are dying because no one will tell these men..no more excuses. The gravey train ends now. We cannot change a country from the outside the people need to want it.
We need to fix ourselves. We are in need of some nation building right here.
It's infuriating and frustrating. It's down right foolish and people are dying because no one will tell these men..no more excuses. The gravey train ends now. We cannot change a country from the outside the people need to want it.
We need to fix ourselves. We are in need of some nation building right here.
What to do with barbarians trying to be barbarian, after first not letting them into your own country? A civilized culture will want to try to stop the horrors such as Mr. Kristof reports. There needs to be a world police force and benevolent service that has a charter not subject to the interferences that the UN faces. A good first would be trying the senior members of the Bush administration for the millions of people killed with the excuse of weapons of mass destruction. And at the same it should deal with the barbarian actions in areas such as South Sudan.
11
Mobilize Obama surely you jest. Unless there were votes attached to it you don't stand a chance - and if there were votes it would still only be 50/50.
5
No big donors, no big action. No legacy, no action. It's pretty clear how Obama operates.
3
I cannot believe how much some people hate President Obama. Have you ever read anything about the man other than conservative propaganda? Somehow I doubt it.
5
Mans inhumanity to man. We obviously cannot attempt to right all wrongs. One can argue that many of our 'rights' are another's 'wrongs'. What we can do is to set a good example. Something that we have been especially poor at lately. Invading countries to 'prevent' war, killing by drone with no legal license, etc. Maybe we should stop being the world's arms supplier and beat a few swords into plow shares. I am at a loss to defend the actions of this country let alone attempt to criticize another. Take it to the world court and united nations. We should not be the world's policeman.
14
This is awful. Why, oh why, are we so murderous with each other? And if not directly, indirectly, by our complicit silence. One would hope that Obama do what is in his power to control. Soldier's atrocities are legion in that region, but there must be orders from above, plus what impunity's 'safety' does confer.
5
America should not start another war on a new frontier especially when we are clueless about other world societies and peoples. One Iraq was more than enough. We are still fighting there not recognizing friend from foe. We are far from being a paragon of virtue bringing down elected governments and installing and nurturing snakes who prey on their own people. The vicious Salva Kiir happens to be one of them. It's time we just stopped interfering in a another country's affairs. We don't help but only make matters horrendous. If we really want to help those helpless, hopeless Sudanese we should stay clear and stealthily behead the snake à la Osama. And as the head goes so dies the snake and it's minions. But please, let's not get into a misadventure. For humans and humanity are on an all time low.
15
Mr. Kristof:
terrific reporting from very near to the bottom of horrific in-human
behaviors anywhere in the world.
such conditions demand the response "Do Something"
to attempt to shut these repetitive massacres down.
however,
having just stated the obvious,
what exactly is the "something" part that anyone can do?
well-armed tribes vowing to destroy each other with
seeming impunity leave 'outsiders' with very few
actual, working options.
other news agencies have repeatedly reported that
neither "side" has any interest whatsoever in ceasing
hostilities.
what then?
blockade the flow of arms from getting into the country?
really?
at what cost?
and then what?
the genocide in Rwanda only ended when one tribe
destroyed the other.
this is a very pessimistic set of statements to make,
but the conditions and circumstances that you and others
have described leaves us shaking our collective heads in
dismay.
further,
the UN is attempting to shelter, feed, and medically
care for more than 2 Million displaced persons from both of the
major, warring tribes in separate camps.
in addition,
more than 600,000 displaced persons are in
South Sudan as refugees from neighboring countries.
and these "numbers" are more than 6-months old,
surely more are now in need.
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/4e43cb466.html
this pit is huge, overwhelming in its complexity and,
sadly,
without substantial efforts from many outside countries,
these fires may have to burn themselves out.
grrrrrrrr
17
This is a global, not an American issue. Because he doesn't have enough on his plate for the moment, President Obama might spearhead some coalition-building to address the unspeakable atrocities unfolding in South Sudan. Perhaps Europe could help if it weren't frittering away its own future with the futile spectacle of self-destructive posturing with Greece.
There exists a dark carcinoma in the soul of human existence. It proves so hard to keep it raging outside the gate of human decency.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
There exists a dark carcinoma in the soul of human existence. It proves so hard to keep it raging outside the gate of human decency.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
30
How to arrest the cycles of violence and how to produce a stable and inclusive government -- if we had figured this out for Iraq, then I would start thinking about whether that template could be applied to South Sudan. I've often wondered whether religious differences in places like Iraq are more of a red herring Westerners get hung up on, and whether it's more the case that we really don't understand tribal dynamics well enough and don't focus on them enough, that we just assume, for our own reasons, that nation state issues are the correct structure to put our attention to and through which resolution will come.
17
"..how to produce a stable and inclusive government --"
Too bad our own nation is becoming:
1. more and more unstable as we militarize our local police and vote in politicians who choose to do nothing but support their billionaire donors
2. less and less inclusive as the 1% is allowed to steal more and more money and opportunity from the rest of us.
Lets clean up our own mess, and take care of our own people before we are so arrogant as to think we can take on the rest of the world.
Perhaps Mr Kristof should spend less time touring and viewing the unfortunate and use his money to personally take in , house, feed and educate one or more of those his heart is bleeding for.
Too bad our own nation is becoming:
1. more and more unstable as we militarize our local police and vote in politicians who choose to do nothing but support their billionaire donors
2. less and less inclusive as the 1% is allowed to steal more and more money and opportunity from the rest of us.
Lets clean up our own mess, and take care of our own people before we are so arrogant as to think we can take on the rest of the world.
Perhaps Mr Kristof should spend less time touring and viewing the unfortunate and use his money to personally take in , house, feed and educate one or more of those his heart is bleeding for.
6
@Diana
I appreciate the term "tribal dynamics" and wonder, as you appear to, if we aren't expecting the rest of the world to view circumstances and events through the same geopolitical lens as we do. Of course, in the prevailing atmosphere of toxic political discourse, reasonable alternatives are frequently derided as "cultural relativism," implying that understanding how peoples and cultures view their own problems and situations should be a bad thing.
I appreciate the term "tribal dynamics" and wonder, as you appear to, if we aren't expecting the rest of the world to view circumstances and events through the same geopolitical lens as we do. Of course, in the prevailing atmosphere of toxic political discourse, reasonable alternatives are frequently derided as "cultural relativism," implying that understanding how peoples and cultures view their own problems and situations should be a bad thing.
Iraq isn't a nation, that was always the problem. As it is also with Syria, Libya etc... these artificial constructs will never be nations, and can only be ruled via dictatorship.
Mr. Kristoff is an overly emotional individual who lets his heart make all the decisions. He suggests that Mr. Obama should launch a war to stop atrocities in the South Sudan.
It would be a great idea if we already didn’t have an existing track record of us launching the foreign wars for seven decades and never managing to end the atrocities or stop the conflicts.
The proper line of thinking is that we should not get involved because the other African nations are better positioned to intervene and stop the conflict.
If the rest of Africa cannot get together and agree to the common action to stop suffering of the civilians, it means something’s wrong with all those governments.
The unfortunate conclusion is that we are not powerful enough to reform the entire African continent.
It means it has to be done by the African nations and that we should not get involved. Those countries have to learn how to work together and should have the shared vision of the future for their continent.
We cannot and should not to their homework for them. It’s always counterproductive as we already learned in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria…
It would be a great idea if we already didn’t have an existing track record of us launching the foreign wars for seven decades and never managing to end the atrocities or stop the conflicts.
The proper line of thinking is that we should not get involved because the other African nations are better positioned to intervene and stop the conflict.
If the rest of Africa cannot get together and agree to the common action to stop suffering of the civilians, it means something’s wrong with all those governments.
The unfortunate conclusion is that we are not powerful enough to reform the entire African continent.
It means it has to be done by the African nations and that we should not get involved. Those countries have to learn how to work together and should have the shared vision of the future for their continent.
We cannot and should not to their homework for them. It’s always counterproductive as we already learned in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria…
71
Exactly. Where are the rich Arab nations? Why can't they intervene with aid, and defense? Surely Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Dubai can afford to do something in the Sudan? Actually, they don't care; they are busy exploiting poverty stricken Indonesians to build high rises. None of the African nations care. We keep caring, and now we are without enough funds to keep our young people in college, or to keep our people healthy, or fed. We have children in inner cities digging through dumpsters for food and scraps. We have jobless youth in abandoned inner cities. I really do not care to get involved with the Sudan. I do want us to get involved with our domestic problems; I do want us to provide jobs by rebuilding and repairing our infrastructure; I do want us to have a Single Payer health system; I do want to end the plutocracy which now runs the U.S. Congress. That is a lot right there, and it is here at home!!
56
Where did Kristoff say the US should launch a war? He spoke of targeted sanctions and "hands=on-diplomacy to pressure all sides." Furthermore, he says teh US should "work closely with Kenya, Uganada, and Ethiopia" to accomplish these things.
The fact that this is the most recommended comment makes me wonder how many people even bothered to read Kristoff's column!
The fact that this is the most recommended comment makes me wonder how many people even bothered to read Kristoff's column!
22
Mr. Kristoff is not advocating US military intervention in South Sudan. It is obvious to anyone who is paying any attention by now that such interventions solve nothing. What he is asking is for the US and the rest of the world to do what it can to apply pressure on the leaders of various factions to reduce and eventually end a cycle of violence that benefits no one. There are atrocities going on in many places in the world. It is beyond the US power to stop them but neither should the US and other countries close their eyes and pretend nothing can be done. It takes patience and willingness to learn how to make a difference.
7
Obama and his team have--for years-- been aware of the nightmarish horrors going on in Sudan and they have chosen to turn a "blind eye" and to look away from the humanitarian cataclysm that is much of Sudan.
To suggest that an on the ground trip is required to "galvanize" a man who has known for years exactly what is happening is to strain all credulity and common sense.
Mr. Kristof is weaving a didactic and tendentious question and answer echo chamber series of thoughts and declarative statements into the piece.
Simply stated--Obama the supposed great has done nothing to help Sudan and a much hyped photo op trip is supposed to be another effort to garner another phony Nobel Peace Prize for Obama.
To suggest that an on the ground trip is required to "galvanize" a man who has known for years exactly what is happening is to strain all credulity and common sense.
Mr. Kristof is weaving a didactic and tendentious question and answer echo chamber series of thoughts and declarative statements into the piece.
Simply stated--Obama the supposed great has done nothing to help Sudan and a much hyped photo op trip is supposed to be another effort to garner another phony Nobel Peace Prize for Obama.
10
"Mr. Kristof is weaving a didactic and tendentious question and answer echo chamber series of thoughts and declarative statements into the piece."
What say?
"Simply stated--Obama the supposed great has done nothing to help Sudan and a much hyped photo op trip is supposed to be another effort to garner another phony Nobel Peace Prize for Obama.
Uh? Okay. And now what did you wish to say?
What say?
"Simply stated--Obama the supposed great has done nothing to help Sudan and a much hyped photo op trip is supposed to be another effort to garner another phony Nobel Peace Prize for Obama.
Uh? Okay. And now what did you wish to say?
1
Maybe we can get George W to fix the mess, after his tremendous success in Iraq? /sarc
1
Kristof is asking a president and government busy aiding in the destruction of Yemen and starving its people with a blockade to suddenly find something to horrify them in S. Sudan?
Enough with these interventions and wars. The US military is not a force for good and cannot save these poor people.
Enough with these interventions and wars. The US military is not a force for good and cannot save these poor people.
47
a sad stories unfolds the reality of the inability of the united nations and the all the world governments to prevent such atrocities. we need to interfere in every possible way in order to make south sudan is a model of success of the birth of a new nation for the world to watch and emulate..
6
We would have to take the country over. Kick out or kill everyone that won't cooperate and then run it as a wholly owned subsidiary. We are not going to do that. We are not willing to and in the last analysis we cannot. The people in these regions must resolve these things. We have tired and we cannot.
1
Good luck with that. Its like ordering Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz to form a political party and to get them to broadly agree on 95% of the issues. Why do people refuse to understand this artificial construct South Sudan isn't and never will be a nation?
1
Of course this issue is historically and morally complex, and it's hard to get the full picture of WHY the Dinkas are killing infants and gang raping children. And I understand the desire to keep America out of yet another foreign conflict, but,
what I want to know is this:
Hypothetically, if one knew that Obama's spending even half a day in South Sudan, or making one speech on the topic, would save the life of ONE Nuer child who would otherwise be castrated and allowed to bleed to death, do you think you would protest his, (and the US's) "getting involved"???
That's how I think about this. Forget trying to fix a failed state for a second and think SMALL picture, how many lives can be saved by people simply spurred on to contribute in some way by hearing Obama's voice on the subject. I think it's our duty as HUMANS to think on the scale of helping other humans and not just throw our hands up and say 'not our problem'. It IS.
Now I'm going to go and figure out what I can do to help.