Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

respublica.media

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 213 posts

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#121

Post by dist-epoch »

csense wrote: post #47

Let's be honest. If someone did send in the troops to restore order, people would be screaming "How dare you invade a sovereign country" or "You're only doing this because you want oil" or "The President wants to make Sudan the 51st state" or "You're wasting money and soldiers' lives messing around in a place most of us can't even put on a map" or "You're just doing whatever the Jews tell you to do."

Exactly this, the same "The Guardian" that routinely complains that any western/US military intervention in Africa is "western colonialism" is now begging for western/US military intervention.

Typical example:

> Colonialism in Africa is still alive and well

> Today’s waves of migration are a direct result of Britain’s disastrous intervention in the ousting and killing of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

> The current situation is down to the failure of western powers, particularly the US and British governments, who feel they’re the custodians of almighty power and believed could do as they wished in Africa without any blowback.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/01/colonialism-in...

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#122

Post by nradov »

LightBug1 wrote: post #106
nradov wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which international peacekeepers? They have to come from somewhere. How would they be armed? Would they have artillery and air support or small arms only? What would the rules of engagement be?

What do you think international peacekeepers means? Where do you think they've come from before? How do you think they've been armed before? What have the rules of engagement in previous peacekeeping missions been? I notice you skipped the piece about pressuring the key players, which is much closer to a solution than what you chose to focus on. Any more questions? Because that seems to be all you have. Pop over to C…

What a silly, low-effort comment. It's always sad to see that level of arrogant ignorance on HN.

There haven't been many examples of international peacekeepers imposing peace by force. In the few cases where peacekeeping missions sort of worked usually the warring parties already had some sort of truce or at least the major fighting had stopped. Where there was no peace to keep, the international peacekeepers have been ineffective. Sometimes they even ended up becoming victims themselves due to restrictive RoE and lack of firepower.

The reality is that only the USA and maybe France has the expeditionary military capability including tactical air power necessary to execute a mission like this. No other country is in a position to even try. And I wouldn't want to see American lives wasted trying to impose peace in Sudan.

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#123

Post by yostrovs »

SadTrombone wrote: post #100
csense wrote: post #47

Let's be honest. If someone did send in the troops to restore order, people would be screaming "How dare you invade a sovereign country" or "You're only doing this because you want oil" or "The President wants to make Sudan the 51st state" or "You're wasting money and soldiers' lives messing around in a place most of us can't even put on a map" or "You're just doing whatever the Jews tell you to do."

There are other countries and coalitions in the world that aren't the United States. Humanity fought and ended wars for thousands of years before the United States ever existed.

Most of the countries and coalitions you're alluding to have no functional militaries or actual interest in doing something about the war. They do strongly condemn.

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#124

Post by anovikov »

tovej wrote: post #53
WarmWash wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you will be held as responsible for exploiting the country if you do actually manage to end the conflict and bring about positive economic change. People don't understand that it takes generations to train a populace to work in a functioning economy. Sudan would probably need 25 years of colonization before you had competent Sudanese to run all parts of a modern economy. You can't just go in, stop the fighting, a…

Are you under the impression that Sudan was not under British colonial rule for ~50-60 years? This completely wrecked their economy and political structures, with the British intentionally causing divides between ethnic groups in Sudan and Egypt. And are you seriously claiming that this was a good thing? Is this some crazy new neo-conservative take about the West being the only block that can be "civilized"?

Sudan was under British rule and Cyprus was under British rule at the same time. Outcome is vastly different. The Brits brought civilisation and made Cyprus what it is, enabling its current prosperity (only difference between Cyprus and Greece is that Cyprus was a British colony and Greece wasn't). Somehow it didn't happen in Sudan.

And no it's not because they handled locals differently. They didn't care about locals. Colonialism is about exploiting territory, not population - locals, for colonialists, just "happen to be there" and are usually an obstacle or annoyance rather than a resource to exploit.

Maybe it's because locals were different.

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#125

Post by [deleted] »

goodcanadian wrote: post #37

I feel like I have seen better analysis of this elsewhere. In a nutshell, it is not simply a civil war. Regional actors are involved as a proxy war: Saudi Arabia against the UAE, for example (who are also having a proxy war in Yemen). And Egypt against Ethiopia. The wikipedia article covers some of the complexity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudanese_civil_war_(2023%E2%80... EDIT: This is what I am thinking of: htt…

[deleted]

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#126

Post by steinwinde »

voodooEntity wrote: post #88
jvanderbot wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's overly cynical. Donating to local warlords / psuedogovernment actors can be sketchy. Donating to e.g., UNICEF is much more likely to produce good results for refugees, especially children and mothers. I'm not aware of where to send money to stop wars - it's likely to have the opposite effect, sadly.

Even donations to organisations such as UNICEF often end up in the wrong hands. Lets go for the optimistic scenario in which UNICEF will only take a very small portion for the "processing" and really deliver lets say food and medical supplies to the region. Those warloard will simply come and take it away from those citizens and provide to their armies. Theres nothing those citizens can do against it. Do i wish it wo…

I'm a member of an organization that collects money for Sudanese soup kitchens and hospitals in affected areas (https://sound-of-sudan.org/) , and I know a few other organizations that indirectly support such campaigns (e.g. https://sudfa-media.com/). Being personally acquainted with people, who spend much of their time, energy and last-but-not-least their own money on such activities, your claim makes me slightly angry.

> such regions the most money will be "lost" halfway

Please elaborate and don't lump all "regions" in with each other. My personal impression is that the combination of the community kitchen movement (which has its roots in the failed Sudanese revolution) and money transfers to mobile phones makes it relatively transparent where one's money goes and what it achieves. I'm not in the US, but I have no doubt that money donated to an organization like the Sudanese American Medical Association (https://sama-sd.org/about-us/finances/) largely reaches the people that need it.

> Those warloard will simply come and take it away from those citizens and provide to their armies.

I can assure you none of use would send money to hospitals or community kitchens, if this was likely to happen. What makes you think so?

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#127

Post by newspaper1 »

yostrovs wrote: post #116
goodcanadian wrote: post #37

I feel like I have seen better analysis of this elsewhere. In a nutshell, it is not simply a civil war. Regional actors are involved as a proxy war: Saudi Arabia against the UAE, for example (who are also having a proxy war in Yemen). And Egypt against Ethiopia. The wikipedia article covers some of the complexity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudanese_civil_war_(2023%E2%80... EDIT: This is what I am thinking of: htt…

This war is not even known about by the general public. The question is why not? I believe the actors of the war nobody hates or loves outside of Africa. Nobody knows them. If it would be Americans, Chinese, Israelis, or Russians involved, the war would be in the news.

“The world” is very complicit in supporting Israel’s genocide. It also has effects like stripping the rights of citizens in countries whose governments support Israel. That’s why people care.

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#128

Post by nixon_why69 »

ResPublica wrote: post #111
goodcanadian wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not covered in anywhere the same level of detail, in my opinion.

I appreciate your feedback and understand your criticism. I'll be sure to add more detail in future analyses. My main goal was to draw attention to this matter.

I almost commented before realizing I hadn't RTFA and deleting my draft in shame.

Having read it, how are UAE and the Saudis opposing each other in this proxy war while being nearly joined at the hip in their actual neighborhood? Your article was informative and I learned from reading it but this whole dynamic still makes zero sense to me. They don't talk? Maybe it makes zero sense to anyone.

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#129

Post by notabotiswear »

tovej wrote: post #9
testdelacc1 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are large groups of people have very strongly negative opinions about one side or the other in Israel-Palestine. Only a tiny fraction of people in Europe or North America could point to Sudan on the map. And even fewer could explain the differences between the factions involved. There’s no simple good-guys-vs-bad-guys rhetoric that’s easy to join.

I mean, the RSF is very clearly the bad guys in this conflict. The reason there is no coverage is that there is widespread agreement on this point, and western govts aren't directly funding the bad guys as is the case with Israel.

Both side are the “bad side.” The RSF just wins the award of being the “worst.”

Re: The abandoned war: Why no one is stopping the genocide in Sudan

#130

Post by 4gotunameagain »

boxed wrote: post #45
4gotunameagain wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

In the Spanish colonies they speak Spanish. In the Portuguese colonies they speak Portuguese. In the __BLANK__ colonies they speak Hewbrew. Fill in the blank.

Hew brew, as you spell it, is a resurrected language. It was extinct. It was resurrected solely as a tool for jewish nationalism.
Post reply on HN