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

Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 211 posts

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#81

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ch4s3 wrote: post #71
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> plenty of flat sand to park aircraft on Then someone else parks there. Barring a Saudi takeover of Qatar, we’re stuck there to keep the Russians and Chinese out.

Qatar already deals with Iran and Russia by proxy. Qatar’s largest trading partner now is China and Qatar supports the one China policy.

> Qatar already deals with Iran and Russia by proxy

So does the UAE. They’ve played their game well.

It doesn’t mean we need to be their staunch defenders. But it’s in our government’s interest to not piss them off for no gain. And we’re not in a place in America where foreign policy swings power.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#82

Post by JumpCrisscross »

MangoToupe wrote: post #76
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What we have to do is keep the Emirates onside with Israel and onside against Iran This is so incredibly dumb. The UAE is a spigot of oil and money. (Secondarily, a massive buyer of American goods, services, weapons and financial assets.) Sudan isn’t on our to-do list because it doesn’t directly affect American voters. Oil prices and capital do.

I don't understand what you find dumb. Can you explain what you're disagreeing with? Do you think the money that the UAE offer precludes all other incentives to ignore mass slaughter? Surely by this metric we would be more allied with Venezuela than Israel. Or, perhaps, you have not fully articulated yourself.

It’s dumb to frame every foreign policy issue through Israel. It’s simple. It will get views. But it’s dumb.

> Do you think the money that the UAE offer precludes all other incentives to ignore mass slaughter?

Precludes? No. Politically balanced. Absolutely. You’re not going to win votes promising higher oil prices and stalled construction projects to plant a moral flag in Africa so the guys backed by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey win. Abu Dhabi is more than just geopolitically convenient.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#83

Post by RobotToaster »

card_zero wrote: post #36
exe34 wrote: post #31

I'm constantly impressed that we are a civilisation that can look down from space and see this kind of barbarism.

"Visible from space" used to mean "by astronauts". If high-resolution sensors are allowed, then the term applies to things like a tree and a car, and doesn't signify much. Well, maybe it signifies that nobody wants to go and take photos in person.

> Well, maybe it signifies that nobody wants to go and take photos in person.

I'd happily do it if someone pays for my ticket

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#84

Post by MangoToupe »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #82
MangoToupe wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you find dumb. Can you explain what you're disagreeing with? Do you think the money that the UAE offer precludes all other incentives to ignore mass slaughter? Surely by this metric we would be more allied with Venezuela than Israel. Or, perhaps, you have not fully articulated yourself.

It’s dumb to frame every foreign policy issue through Israel. It’s simple. It will get views. But it’s dumb. > Do you think the money that the UAE offer precludes all other incentives to ignore mass slaughter? Precludes? No. Politically balanced. Absolutely. You’re not going to win votes promising higher oil prices and stalled construction projects to plant a moral flag in Africa so the guys backed by Iran, Saudi Ara…

> It’s dumb to frame every foreign policy issue through Israel. It’s simple. It will get views. But it’s dumb.

Why? I get nothing from views, and much of our foreign policy is based around Israel, which serves the needs of our state in almost uncountable ways. Is it not just as dumb to ignore this? Acting as if our relationships with foreign countries appear in a vacuum seems.... absurd, to put it charitably.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#85

Post by ch4s3 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #81
ch4s3 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qatar already deals with Iran and Russia by proxy. Qatar’s largest trading partner now is China and Qatar supports the one China policy.

> Qatar already deals with Iran and Russia by proxy So does the UAE. They’ve played their game well. It doesn’t mean we need to be their staunch defenders. But it’s in our government’s interest to not piss them off for no gain. And we’re not in a place in America where foreign policy swings power.

We should wash our hands of both places and their petty feud. They offer us nothing but problems and moral stain by association.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#86

Post by casey2 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #43
jmyeet wrote: post #30

As always, conflicts are much easier to understand when viewed through the lens of materialism. Factors such as ethnicity or religion are never the reason for these conflicts. Those are simply the excuse. It’s what’s used to fuel the fire. The heart of this conflict is Sudan’s gold that’s laundered via Dubai then Switzerland. The culpability of Western powers including the US cannot be ignored either. The RSF is supp…

> Factors such as ethnicity or religion are never the reason for these conflicts Economics motivates. But these divisions dominate in determining magnitude. You don’t need genocide to control mines, farms and oil fields. (You need labour.) The dial turns from enslavement to extermination when there is deep-rooted fury. That sort of fury can really only be channeled on divisions of race and religion. (You need a way f…

So Arabs fly planes into the world trade center, commit mass genocide at darfur and are still support this dude and his band of thugs with their colonialist rape of Africa?

The US could drop a nuke on UAE and tell them to stop funding colonialist expansion. The war against evil is never ending playing nice is a fools game.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#87

Post by ngruhn »

MangoToupe wrote: post #78
inshard wrote: post #69

[flagged]

It's worth noting there are islamists on both side. Anyone who characterizes this as purely religious or ethnic has a bridge to sell. This conflict would have died years ago if it weren't for foreign actors putting their hands up Sudan's ass

The number of violent conflicts initiated by various islamist groups is insane [1]. There is something wrong here that goes beyond funding. It's possible to acknowledge that without being islamophobic.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflict...

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#89

Post by scythe »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #44
shmageggy wrote: post #4

> ...the United Arab Emirates (UAE) accused of backing the RSF with supplies and mercenaries... And also helping to launder Hemedti's gold via Dubai. https://globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/conflict-resources/ex...

China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Turkey, (EDIT: the UK, indirectly) and Egypt have each also supplied weapons into this conflict [1]. Presumably due to Sudan’s position on the Red Sea. (China and the UAE seem to be alone in supplying the RSF, though.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudanese_civil_war_(2023%E2%80...

The other complication is the surprising contributions of various African countries. Ethiopia had supported the RSF until 2024, and Kenya hosted an RSF conference in Feb 2025. Haftar in Libya supported RSF before the war, but may have changed positions as his Russian backers turned against the RSF in 2024. The RSF also has some ties to rebels in South Sudan as well as in Chad. Chad in particular gave shelter to the RSF at the behest of the UAE, but has also seized arms shipments that were intended for the RSF. Russia as noted was sympathetic to the RSF until mid-2024, when they switched sides.

When the war initially broke out, some articles in The Economist seemed somewhat agnostic between the two sides, noting that both had serious corruption issues and had committed many abuses. But as the war has progressed, the RSF seems to have revealed itself to be the far more vicious faction, and the red E along with the rest of the Western media now sees their advances as a tragedy. Unfortunately, the one constant here is the general failure of foresight among nearly all countries of the global North (whether aligned with the West or Russia) getting involved in Africa. If the brutality of the RSF had been better anticipated in 2023, the current situation might have been prevented.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#90

Post by kjs3 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #54
hulitu wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot US and UK.

I didn’t know British weapons made it to the RSF. Wow. Have American weapons been used in the war?

It would be very strange if American weapons weren't used in a conflict this big, which is a very different question from "did the US government sell weapons into this war".
Post reply on HN