I heard an interview on NPR this morning with the authors of a new book called "Not On Our Watch," a book about the crisis in Darfur and the hundreds of thousands of people who are being killed.
I can't even conceive of hundreds of thousands of people being killed. It makes me so sad...and helpless because being here in the U.S. I feel so far removed from the situation. A couple of thousand people dying on the other side of the country in 2001 is as close as I can relate. It's crazy.
It moved me to take at least a little bit of action, do what I can, I guess. I signed an online petition to try to get the US government to make helping these people a higher priority, and I'm posting this blog; I guess that's a start. Here are some links to click if you have the time...
Learn about what's happening in Darfur
Sign a petition to get more aid to the now homeless (over a million)
Listen to the NPR Interview and read an excerpt from the new book
From the interview:
"If U.S. citizens can make enough noise to press their government to do
what's right, then we will have saved literally tens, perhaps hundreds
of thousands of lives in Darfur," Prendergast says.
Mucholove...-m@
13 comments:
I won't try to get too political, but I think that the many crises we have here in the States should be dealt with first. With the continuing threat of domestic terrorism, the problems with more American jobs being taken out of country, such as the Hershey Chocolate plant in Oakdale, CA being shut down and the operation being moved to Mexico, (It could be any business sending jobs out to any other country.) Drugs, school shootings, abortions, human slave trafficking...I could name many, many different reasons why we ought to clean up our back yard before we clean up the yards of our neighbors and friends. I could also go on, without drawing party lines, about how the United States is losing its power as a major governmental and economic force.
Please don't think I am unkind and not feeling the pain of those poor souls in Darfur, or elsewhere, that has it so much worse than we do in this country. I am wanting to help those that are in want and need, but in order to help others improve, we need to set a better example as a nation by cleaning up our act first. To do that, ( I am not tooting my own horn here), I donate to local non-profit educational and service organizations, and volunteer my time to serve my city emergency services organizations as a registered disaster worker. I do what I can to make a dent in the socio-economic problems that are hitting close to home. It starts with the children in my community, and hopefully is carried on and spread by them, thus propagating throughout our country, eventually getting those necessary "repairs and other yard cleanups" happening to improve our country enough to diligently and faithfully be able to fully assist those in countries like Darfur.
On a parallel subject, the National Guard is supposed to be utilized for defense within the borders of the United States instead of being sent overseas. This includes local disasters, riots, wildland fires to name a few. I think it has made us more vulnerable as a nation to not have the full strength of our home defense forces.
Here are some statistics and conclusions about a subject that really has me worried. If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theatre of operations during the last 22 months, and a total of 2,112 deaths,(when this was written) that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.
The firearm death rate in Washington D. C. is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period.
That means that you are about 25% more likely to be shot and killed in the U. S. Capitol, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, than you are in Iraq.
Conclusion:
The U.S. should pull out of Washington D.C. !!!!
PASS THIS ON and ON 'cuz CNN won't!
NOTE: The excerpt above is from a message I received, and can be viewed by my relatives very soon on the private family blog. Email me if you would like me to forward the full content of the message. kd6pct@hotmail.com
Yeah, well, I guess it just depends on your perspective. If you view yourself as a citizen primarily of your nation and view that as your only realm of responsibility, then you will support your country and its citizens and let what happens happen in the rest of the world.
If you view yourself as a citizen of humankind, however, than what happens to any human being will be of concern to you.
I am the type of Christian who believes that one of the major things Jesus was trying to teach others was that God wants us to treat all human beings as our brothers and sisters -- not just those who happen to live in the same country that we do. Jesus continually crossed social and political lines to help those who were sick and dying; that's why the "gentiles," (those who were not a citizen of the Jewish Nation) received his healing and his message of love at all.
The United States does have many problems as well, but not like Darfur right now. The problems are incomparable. Hundreds of thousands of civilians being killed and driven by their homes, children being raped, murdered, and turned into soldiers. The United States has never seen anything like that. I am just trying to prioritize.
And, I'm not saying that we should give up on any of our donations or support that we offer to programs back home. I'm saying that I think we should ALSO support this cause, and make an effort to do what little we can from this removed vantage point.
I'm not sure why you decided to mention Iraq in this post, but the statistics posted here about deaths in Iraq show the same difference in perspective: country vs. humankind. These statistics are only counting American soldiers as "lives".
If you believe that all human beings are important, You have to add at least 50,000 to that number, as that is the amount of Iraqi deaths that the US Government has admitted to in October 2006 (link below). But the government also admitted that they don't count everybody. Some organizations, who are trying to keep accurate track of total deaths caused by the invasion, have put the number well into the hundreds of thousands, with as much as 55% of total deaths being women and children civilians.
So, yeah, it just depends on your perspective. My perspective is that all human life matters, all people suffering should be of our concern, and that we should do unto others as we would like done to us. And if I was in Darfur right now, I would want help.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=1564
One more thought on the "clean up your own backyard first" philosophy...
That's a valid perspective to hold, but you can't have that perspective in regards to both Darfur and Iraq right now. The US is currently using the majority of its resources to "clean up" Iraq's backyard. We've made our defenses thinner by sending so many troops overseas (making us more vulnerable to an attack on the homeland), and currently we're policing a civil war, which by definition is a country's "own problem."
Holding the back yard perspective, I don't think that you can simultaneously support the Iraq war and oppose helping in Darfur without being hypocritical. Am I wrong?
Personally, I think everyone is hypocritical on the issues there in Darfur, including the people writing many of the articles.
The problems in Darfur, much like in Iraq, is religious persecution. In Darfur it is the Islamic government seeking to basically wipe out or in other ways oppress the rest of the populace. No one seems to want to acknowledge the religious aspect to this that is actually at the core of their actions.
And I agree that many are hypocritical when it comes to Iraq and Darfur. Most often, though, I see people that want us to pull out of Iraq that also want us to help in Darfur.
The main difference in the areas is that we are in Iraq and not in Darfur. The major concern, and a very likely outcome of pulling out of Iraq is that it descends into a situation much like in Darfur now.
Yes, we as Americans have a lot of problems here at home, and it is our job to set a good example. I believe, though, that we should try to help people in this world regardless of where we live.
I believe that, no matter what the reason why we got into Iraq in the first place, we are there now mainly because we care about the people of that country and believe they can do better. We want to help them do better for themselves. I think many people just look at "American" casualties and do not really look at the whole situation. We are helping people and we should care as much for the people of that country as we do for our own soldiers who are there.
Well, I don't know if I'd say that EVERYONE is being hypocritical... But truth to be told, I really don't know.
I'll look into the situation more. I know that the government is likely corrupt and that they are most likely trying to wipe out a certain type of people based on their religious preference, but I'm not educated enough on the political details of the situation.
Still though, I'm not sure that the type of aid people are pulling for in Darfur is to send in "military" aid. I know one main goals is to deploy the UN Peacekeeping Force, which I don't believe to be an armed military unit. Some legislation is pulling to have the UN aid and take over what the AU is doing now, which is basically providing aid to the displaced and trying to enforce the ceasefire. And a main need is for humanitarians to have access to the people that need help.
So I guess I have a lot more research to do, but like I said before, I don't think Iraq and Darfur are really comparable. No one is suggesting going "into" Darfur like we are "in" Iraq. At this point, I think we mostly want access to the people who are suffering so we can help them.
Wow, what a great bunch of responses. I agree with everybody :) Just kidding, but really...I don't know too many details, but on the face of things it seems like some "military aid" would be necessary if one would want an impact in Darfur. When people are being raped, murdered, and driven from their homes, as you said, you can't just throw money at them and make it better. and i don't think unarmed peace mediators would have an impact on the perpetrators. i mean these are violent people with violent goals. But hey, at least the Darfurians (ha ha) would want us there. i apologize for any lapses in logic, i usually refrain from bloging politics but i couldn't resist.
Oh yeah, who could resist hopping on this speeding train?
I think you might be right about some type of armed forces being needed to help protect people. I'm still trying to find out what this "peacekeeping" force is supposed to consist of exactly.
Sometimes, though, it may not be needed because just having a major presence by other nations in the country forces people to behave. If the Janjaweed started killing relief workers or peacekeeping forces for example, it might be considered an act of war and then other countries would take it personally.
But, oi, I really need to read up on this more before I say something stupid. =)
Each of us have very valid points. None are right or wrong. All are actually happening, or a part of the reason for the certain actions or inactions on the subject.They are all affecting each other.
Regarding Iraq: The problem right now is very seriously similar to the Vietnam conflict. (War was never declared.) The funny thing is that Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson was the one that initiated the carpet bombings. Republican President Richard M. Nixon put an end to to it. In Iraq, The current Republican President, George W. Bush, placed us into the declared war, and the Democrats want to put an end to it.
Vietnam veterans were treated like dirt by the American public, and the Iraq War veterans are being treated like heroes.
Darfur Visited One More Time:
Yes, entire villages have been wiped out. Yes there have been unprecedented numbers of murders, rapes, and any other number crimes against humanity. But, where do you think the monetary donations are going to go? The medical, food, and clothing supplies will be taken by those responsible for all the terrible things happening in Darfur. The "ruling" Fundamentalist Muslim rebels are taking all that is a commodity, and leaving nothing for those really in need. As we learned in our Sunday service last week, you either capitulate and become a Muslim, or you die. No other choices. That is what is written in the Koran, and must be followed to the letter. This is the view and belief of the Fundamentalist Muslim.
We tried to help in Somalia without much luck or backing, so we left that one alone.
Afghanistan is currently somewhat of a stalemate, but the Taliban is regaining its strength and starting to become a real problem again.
France is too liberal and weird. We don't really want to help them, but their wines are so good...hehehe...
Wait until you hear about some recent events and how they are adding up to a sum called China.
TTFN
Yeah, I'm interested to hear comparisons between Vietnam and the current situation in Iraq because I have no concept of what it was like to live during that time period, and I have never done much study on the subject. I'm glad that you think that the soldiers are being treated better this time around; I think it is really sad to badmouth anyone who is risking their life to try to do the right thing.
I strongly disagree that monetary donations are going to be wasted in regards to Darfur. The aid that is funded by these donations is not just going to be food and supplies that are going to be handed out to people and then stolen by Janjaweed forces.
The UN has been being as careful as possible to only administer aid and supplies in areas that are safe enough to do so; when that situation changes,
they pull out.
As I understand it, the major problem right now is that their aren't enough safe areas to administer the aid. And the AU, the only real force currently protecting the civilians from the Janjaweed, is out of money.
So, yes, giving money to these causes will help people, and it will save lives. It will help keep the AU functioning and will get food and medical attention to anyone the humanitarians can get access to.
No, it won't "solve the problem." Yes, it will probably save the lives of many innocent people.
As for comparisons, the current situation in Darfur might be most easily compared with the Rwandan Genocide in 1994, where a corrupt government also used militia groups to round up a certain type of people and execute them. In that situation, 500,000 to 1,000,000 people were killed.
President Clinton, who was in office during the genocide, has expressed that his one greatest regret during his presidency (an he has many of them, obviously) was not sending US troops to help out. He believed that if the US had acted, half of the people who were murdered could have been saved without US losses.
Our current President Bush, after reading the report on the US's lack of action in Rwanda wrote in the margains of the report, "not on my watch," indicating that he was not just going to stand by while something like this happened during his presidency.
Fortunately, President Bush has acknowledged what is happening in Darfur as a genocide, and legislation to get the US more involved is in the works. If everything passes, we will all be making "monetary donations" through our tax dollars anyway. I would just prefer to try to do something now, in case the legislation takes too long.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
-Martin Luther King Jr.
Letter from Birmingham Jail
April 16, 1963
I think I need to clarify one statement I made in my previous post. Regarding the treatment of our troops and Iraqi/Afghani Vets. The general public seems to be supporting the troops well. The political jousting and arguing between the parties is causing a very poor showing of support by tying up funds and manpower to finish the job the U.S., not just the sitting president, has undertaken. s it may, the specifics of lack of support is primarily due to the election year and trying to persuade the populace to vote for the candidates that smooth-talk with what everybody would like. That would be peace, and having loved ones home again. It has nothing to do with the fact that there are people in this country that care enough to sign up to defend the weak and defenseless. It partially has that age-old "religious belief" connotation, but that is because a lot of people believe right, and good, and helping others are at the forefront of their belief in a forgiving and loving God. I know, I may get slammed for this one, but this is my take on it. Man,I hate philosophical and political discussions...
Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history.
- George Bernard Shaw
Wait, you hate these discussions? I thought we were having fun here =) Seriously, I think that discussion about stuff like this is good as long as it serves the purpose of motivating us all to learn more about important subjects and consider other people's opinions. And as long as no one is yelling and insulting each other's mama's =)
I'm not sure that I 100% understand your last comment, but I think your saying that, in general, most people are supportive of the troops right now and that many of the politicians are just being negative about it because the election year is coming up and are trying to woo people with promises of "it's time to bring these troops home."
I agree that upcoming presidential candidates have a lot to gain by showing disapproval of the President right now, and that the thought of bringing everyone's loved ones home is a tasty lure for voters.
I do find it interesting, though, that it is not even election year yet, and people are looking to new faces to represent some kind of change. As for the funding issues, I think that a lot of the House's and Senate's reasons for putting up a fight in regards to the money is because no one in the current administration is saying that this money will "finish the job." President Bush is currently vetoing the bills primarily because in them they are demanding definitions of "finishing the job," and no one seems to know what that is or when it could happen.
And are you saying that many of the officers are signing up to go to Iraq because of their religious beliefs in a forgiving and loving God? I didn't really understand the last part.
Post a Comment