Over 900 killed in Congo fighting: UN

[John Bryce]

NAIROBI - United Nations investigators discovered that 966 people died in a massacre in northeastern Congo on Thursday, a UN spokesman said Sunday.

Over 900 killed in Congo fighting: UN (http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/04/06/congo_030406)

[Fade]

No oil. No strategic locations. No religions we hate.

Obviously we'll leave them alone. This sort of genocide isn't uh, axis of evil-y enough, and they aren't building WMDs.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Fade
No oil. No strategic locations. No religions we hate.

Obviously we'll leave them alone. This sort of genocide isn't uh, axis of evil-y enough, and they aren't building WMDs.


Sad but true, you also forgot to add "white people arent dying". If this had happened in eatern europe all of nato would be sharpening their weapons.

[John Bryce]

I checked the CNN website, and there is no mention of the slaughter in Congo.

The BBC website has this:

Congo massacre 'leaves 1,000 dead' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2922595.stm)


United Nations staff have been told that nearly 1,000 people were massacred in the Ituri region of north-eastern Democratic Republic of Congo last Thursday.

UN investigators taken to the site at Drodro - about 80 kilometres (50 miles) from the regional centre Bunia - saw mass graves with traces of fresh blood still visible.

According to lists compiled by leaders, 966 people died in three hours of blood-letting.

Ethnic clashes between the Hema and Lendu tribal militias in Ituri have killed thousands of people since the conflict started.

Local groups said the clashes that started out as a simple land dispute between pastoralists and farmers have killed more than 50,000 people and displaced a further 500,000.

[iain]

If the UN weren't around, would we even know about this sort of thing?

[Lisa]

Originally posted by John Bryce
I checked the CNN website, and there is no mention of the slaughter in Congo.

The BBC website has this:

Congo massacre 'leaves 1,000 dead' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2922595.stm)




Yep, it's there (http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/04/07/congo.massacre/index.html)
With all the stuff going on in Baghdad right now, it's just sort of buried a couple of stories down.

[John Bryce]

Yep, it's there
With all the stuff going on in Baghdad right now, it's just sort of buried a couple of stories down.

Thanks. I didn't see it on the main page, and a "search" did not find it. I see now I had to click on the "World" link to get to it. Thanks again.

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Fade
No oil. No strategic locations. No religions we hate.

Obviously we'll leave them alone. This sort of genocide isn't uh, axis of evil-y enough, and they aren't building WMDs.

we must not leave them alone
we can sell weapons there.

[Lisa]

Originally posted by John Bryce


Thanks. I didn't see it on the main page, and a "search" did not find it. I see now I had to click on the "World" link to get to it. Thanks again.
I'm seeing it on the main page, in the list of stories right under the picture. CNN's search function btw, sucks.
So does anyone think the UN will try to send troops there?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Lisa

I'm seeing it on the main page, in the list of stories right under the picture. CNN's search function btw, sucks.
So does anyone think the UN will try to send troops there?

the UN will only send troops there if it's members want to send troops there. A few big countries pushing for something like this always helps, but they may be pre-occupied.

[John Bryce]

I'm seeing it on the main page, in the list of stories right under the picture.

The page doesn't seem to load properly for me. :confused:

So does anyone think the UN will try to send troops there?

There already are UN troops there as part of MONUC (http://www.monuc.org/eng/). Here is a list of contributing countries (http://www.monuc.org/eng/onmonuc/contrib/EN_contrib.asp).

[John Bryce]

Three million dead in Congo war: relief group (http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/04/08/congo030407)

NAIROBI - A relief organization says disease, malnutrition and war have killed more than three million people in the Democratic Republic of Congo over the past four and a half years.

I am shocked, and saddned by this. Why is it that Africa goes through incredible carnage, and suffering, and the rest of the world seems to find it so easy to ignore? I hear all this talk of the "liberation" of the people of Iraq from a brutal government, and yet no one speaks a word about "liberating" the people of Africa from decades of suffering, and murder, that is easily as horrible as the suffering of the Iraqi people under Saddam, if not worse. The UN has passed eleven (11) Security Counsel Resolutions with regard to the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo since 24 February 2000, but the suffering, and the slaughter, goes on. This is from the UN mandate in the Democratic Republic of Congo:

- To facilitate humanitarian assistance and human rights monitoring, with particular attention to vulnerable groups including women, children and demobilized child soldiers, as MONUC deems within its capabilities and under acceptable security conditions, in close cooperation with other UN agencies, related organizations and non-governmental organizations;


The humanitarian assistance of this is a complete failure. Three million dead in four and a half years "...85 per cent of the deaths were from treatable diseases and malnutrition." What is going wrong? Why can't the humanitarian assistance part of the mandate be effectively carried out? The mandate states the humanitarian assistance will be conducted by the U.N. "...under acceptable security conditions..." Quite clearly, the civil war in the Congo is preventing the humanitarian operation from being implemented fully due to a lack of "acceptable security." Why is there a security problem?

Acting under chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, the Security Council also decided that MONUC may take the necessary action, in the areas of deployment of its infantry battalions and as it deems it within its capabilities, to protect United Nations and co-located Joint Military Commission personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of movement of its personnel, and protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence.

In a nutshell, that means the UN may use military force to protect itself, and civilians. Clear enough, but there is a problem: "... as it deems it within its capabilities...". When one examines the list of countries that have sent troops to the region it leaves a lot to be desired. The bulk of the troop commitments comes from poor nations with ill-equipped militaries. These units are not capable of providing the security the UN needs to operate with success in the Congo. Unfortunately, many of the countries that are able to provide effective security through military force are former colonial powers that are disliked in Africa, or are countries just not interested in sending troops to Africa. Without effective leadership on the issue, and without world outcry, I am afraid millions more will die in Africa, as the world watches something else.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by John Bryce
I am shocked, and saddned by this. Why is it that Africa goes through incredible carnage, and suffering, and the rest of the world seems to find it so easy to ignore? I hear all this talk of the "liberation" of the people of Iraq from a brutal government, and yet no one speaks a word about "liberating" the people of Africa from decades of suffering, and murder, that is easily as horrible as the suffering of the Iraqi people under Saddam, if not worse.


Don't say no one (http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=226538#post226538).

Presented for discussion:

Invade Africa I (http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldbergprint050300.html)

Invade Africa II (http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldbergprint051000.html)

The rhetoric is overdone (all his columns seem to be so) but overall, invading Africa sounds like a pretty good idea to me.



I'm going to continue advocating the violent overthrow of African tyrants, just as I advocate the violent overthrow of Middle Eastern tyrants. Call it Empire if you will.

MattJ