At least 29 killed in Arab militia attack on Darfur camp: UNHCR

[rodeodance]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050929/ts_afp/unsudandarfurunhcr_050929183609;_ylt=ApZ5WRFEWHX267GJRTIp1b2s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-
At least 29 killed in Arab militia attack on Darfur camp: UNHCR

37 minutes ago

GENEVA (AFP) - The United Nations refugee agency said an Arab militia attack on a camp in Sudan's Darfur region was feared to have killed at least 29 people and seriously injured 10.

The office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said in a statement it has received reports that a group of up to 300 armed Arab men on horses and camels launched an "unprecedented" attack Wednesday afternoon on the Aro Sharow camp, in Sudan's West Darfur province.

The attackers reportedly burned 80 shelters, or around a quarter of the temporary homes in the camp, and sent thousands of residents fleeing into the unsafe countryside surrounding Aro Sharow.
..........

They are among two million people estimated to have been driven from their homes by fighting since rebels who accuse Khartoum of discrimination and neglect rose up in February 2003.

[tainowarrior]

1. Where the hell were the Blue hats!

WHere the hell are the soldiers protecting these people!

Men with horses and camels just running into refugee camps.

What barbarians...i'm so angry at these news, and I'm incredibly angry that no country in Africa is willing to give soldiers to protect these refugee camps.

What the hell is wrong with these Arab men? what the hell is wrong with the U.N. for not having a strong enough defense force?

[Igel]

2. Blue hats?

Last I heard the African Union had been allowed to send limited numbers of troops into the area in Sudan, and the UNHCR was active. But no UN peacekeepers per se are authorized for the area as far as I know, and the African Union troops are there only at the sufferance of the Sudanese government.

The UN Security Council was asked to declare what was happening in Darfur genocide, and did not. That means the UN is forced to respect Sudanese sovereignty.

The US Congress declared it genocide, and I think * used the word (or Powell did), but it's meaningless blather: to act on it, invading Sudan to stop it, would be a unilateral invasion illegal under international law.

[tainowarrior]

3. Didn't stop the U.N.

from doing the same in Iraq in 1990s.

I'm sorry, but this is a legitimate peacekeeping mission. The world should vote on this, and intervene in Sudan. Allowing these murderous Arab men to slaughter refugees is unconscionable. It's not like the Sudanese people are angry at intervening in their affairs. I'd bet most of them would welcome it. It's the illegitimate government that will claim abuse of sovereignty.

Why is that we always intervene in the wrong places! It's time for the AFrican Union to step up and actually do something meaningful. South Africa and Nigeria and Egypt should send a strong enough force to deter these Arab men. Better yet, they should eradicate them...they are worthless, backward scum, that have nothing better to do but attack poor women and children in refugee camps.

No sympathy for backwards Arab men here. If you're an upstanding Middle Easterner or Muslim, you have my full respect, but I don't suffer backwards Arab or Muslim cavemen just because we're supposed to be "multicultural". To hell with that if they're slaughter poor women and children.

I'm trying to maintain a healthy balance here between respect for other cultures and defending some elementary grounds of morality here. I'm real pissed with these Arab men.

[Igel]

4. The UN was mixed up in sanctions,

and I think they condemned Iraq for invading Kuwait (but that's not important, to be honest).

They didn't authorize what the US, British, and (French) did in N. and S. Iraq. Removing Iraq from Kuwait was one thing, but the no-fly zones weren't part of the UN-approved package. Personally, I'm surprised Russia and France went for sanctions on Iraq; then again, they pushed awfully hard to have them lifted.

I agree with you: intervening in Darfur would be a legitimate peacekeeping mission. But the Security Council didn't authorize it, and probably won't. China alone has too much interest in Sudan; I'm not sure about the other players on the council.

[tainowarrior]

5. what could China possibly have as an interest

in a country where people are getting slaughtered?

I'm sure a new government would do business with the Chinese. Sudan needs all the business it can get.