U.S. proposes 10,000 U.N. peacekeepers for Sudan (CNN)

[Tsiyu]

Draft resolution submitted to Security Council members
Monday, February 14, 2005 Posted: 10:48 PM EST (0348 GMT)



UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- The United States on Monday proposed sending to Sudan up to 10,000 United Nations peacekeepers who would have the authority to use force to "protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence."

Deputy U.S. Ambassador Stuart Holliday said the proposal would mean U.N. peacekeepers could be in a position to protect civilians in Darfur but added that the United States is leaving it up to the United Nations to advise on where the troops would be deployed.

In January, Sudan's government and main rebel group signed comprehensive peace accords to end more than 21 years of civil war between north and south. International officials expressed hope that the agreement will bring the government closer to solving problems in the western Darfur region. (Full story)

However, it is not yet clear if the Sudanese government will allow U.N. peacekeepers into Darfur. Pressed on the question, Holliday would only say, "Sudan has not denied" permission.

more:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/africa/02/14/sudan.peacekeepers/

[Dark]

1. This sounds alot like Somalia.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. If the mistakes of Somalia are repeated, then it may be better for us to stay out.

But I don't like the idea of thousands of people being killed either.

[Tsiyu]

2. Damned if you do

damned if you don't.

[Dark]

3. Seems to happen far too often, no? n/t

[bluestateguy]

4. If it's a truly multi-national force then I say fine

Seeing as how were not the most popular kid on the block right now, it might be a good idea if the US maintained a modest presence in this force. If any peacekeeping force is perceived as a predominantly US force they will be targets for the Arab/Muslim guerrillas in Sudan who may wish to take out their grievances on the US right then and there.

[cal04]

5. US offers 10,000 troops to monitor Sudan

The United States has offered the United Nations 10,000 troops to keep the peace in Sudan, including the troubled western province of Darfur.

In a draft resolution, the US offered the soldiers to monitor the peace process in southern Sudan, where a peace deal has been signed to end a 21-year war.

The resolution leaves the exact deployment of the troops up to the UN but it is expected some will be sent to the western region of Darfur.

The proposal calls for sanctions on those responsible for continuing violence there.If passed, it would also impose a weapons embargo on the Sudanese Government.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200502/s1303542.htm

[Ian David]

6. And those 10,000 troops will come from... where?

[DRoseDARs]

7. Afghanistan and the hunt for Osama bin Laden, of course...

...you know, where we got the extra troops for Iraq?

[DRoseDARs]

9. Sarcasm aside, I do support an HONEST effort to quell violence there...

...but what are Bush and his cronies up to in making such an offer?

[ConcernedCanuk]

11. Gee - I thought it should be obvious - spell O_I_L ?

.
.
.

"The upstream oil industry could be key to the future of the economy of the North East African state of Sudan. Although the country is considered to be vastly under-explored, it has been a producer of oil and gas for a number of years. The country's oil and gas reserves are vast. The downstream oil industry in Sudan is an important sector in the country's economy as Sudan has three refineries and imports both refined product and crude oil. The completion of a new refinery has made Sudan largely self sufficient and able to export refined as well as crude products. Sudan still needs to import jet fuel however.



/snip/

The country is also rich in natural gas with reserves estimated at 3 trillion cubic feet (tcf). Production of oil in 1998 is estimated at approximately 600,000 metric tons (12,000 bpd). Figures for September 1999 are estimated at 7.2 million metric tons or 146,000 bpd.

http://www.mbendi.co.za/indy/oilg/af/su/p0005.htm
__________________________________________________

We all know that the WH don't have one ounce of GoodWill

so hadda be oil or $$, no?

:shrug:

[DRoseDARs]

8. Oh, and the link in your sig is broken; Page Not Found

[bunkerbuster1]

10. Me too, and I'm willing to consider the possibility

that this offer by our government is being made for the right reasons--i.e., a lot of pressure was brought to bear to "put up or shut up" about increasing freedom around the world when a prime example where we COULD make a huge difference with a relatively small contribution is staring us in the face.

[Ian David]

12. Sure, we should probably go to Somalia.

But it would sure have been a heck of a lot easier if we weren't so strained for troops that we're pulling them out of Europe and Korea, and calling grandmas and grandpas back into active duty.

It would also be nice if we still had those 7,000 soldiers that were fired for being gay. Soldiers, rocket scientists, intelligence analysts, and Arabic language translators. Oh, yeah. Genius Monkey at Work.

[LinuxInsurgent]

13. where are the peacekeeprs from?

Notice they say "U.N. Peacekeepers"..not "U.S. troops, under the aegis of the U.N."

They will be sending EU or Third World soldiers...not themselves.

Where it actually counts (in averting genocide)...know that the United States WON'T be there.

[applegrove]

14. And 10,000 armed UN troops is all it will take - if they tote smart bombs

Finally - some consistancy. If they go after human rights abusers then they need to be real. Now for the poor starving people in Korea!!