Posted on 01/01/2005 12:12:13 AM PST by Robert Lomax
If it meant a huge war machine (mostly US forces of course) I would have been for debate and discussion, but from all I've read there was already a sufficient force on the ground to prevent the situation BEFORE it got going, and Koffi personally ordered that the commander on the ground (Canadian?) not even threaten or simply protect--being a UN group that's probably all that had to be done. ALbright is a disgrace.
"A 2,500-member United Nations force sought authorization under the United Nations charter to stop the killing. The United Nations commander in Rwanda at the time, Canadian Maj. Gen. Romeo Dallaire, said last month that if he had had the mandate, the massacres would have ceased.
Giving Dallaire the authority and the troops that he requested "could have stopped the whole thing," said Morton Halperin, a National Security Council staff member in 1994,
But the Clinton administration opposed the move. The United Nations had to learn "when to say no," President Clinton said at the time."
(March 26, 1998 NY Times)
Any sourcing to Kofi on this?
Must have been because we're all so stingy.
I dimly recall that the situation was far worse than mere incompetence. I recall that the UN man on the ground said that if they didn't give one of the two tribes weapons (locked up in the African equivalent of gun control), it was going to get massacred, and that Kofi Annan was directly involved in the decision to reject the recommendations of the man on the ground, but I can't find the article that laid it all out anywhere.
After all, what is worse. A few US soldiers putting panties on the heads of susupected terrorists/enemy combatants, or a million dead and millions more maimed, raped and otherwise oppressed. Which is worse .....some soldier breaking protocol and taking pictures of naked prisoners, or thousands of children getting their arms hacked off and millions of women raped?
The UN should be more than ashamed. Especially when they can find the time to root out the earth over a few cases of a few US soldiers breaking rules in some forsaken prison yet apparently have their hands tied when real issues are happening.
I can tell you this. The US is appreciated more than the media would let you believe. True, there are whole regions of the earth that believe the US is evil incarnate (for example virtually all of the Arab world) due to perpetual indoctrination by the theological and political demagogues, however there are many other areas where the common man and woman appreciates the US. For example the Asian situation .....the people receiving bottled water from the US, or hot food, or urgent medication are grateful. In Indonesia for example (which is the world's largest Muslim nation) the imams may be spewing forth anti-American vitriol, and the ruling elite may be harboring views that would not put a smile on Lady Liberty, BUT you can be certain that the people afflicted by the tragedy are grateful.
And while there will always be those who say the US 'should' do more or that it 'has' to do this and that, you should be grateful for that. Why? Because such asinine statements mean that there is something irking them. It is like having your neighbors being envious about your house, spouse, car, occupation etc. It only means that you are blessed more than they are!
Such people (eg the media in the US and Europe, the elite in Europe, liberals in the US, theologues and demagogues in the Middle-East et al) will always have a bone to pick with the US (or any power that is greater than they are). Thus the very fact that they whimper and gripe is a good thing. I'd be more worried if they were to stop.
Good observations though and thanks for posting them.
I just saw the movie Hotel Rwanda and I'm still in shock that the world did nothing. Nothing.
Gen. Dallaire stated that the single most fatal decision leading up to that point was the retreat from Somolia, which gave terrorists the world over the idea that the peacekeepers were a legitimate target and that they would withdraw if attacked. He then stunned the audience (it was a "Peace Conference") by (1) praising the U.S. intervention in Iraq, and (2) praising the American people for tolerating casualties there. Wasn't quite what they'd thought they were going to hear.
He ended his talk with Darfur and an admonition for the U.S. to "kick some asses" in certain prominent UN member countries in order to get them to contribute trained troops to interventions. His own country, Canada, was among them. (The Canadian consul was sitting right there, too - he took it well...)
I'm talking about the whole world..the UN.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.