Bush Defends US Record On Darfur

Users who are viewing this thread

Peter Parka

Well-Known Member
Messages
42,387
Reaction score
3
Tokenz
0.06z
Bush defends US record on Darfur
US President George W Bush has defended his decision not to send troops to the Sudanese region of Darfur, despite what he calls a genocide taking place there. He called it a "seminal decision" not to intervene with force, taken partly out of the desire not to send US troops into another Muslim country.
Mr Bush was speaking to BBC World News America before flying to Africa.
He also discussed controversy over China's Olympics - saying he would attend the event as scheduled.

After Hollywood director Steven Spielberg withdrew his assistance to the Olympics in protest at China's policy towards Darfur, Mr Bush said he would not be taking a similar stance.
"I view the Olympics as a sporting event," he told the BBC's Matt Frei.


But he added that he would meet Chinese President Hu Jintao and "remind him that he can do more to relieve the suffering in Darfur".
Mr Bush is scheduled to leave on Friday for his second tour of Africa - though he said on Thursday he might be delayed if a crucial wiretapping bill was held up in Congress.
He is due to visit Benin, Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana and Liberia.
The president will be travelling with his wife, Laura.
They will visit hospitals, schools and businesses, hoping to show how US investment in health and development programmes has made a real difference to Africans.
Aid promises
Mr Bush said he had a "firm, heartfelt commitment to the continent of Africa".
But he said it was also in the interest of US and global security to tackle poverty there.


"We have people who are suffering from disease and hunger and hopelessness. The only way a radical can recruit is to find somebody who's hopeless," he said.
US aid to Africa has grown rapidly since Mr Bush entered the White House in 2001. He said on Thursday it had doubled over his first term and was set to double again by 2010.
Asked by Matt Frei if he felt he had got the credit he deserved for such investment, Mr Bush replied: "I'm not one of these guys that really gives a darn about opinion. What I really care about is are we saving lives?"
Interrogation bill veto
Mr Bush will not visit Kenya, where inter-ethnic violence erupted after recent disputed elections, or Sudan.
But his aides say he will discuss both crises with African leaders during his trip.


Mr Bush condemned the government of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe and said he would put more pressure on neighbouring South Africa to find a diplomatic solution.
"I just happen to believe their government could do more to enhance a free society in their region," he said.
Talking about events at home, he defended his threat to veto a bill passed by the US Senate outlawing the interrogation technique of water-boarding, dismissing fears that that might send a negative message around the world.
Asked whether America still occupied the moral high ground after Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, Mr Bush gave a crisply blunt answer, our interviewer says.
"Absolutely," he replied. "We believe in human rights and human dignity. We believe in the human condition. We believe in freedom."
Mr Bush was similarly robust in his defence of his actions in Iraq, saying: "The decision to move Saddam Hussein was right. And this democracy is now taking root. And I'm confident that if America does not become isolationist - you know, and allow the terrorists to take back over, Iraq will succeed."



Story from BBC NEWS:
 
  • 73
    Replies
  • 1K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

dt3

Back By Unpopular Demand
Messages
24,161
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.21z
If they're pissed about Bush's policy on Darfur, they really oughta take a long look at the UN's policy there. Absolutely disgusting.
 

Pudding Time

Banned
Messages
2,933
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
If they're pissed about Bush's policy on Darfur, they really oughta take a long look at the UN's policy there. Absolutely disgusting.

Well both are disgusting. Including many other nations that hold the power to step in and stop the genocide.
 

IntruderLS1

Active Member
Messages
2,489
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
His reason really does make sense. U.S. troops moving into another Muslim country is going to be a massive recruitment tool for radicals around the world.

I personally would love to be able to save the entire world, but when we do we get yelled at for meddling, trying to police the world, and forcing our Western values on everybody, and when we don't we get called disgusting for not intervening.

We do what we can to help those less fortunate. We help million and millions every day with nothing asked in return. We have nothing to be ashamed of IMO. When I give a homeless person $5 bucks to buy himself a meal, I don't feel guilty that I didn't drive down to the shelter and pass $5 bills out to everybody there.

Where are the stories about the good we do in the world? You can find them if you look, but you have to know pretty specifically what you're looking for to dig it up.
 

Pudding Time

Banned
Messages
2,933
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
His reason really does make sense. U.S. troops moving into another Muslim country is going to be a massive recruitment tool for radicals around the world.

That has got to be the most pathetic excuse one could possibly conceive for why the US isn't stopping this genocide.

Iraq is doing a fine job of creating muslim hatred towards the west.
 

IntruderLS1

Active Member
Messages
2,489
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
(1.)His reason really does make sense. U.S. troops moving into another Muslim country is going to be a massive recruitment tool for radicals around the world.

(2.)I personally would love to be able to save the entire world, but when we do we get yelled at for meddling, trying to police the world, and forcing our Western values on everybody, and when we don't we get called disgusting for not intervening.

(3.)We do what we can to help those less fortunate. We help million and millions every day with nothing asked in return. We have nothing to be ashamed of IMO. When I give a homeless person $5 bucks to buy himself a meal, I don't feel guilty that I didn't drive down to the shelter and pass $5 bills out to everybody there.

(4.)Where are the stories about the good we do in the world? You can find them if you look, but you have to know pretty specifically what you're looking for to dig it up.

That has got to be the most pathetic excuse one could possibly conceive for why the US isn't stopping this genocide.

Iraq is doing a fine job of creating muslim hatred towards the west.

Fine. One down. Three to go. :)

I'm looking forward to #2 the most. :nod:
 

Pudding Time

Banned
Messages
2,933
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Fine. One down. Three to go. :)

I'm looking forward to #2 the most. :nod:

How very ostentatious. Nevertheless, I shall indulge.

(2.)I personally would love to be able to save the entire world, but when we do we get yelled at for meddling, trying to police the world, and forcing our Western values on everybody, and when we don't we get called disgusting for not intervening.

You are confusing this with time the US tried to convince the world iraq needed saving. No one was crying out for iraq to be saved. In this case, the whole world is crying for the genocide to stop, and the US has a great oppotunity to score major brownie points here. So in essence, this is your dream situation to do your world saving.

(3.)We do what we can to help those less fortunate. We help million and millions every day with nothing asked in return. We have nothing to be ashamed of IMO. When I give a homeless person $5 bucks to buy himself a meal, I don't feel guilty that I didn't drive down to the shelter and pass $5 bills out to everybody there.

What in the bloody hell does this have to do with this topic?

(4.)Where are the stories about the good we do in the world? You can find them if you look, but you have to know pretty specifically what you're looking for to dig it up.

Again, what does this have to do with why America should, shouldn't, or wont help stop the genocide in Darfur.

Anyway, the US has done tons of great things in the world. Yet your current president is doing a mighty fine job of making the world forgot all about those great things.
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
I personally would love to be able to save the entire world, but when we do we get yelled at for meddling, trying to police the world, and forcing our Western values on everybody, and when we don't we get called disgusting for not intervening.
And there you have it. It has even already been said as much in this thread.

Personally I'd love for us to go and stop, aid, protect, etc. a lot of things/people/places in this world, but stretching ourselves on so many fronts is not wise. I am happy that we are at least doing something to help in the region; in many regions for that matter.
 

All Else Failed

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,205
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
His reason really does make sense. U.S. troops moving into another Muslim country is going to be a massive recruitment tool for radicals around the world.

I personally would love to be able to save the entire world, but when we do we get yelled at for meddling, trying to police the world, and forcing our Western values on everybody, and when we don't we get called disgusting for not intervening.

We do what we can to help those less fortunate. We help million and millions every day with nothing asked in return. We have nothing to be ashamed of IMO. When I give a homeless person $5 bucks to buy himself a meal, I don't feel guilty that I didn't drive down to the shelter and pass $5 bills out to everybody there.

Where are the stories about the good we do in the world? You can find them if you look, but you have to know pretty specifically what you're looking for to dig it up.
LOL!!! I love to hear you admit that.
 

dt3

Back By Unpopular Demand
Messages
24,161
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.21z
And this helps stop the genocide how?:confused
It helps the root causes: famine, poverty, disease, a government that can't support it's people, etc... And by helping solve these problems throughout the continent it's helping to prevent a similar situation from happening elsewhere.
 

Peter Parka

Well-Known Member
Messages
42,387
Reaction score
3
Tokenz
0.06z
A lot of aid ends up in the wrong hands, not going to help the people it's intended for but used by the greedy and corrupt leaders. I'm interested to know why he feels that the way this is dealt with should be any different to how to deal with Iraq anyway?
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
Iraq - America is directly involved and America is damned by the left.
Durfur - America is not directly involved and America is damned by the left.

Iraq = NeoCon agenda
Durfur = Humanitarian aid

Nope, I can't see the difference...

As long as you conservatives can sleep at night feeling like you are safer, that's all that's important.


Just remember 1 thing... we are in Iraq (according to the right) to prevent something that might kill innocent people here.

Yet we won't go into Durfur to stop the killing of innocent people (in the hundreds of thousands)

And that isn't a hypothetical..... it's actually happening now
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
It is ridiculous to think we are going to just up and change fronts or to engage in many fronts at once. It isn't going to happen.
Lefties want to talk about America being involved in another Vietnam ... being caught in a civil war (that is what is being complained about in Iraq) ... the same would be said of Durfur. Though it is easy to say that the left would not say that now since we are not there.

Left always talk about where we 'should' be when we aren't and where we 'shouldn't be' when we are. They are never happy, it is always the same old thing. What the left truly want is for us to be isolationalists.
 
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members
Back
Top