"Genocide" is big because it carries the Nazi label, which sells well....but simply killing is boring, especially in Africa." ~G. PrunierIn your opinion should the the term "genocide" be used to describe the conflict in Darfur? Why or Why Not?
Also, consider the response from both the U.S. and the United Nations. Were they correct in their actions? In your opinion what should have been done?
Join the Conversation. Reply here.
I definitely think that the conflict in darfur is a gencide because Africans are being killed to be replaced with Arabs. The UN just sat back and did nothing because they didnt want to get involved. The US also did nothing as well. I think its sad that we cant come together as people to help each other. I think that the UN and the US should have sent in troops in to help out those poor people because if this would have happened to us we would want help from other nations.
ReplyDeleteI do think it's genocide, but even if it weren't technically genocide I think that the death count warrants a response. Murder is still murder whether or not it's ethnically targeted. As for US and UN involvement, I think that we should get involved, even if the focus is only to prevent further bloodshed. I think UN involvement would be better, rather than only US. I think as long as we agree that people are dying in unacceptable amounts, something has to be done.
ReplyDeleteI see no reason as to why it wouldn't be a geneocide. The africans are clearly being targeted and i see no feasable reason as to why it wouldn't be genocide. The fact that no onehas recoginized this and done anything makes me rather angry. It makes me angry that the US has recoginized it as genocide yet hasn't done anything about it. The US is just at asfault as everyone else and that th UN hasn't done anything about it just perpetuates the view that the UN doesn't have any power
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion genocide should be used to describe the conflict in Darfur. In Darfur, Africans are being murdered by Arabs. This fits the definition of genocide. A genocide is when one ethnic group wans to cause the destruction of another ethnic group. Although the U.S. declared the conflict Darfur a genocide, they only took minimal action. When Collin Powell declared it a genocide he also stated that this did not mean the U.S. had to take military action. The U.N. however did not declare the conflict a genocide. I think that there is more that we could have done. Although humanitarian aid is very important, it is not going to stop the conflict. In my opinion we should have tried to intervene in the conflict. Declaring it a genocide means that we have a responsibility to act and assist. Awareness and humanitarian aid are important but they are not enough.
ReplyDeleteI think it should be considered genocide but I find it very sad that it has to be labeled as genocide before anyone will intervene. Mass murder is mass murder and it shouldn't have to be labeled as genocide before anyone will notice. As we read the article it made me so sad and angry that everything is this political decision. Why can't a decision be made for the good of human lives instead of political gain? I think the US should have been a lot more forceful with their actions instead of being so wishy washy. The UN definitely should have taken action. I think more direct blame should have been placed on the Sudanese government instead of trying to skirt around blaming them. Both the UN and the US should have stepped up and taken more action instead of trying to protect themselves politically. We have a duty as humans to step up and do something when something this horrifying is happening.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the terme genocide Darfur should be used to describe the conflict in Darfur. A group of people were trying to physical destroy another group of people. They were commiting mass murder and if the the word genocide is used or no countries should have steeped in and done somehing. Innocent people were getting killed because of their race. The fact that the US named conflict a geneocide but did not step in and help was pointless. A country as powerful as the US cn not tell people that they should stepp in and try the fix the conflict without themselves helping. To get everyone to really helped in Darfur we need everyone and that really does mean everyone should have done something to help no matter what the label on the conflict really is.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that the conflict in Darfur should be categorized as a genocide. This killing in Darfur was targeted at a specific ethnic group and was committed by a specific ethnic group as well. I am ashamed by the response of the UN to the killings in Darfur and its hesitancy to admit that what was going on in Darfur was a genocide because of the consequences that would arise. I find it extremely sad that as a nation and Western culture, we refuse to get involved in international conflicts unless it benefits us. We preach morality and Chrsitian values yet refuse to do the right thing for the sake of humanity. Sometimes, we need to recognize that there are more important things at stake than politics and money: the lives of human beings.
ReplyDeleteI DEfinitely believe that the term "genocide" should be applied to the conflict going on in Darfur. The people being killed are African farmers; they are beign targeted by the Arabs whom are funded by the Sudanese government. If the term "genocide" is defined as killing people based on religion, race, or etc. how can the UN say it's not a genocide? These peoplea re beingkilled based on their race. There i no way to classify the conflict as something other than a genocide. There doesn't need to be extermination camps or gas chambers in order for the events happening to be considered a genocide. What constitutes a genocide is based on the people.
ReplyDeleteI think that the US was correct in classifying the conflict as a genoide; however, I fervently disagree with the lack of action taken by the US. IT'S DISAPPOINTING that our country could make that assertion yet remain silent on the issue. I believe that the UN needs to classify the conflict as a genocide and start taking action to stop the killing. If one of the most powerful groups doesn't recognize the conflict as a genocide, then neither will the rest of the world.
I fully believe the situation in Darfur was genocide. it was the systematic destruction of one specific ethnic group. but i have to agree with earlier comments that is hould not have taken the word genocide to instigate action to protect the people of Darfur.
DeleteI think that genocide is definitely a fitting word for the situation in Darfur. African people are being slaughtered and replaced by Arabs. They are being armed and payed by the Sudanese government and they are targeting Africans, whether they are Christians or Muslims. I think that the US and the UN should have done something about the genocide instead of just sitting back and limited their involvement in the war.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if the UN knew the full story of what was happening in Darfur at the time of their decision, but if they had received reports such as we saw in The Devil Came on Horseback, they had no reason to assume that this was not a genocide. The politics of the lack of action taken by both the UN and the US are only explainable by the lack of unity within. I don't feel comfortable discussing the UN's predicament, but as for the United States, is this not a government "for the people, by the people?" The CITIZENS did not express their concern for whatever reason or lack of knowledge. Whoever condemns government bodies may be missing the true root of the problem. Yes, they were wrong--the UN and US that is. And who is ultimately responsible for that?
ReplyDeleteUS.
that last US means us, not the United States.
DeleteWhat is going on in Darfur should DEFINITELY considered genocide. The Arabs are trying to wipe out the African population in Darfur, it is genocide when one ethnic group is trying to elimiante another ethnic group's exsistence. The Arabs wanna make Darfur an Arab populationand are killingthe Africanswhich showsthey are trying to make that happen. It upsets me that the UN lets reasons get in the way of calling Darfur a genocide, when what is going on in Darfur is far more worsethan a reason not to help. It makes sad my owncountry ingoredthe genocide.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the conflict in Darfur should be considered a genocide. Since the Arabs are participating in ethnic cleansing against black Africans, the term genocide fits. While I can see the reasons for not wanting to interfere by both the U.S. and UN, shouldn't the UN, at least, have an obligation to stop this? The UN doesn't have to worry about its country's population contentment with the engagement, it has to worry about results. It seems to me that Africa is being constantly left in the dark and forgotten with this mindset - There's killing?! Where?! We must stop it... oh wait, it's just Africa; there's nothing we can do. Once this mindset is changed then it'll be easier to deal with the African problems.
ReplyDeleteyes, darfur is a genocide. They are trying to eliminate one race entirly and the government is owning up to it. and i think the u.s and the u.n should get involved, because no more lives need to be lost in this battle.
ReplyDelete