But what about Darfur
Submitted by johnsmithindustries on Sat, 11/17/2007 - 12:39
I keep getting this question after dutifully explaining Ron Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy (and after first correcting the assumption/misconception that non-interventionism=isolationism).
Another one is: "We are the world's only superpower, we have the responsibility to keep the peace."
What is the best way to answer these? I've got friends and family sold on just about every issue but this one.
Thanks!
»
What is our moral obligation?
Africa was severely damaged by colonialism followed by the current corporate colonialism that undermines any legitimate government that might start to develop. Why? Because any legitimate government would maintain sovereignty over their own resources so that the people benefit as a whole.
Don’t forget there is oil in Central Africa and many other valuable resources. Anarchy is good for the global corporations from Europe, USA and Asia because they can take what they want and pay off a few brutal dictators. It’s very profitable to let millions of people die and focus on exploiting the local resources. The Christian nations of Europe and America must be proud. China? Who knows what they believe?
I general support a Libertarian philosophy but I don’t see how this is anything but the result of Laissez-faire corporatism—the kind that is participating in the rape of innumerable weaker countries internationally and the destruction of American democracy here at home. Corporate capital that is un-tethered to a specific community is one of the most brutal forces ever to be release upon the world.
I wonder what moral position Libertarians would take it the face of this reality? We may not want to nation build anymore (like we did successfully after WWII) but leaving the weaker parts of the word to be ravaged by our destructive corporations is not a morally neutral position, as some of you seem to think. And, to be honest, our national participation with these corporations is not neutral either—just look at the oil nation, Iraq. That’s all you need to know. “Bringing freedom” to Iraq is one big lie—as we squat on their oil reserves and let their people die.
Cut them all off
Here I sit balancing my checkbook, and even people I don't Know have their hand out. I myself say screw em. I don't put in 50-70 hours a week because I'm concerned about the welfare of other countries. Let Angelina & Brad adopt them,Madonna might have room for more. Outright charity should be an individuals choice,what we have now is extortion.
Small and getting smaller
Your small and ever shrinking world-view is what I fear most in Libertarianism.
Foriegn aid is not cash to buy something
Forign aid is Arms , Caddilacs, Trucks , Bulldozers,and some rice and medical products .So tell me why are the American people taxed for forign Aid.I'm sorry Israel get's cold cash but they rather have there cash in euro's
We need to contact our congress and senate reps.
WE should tell our reps in congress and the senate to stop sending aid to these foriegn countries that are wasteing it .In fact I'm gonna do it today
We support the rest of the world the same way we support Dr Paul
All one needs to do is organize individuals. They can enlist the support of private individuals through ought the world through what ever means they see fit. Hell if you weren't working from Jan - May to just pay taxes then you could just spend a month on a mission and still have 4 months of salary left over.
British colonialism is the root cause of this mess over there. In fact they are the cause of the mess world wide. We need to follow the words of the founding fathers echoed through the humble voice of the good Dr. No nation building!
How does a constitutional
How does a constitutional republic work. Do u think Darfur is ready for a constitutional republic? How about Iraq and Iran? See where this is leading to?
Tell them this
Since colonialsm ended in Africa there has never been a time that a country in Africa was not at war .Ask them should we help the pygmys in the congo who are getting eaten by cannibles.Are we helping the White farmer's in ni
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/22/1053585643490.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7096862.stm
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/world/africa/15witches.htm...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7091231.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/zimbabwe/article/0%2C%2C2181086%2C...
Ask them if they ever saw these sudan people
I watched these sudan people you wouldn't want them near you. They buy there wives for cattle they let the cattle urinate on there heads. Tell me why should we protect slave holders that what they are if they purchse there wives.I guess its ok since it's there wonderful culture .If you do not believe me there was a National Geographic special about it. They walk around naked with AK 47's. Darfur is nothing more than the controlled media trying to divide this country .So when people ask you what about Darfur tell them what about America. I nearly puke when I here these Nuts talk about genocide in Darfur.Tell them to throw another LIVE AID it made a ton of money for Eitheopia
Peace for Profit.
For all the talk about the US noble duty of providing peace and harmony in the world. There is arguably no instance of this without corporate profits (arms, oil etc). So that "noble superpower responsibility" argument against non-interventionism is a load of crap, because it always has been about US interests and no-one elses.
Am I forgetting anything? When is the last time we intervened in a country to promote peace?
Ask them about the thousands
Ask them about the thousands of vets that are homeless, the people in hurricane katrina, our bridges collapsing. Ask them why we should protect other countries at the expense of our own.
You Go, Girl!
If Darfur troubles you personally, I expect neither Dr Paul nor any of his supporters would stop you from going and helping out. The Constitution may not permit FedGov to involve itself, but it does not prohibit United Bleeding Hearts and Do-Gooders of the Universe Unlimited.
Saddle Up!
LehrBoy
www.citizenduquesne.org
LXXI BC: Ego sum Spartacus // MDCCCLVII: I am Dred Scott // MCMVL: Ich bin Anne Frank // MMX: Je suis Assange // MMXI: Ik ben von NotHaus
What does Darfur have to do with defending my liberties?
With my liberties defended and my finances secured, *I* will have the ability to do something about Darfur.
PeterSchiffSays.COM
What about Katrina?
Ask them whether or not they feel we should protect other nations at the expense of our own? We have millions of citizens at poverty level on the verge of starvation. What about them? We must lead the world by example.
Darfur
Hire Blackwater to take care of the country, i hear they are looking for another country to pillage!
Blackwater already said if
Blackwater already said if someone payed them enough they would go to darfur
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms is ,as a last resort ,to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-Thomas Jefferson
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms is ,as a last resort ,to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-Thomas Jefferson
Unfortuneatly thats been the problem!!
Its our "helping" foreign Countries that has gotten the U.S. to where it is today.. hated through out the world... and BROKE AT HOME..
The president CERTAINLY ought to encourage the charitable groups and business people of the U.S. to do something personally... even encourage Americans to donate to these Groups..
Truth be told.. there are hundreds of regions of the world where there are injustices.. we only help if there is something to gain...and its those gains at the expense of others that piss off these radicals at us..
I ENCOURAGE everyone to DO WHAT THEY CAN for areas of the world they are concerned about... but when we turn over our GOOD WILL to Congress IT GETS PERVERTED...
Perhaps SOMEDAY.. or SOMEPLACE there will be a need for the U.S's goodwill... IF SO... THE CONGRESS SHOULD PASS A LAW MANDATING HELP AND WHAT IT IS THEY HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH..
If it becomes law... So be it..
However just to say... yes we should help everyone who DIRELY needs it... now just do it and do bother me with it anymore...
THAT HAS NOT WORKED
Not our problem. "The
Not our problem.
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms is ,as a last resort ,to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-Thomas Jefferson
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms is ,as a last resort ,to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-Thomas Jefferson
RP article on aid to africa
Here also is an article about why foreign aid to africa does not work---written by RP himself. [Granted,it is not about crisis humanitarian intervention,but I believe this falls under the same umbrella.]
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/05/07/13/ronpaul.htm
ask them to decide
which Americans should die to save people in Dafur. Ask them why the people in Dafur's lives are more valuable than these americans that they choose.
There is also a book by a guy named Bill Easterly that shows that foriegn aid almost never helps improve a nation - and he was part of the IMF.
.
"We are the world's only superpower, we have the responsibility to keep the peace."
As far as I understand the only reason the US is a super power, or is able to act military as a superpower is because of their monetary policy, they're able to print money to be able to afford their foreign policy.
When you get rid of that (and there are plenty of reasons to, they're all over every Ron Paul related site :P), do you still have that responsibility?
Book recommendations to inform people
I would recommend that they read 'Lords of Poverty' by Graham Hancock. Available almost anywhere. Expose of international aid industry. Astonishing.
It becomes very clear that we,as american citizens,know virtually nothing about what the sudanese,or anyone else,truly 'needs'. Our media simply gets us all in a frenzy based on the crisis du jour that THEY want us to be concerned about,and then we emotionally consent to 'do something' and trust our leaders to take on the job,based on what they deem to be the right actions. We are completely fed a plan from start to finish,and we buy it every time.
And the thing that gets me about Bono's One campaign,since it was mentioned,is this idea that by everyone running out and buying cheap cotton t-shirts from some other 3rd world country,and mass consumerism,we are somehow doing to save anybody,let alone helping anyone. But while I know that is a tangent to this topic-it does speak,i think,to the lack of knowledge that Americans have as a whole over what is happening,what is needed,and how to deliver what is needed/requested.
I lived in Nairobi (Kenya) for a couple of years,and studied at a school of 1200, as one of 3 americans. I had many close sudanese friends,some of whom had been sponsored by NGO's to study,others of whom had also fought in the civil war themselves prior to escaping,and still another who was now a single mom,formerly a teacher in southern sudan, living in a shanty with 4 kids,after he husband doctor was killed,and she and her daughters raped by soldiers.
I also have talked firsthand with sudanese about what they would 'like' to do with their country after the civil war. There is indeed 'in fighting' in terms of a difference in philosophy.
However,the majority of tribal in- fighting in terms of violence-is caused by instigation from other parties who do not wish to see any of them united for a common cause. [Does anyone wonder where these tribes,quite literally living off the desert land-get their 'weapons'? Rather like somalia,they did not come from al queda,but from the US! I like to call it 'cold war blowback'. We are still cleaning up the results of our actions from that time-regardless of the fact that the media gives virtually no coverage of this.]
As well,my time there was shortly(within a few years) after the soviet union ended,and the US no longer had a legitimate reason to be in the sudan [beyond oil and wanting as much power of middle east/islam as possible]-everyone [at least within my international relations program in nairobi,again the majority being east african students] was very hopeful....hopeful that peaceful resolution could come,hopeful that the civil war was now waning [and in some ways it was]....
I agree with the posts that this is now largely about china,keeping them out,and competing for the most influence. And,hey,if the US can use terrorism threats to their advantage,so they can,say,bomb pharmaceutical companies [ie,clinton],great! It is true that the north of sudan is muslim,and the south animist/christian,so there is really no way to separate the fact that this interest on behalf of the US gvmt is politically motivated. But this only makes sense-we could not possibly assist every crisis ocurring in the world today,and naturally choose the ones that mirror our perceived nation-state interests. [our gvmt,that is]. That is why government sponsored humanitarian aid is flawed inherently,as a policy,in my experience.
A kenyan friend of mine just sent me a copy of an article he published in a regional journal [he is a professor]. The title of it is 'africans must change their attitudes',and he went on to say that individual sovereignty must be the mindset,not foreign donor aid.
There is well a movement under way within africa to get off the donor aid and on their own feet. There has truly been little to no improvement,some would actually say things have become worse,since the international aid industry has been established.
Obviously,the world does need crisis intervention,in the form of emergency food,shelter,and medicine. And,as RP has said,this can easily come through private organizations.
But the donor aid industry came about shortly after the emancipation of most nations,from colonialism [although a few did not gain independence until the 80's! that's 1980!]-the industry itself was designed to take away power from sovereign nations,not to help them.
A commonly known book now a days is John Perkins: Confessions of an Economic Hitman,that speaks to some of these policies.
It's a big subject,and Americans are having their heartstrings pulled at each time we see images on our TV/news of starving or dead bodies lined up. It is so manipulative that it is astonishing.
It is also an urgent situation that truly demands help.
But even the coverage on 60 minutes several months back showed interviews with aid workers there who said flat out that American foreign policy has them 'sleeping with the enemy',in that they truly do nothing in terms of their relationship with northern sudan's current leadership. In fact,this leader laughed at a recent UN meeting when asked about changing their policy in darfour,specifically IN relationship to the US criticism. He laughed b/c he knew it was just a front,and that in many ways he has Bush and co. in his pocket.
I would look for the smallest,most transparent organization-non governmental if you like-out there,and donate money to them for on the ground crisis needs in sudan.
I usually recommend the above books when people talk about whether we should or should not intervene in Sudan or anywhere else. We do need to understand how our policies,economically and otherwise,help to create the very situations we are then wanting to *help fix*.
Wonderful Explaination
I will be talking about this more...thanks so much for the information!
Mike
Ron Paul is my HERO!!!
You can catch me on RonPaulRadio.com
Mondays and Wednesdays 10pm EST
Mike
"Fire Team for Freedom"
visit www.mikeandjake.com
military interventionism
Just look at how great of a job we are doing keeping the peace in Iraq! Tell your family, firstly, about all the treachery of the CIA, and how their actions have led to the death and sufferings of millions of people.
Secondly, government should NOT be involved in humanitarian crises. The government bureaucracies are too innefficient to do anything, and are certainly in no shape to try to help people out in other countries. Who gets the food and money we send as aid? The strong arm in the region. Almost every time the oppressors are able to used the resources to further the suffering of the oppressed. So, if we want to intervene, we should do so on private means, so that the resources can be used effectively.
Just look at Pakistan! Here is a country in the middle east, WITH nuclear weapons, and a US puppet leader who's regime receives $10 billion annually in American taxpayer dollars. How can we justify propping up an oppressive military dictatorship while we have people suffering here at home!?! Musharraf (the Pakistani leader) has recently called in an emergency rule so he didn't have to leave power! They are jailing and brutalizing the protesters! And after all this Bush still says we have to give them aid to "fight the war on terror" because thats more important. What nonsense!
That brings me to another good point. Look at how political the aid gets! Its original or stated purpose may be to help people but it ends up being a means for the executive branch to have spheres of influence all over the world. FACT: most politicians are self-centered egomaniacs and couldnt give a crap less about anyone but themselves, much less some random people in other countries or even here at home. They should not be the ones to distribute the aid. If it werent for them, and we had sound money, I guarentee charity would go through the roof!!
"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Ron Paul
Ron Paul has answered questions like that.
Ron Paul has said that nothing in The Constitution gives the government the right to take money out of your pocket and give it to others against your will. If you want to donate money to help the people of Darfur, fine; but do it with your own money. Make a donation to the Red Cross or some other charity and earmark it for Darfur. I prefer to send money to the poverty-stricken Native Americans and native Hawaiians, whose land our government unjustly took away from them. We ARE responsible for their plight.
As for our being a superpower, we are only superior militarily. We don't have the power to keep the peace in the world. By trying to impose peace at the point of a gun, we have reaped the whirlwind. Those who say it's our responsibility are pushing our guilt buttons for their own hidden agendas. We have to teach ourselves to "just say NO."
jg
Yes!
Wow, I think that's what I was looking for.
I also think that people use the government as a way to displace responsibility. They complain and complain that we aren't doing anything about Darfur, when in reality THEY are not doing anything about it. If they really cared they would organize and travel to Darfur to help resolve the situation, not talk about how it's "our" responsibility.
I learn something new and better every day about Ron Paul, and this just cemented his foreign policy in my mind. Thanks fellas!
so how much history do you
so how much history do you know about Darfor?
do you know which tribes attack which tribes, and which tribes are allies with other tribes.
which warlords belong to which tribes, which warlord in the tribe should we help? (you know there are fights within the tribes for power too)
hell what language do they speak?
If the US goes in no matter who we give money too and aid to someone is going to get killed with that aid. and that other persons family is going to hate the US because of it.
two more great questions,
1.are you willing to die to 'fix' the situation in darfor?
2.is it worth becoming a target of someones borther/sister/mother/father who you are responsible for killing to 'fix' a situation you know nothing about?
Darfur?
Last time I read it, the Constitution doesn't mention policing the world.
Let Bono worry about Darfur
Or you as an individual can donate time or money to some charitable organization. To imply that it's the US governments authority to impose force upon it's own citizens to finace warlords is in direct conflict of the message of peace and freedom. We would do much more good for the peacefull people in Darfur (and everywhere else) if we could have to courage to once again simply set the example.
Darfur is a made for
Darfur is a made for television crisis. The real agenda is keeping Chinese Oil Companies out of there, in the hands of Western interests.
The funny thing is, no one is really sure, due to anonymous giving, who exactly is funding the propaganda, but they did hook Hollywood. Compare Darfur to Congo, and it's just another war for oil, only with Leftist dressing to dupe a different constituency.