Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Algeria, Mali, Nigeria...time for the UN to show its strength?


  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#21 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 42,650 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 12:33 PM

This doesn't do expat British workers any favours.


http://www.thetelegr...urgents/?ref=ec


he wants to keep his trap shut


no self respecting service personnel brags about killing people: it just isn't done.
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#22 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 13,448 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 12:57 PM

he wants to keep his trap shut


no self respecting service personnel brags about killing people: it just isn't done.


I think you are being a bit harsh here. He was asked whether he had killed people and this was his response

"Yeah, so lots of people have," he said matter-of-factly, after being asked if he had killed from the cockpit. "The squadron's been out here. Everyone's fired a certain amount."



I don't see that as bragging and it is very similar to accounts by other service personal serving in Afghanistan. He was asked a question and answer it truthfully, even deflecting the attention to others in his squadron.
Fides invicta triumphat

#23 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,837 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 01:03 PM

Apparently the Algerian terrorist group is linked to one of the terrorist groups that the UK is clandestinely supporting (albeit politically rather than financially) against Assad in Syria.

Just like we supported Sadaam Hussain when we were more worried about Iran than Iraq.

The British public gets told what they want us to hear.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#24 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 42,650 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 01:42 PM

I think you are being a bit harsh here. He was asked whether he had killed people and this was his response

[/font][/color]

I don't see that as bragging and it is very similar to accounts by other service personal serving in Afghanistan. He was asked a question and answer it truthfully, even deflecting the attention to others in his squadron.


I take your point sevvy
but it still isn't the done thing.
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#25 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,747 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:38 PM

I don't know.


Me neither.....but then we are not in charge of anything. Well, I'M not anyway!

#26 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:30 PM

Apparently the Algerian terrorist group is linked to one of the terrorist groups that the UK is clandestinely supporting (albeit politically rather than financially) against Assad in Syria.

Just like we supported Sadaam Hussain when we were more worried about Iran than Iraq.

The British public gets told what they want us to hear.


We did not support Saddam Hussein. The USA sent him reconnaisance pictures of Iranian positions but did not give him any arms. We gave no intelligence and sold arms for cash.

#27 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:33 PM

The Western world (UN) left it to the African Union to stop human rights abuse against Christians by the Sudanese government. The AU force was useless as none of the African states wanted to upset Sudan. The poor Darfuri Christians still got displaced, tortured, raped and killed by Moslems.

If the Christian West is to do anything in Africa, it should restrict itself to protecting Christians against muslim atrocities.

Incidentally, I have no religion.


I think you are a little confused here. Sudan was primarily a conflict between the Muslim Arab north and the black African Christian and animist south but Darfur is an exception to this.

People in Darfur are black African Muslims, which is why they didn't end up as part of South Sudan. It's a very nasty conflict but it is not a religious conflict.

#28 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:35 PM

I've just re-read my post. I wasn't pointing a finger. I was asking a question. So given the interpretation of the UN as a talking shop, how far up their agenda do you think the situation in Africa is? I mean to say, this is not just any conflict...the rise of militant Islamic fundamental terrorism seems to me to be more than trivial and more than local.

Still, if the UN isn't the right forum, what is? Unless there really isn't a problem at all?


As is the Islamist issue doesn't become a war between NATO and Russia or NATO and China then the UN will have done what it was designed to do.

#29 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,837 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:45 PM

We did not support Saddam Hussein. The USA sent him reconnaisance pictures of Iranian positions but did not give him any arms. We gave no intelligence and sold arms for cash.


When I worked for a local government waste disposal unit, we bought two heavy duty artic units ... originally built by a British company for hauling tanks across the desert. These had been supposedly built for supply to Saddam Hussein's regime under a government contract. However, the contract had got cancelled by HMG for political reasons.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#30 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,837 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:58 PM

I think you are a little confused here. Sudan was primarily a conflict between the Muslim Arab north and the black African Christian and animist south but Darfur is an exception to this.

People in Darfur are black African Muslims, which is why they didn't end up as part of South Sudan. It's a very nasty conflict but it is not a religious conflict.


As I understand it, a lot of Christians were either driven or fled into the Darfur desert because that's where the UN paid for refugee camps which the African Union was supposed to police and protect.

Edited by Wolford6, 22 January 2013 - 04:58 PM.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#31 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,747 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 05:02 PM

As is the Islamist issue doesn't become a war between NATO and Russia or NATO and China then the UN will have done what it was designed to do.


Not convinced. As posted earlier,, does this not apply?

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
  • to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
  • to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
  • to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
  • to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Edited by JohnM, 22 January 2013 - 05:05 PM.


#32 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 05:08 PM

When I worked for a local government waste disposal unit, we bought two heavy duty artic units ... originally built by a British company for hauling tanks across the desert. These had been supposedly built for supply to Saddam Hussein's regime under a government contract. However, the contract had got cancelled by HMG for political reasons.


Yeah, we sold them to the Iraqis then pulled the plug. Selling arms doesn't necessarily constitute "support". Most Iraqi weapons came from the USSR, Saddam was in the Soviet camp. A fact rarely mentioned.

#33 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 05:10 PM

Not convinced. As posted earlier,, does this not apply?

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

  • to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
  • to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
  • to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
  • to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,


It does but it applies to conflict between states not internal conflicts. The UN has never had much of a part to play in internal conflicts, quite deliberately, since this was the trigger for World War One.

There is a vague obligation to prevent genocide (not defined clearly) and an obligation to help refugees (not all countries signed up to this) and then an undertaking to try to alleviate the effects of war (Peace Monitors etc). At no point is there any right to intervene in the internal affairs of other states, in fact, it is prohibited unless specifically authorised by the UN.

Edited by Northern Sol, 22 January 2013 - 05:12 PM.


#34 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 05:16 PM

As I understand it, a lot of Christians were either driven or fled into the Darfur desert because that's where the UN paid for refugee camps which the African Union was supposed to police and protect.


Who would flee to Darfur? Why would Sudanese forces drive anyone to an area whose status is already contested?

Even if anyone had, why would they stay there rather than return to the independent state of South Sudan?

#35 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,747 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 06:21 PM

Who will save us from militant Islam terrorists?

#36 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,837 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 06:48 PM

Who would flee to Darfur? Why would Sudanese forces drive anyone to an area whose status is already contested?

Even if anyone had, why would they stay there rather than return to the independent state of South Sudan?


I'm guessing that Nuba Christians were driven there. I just remember seeing a harrowing newspaper article about a widowed Christian woman and her associates in of the camps. At that time, there was no South Sudan.

http://www.sudantrib...hp?article45244

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#37 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 07:53 PM

I'm guessing that Nuba Christians were driven there. I just remember seeing a harrowing newspaper article about a widowed Christian woman and her associates in of the camps. At that time, there was no South Sudan.

http://www.sudantrib...hp?article45244


The Nuba are mostly Muslim.

#38 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 07:54 PM

Who will save us from militant Islam terrorists?


We will.

#39 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:00 PM

I merely ask the question on the basis that there seems to be growing instability in the region and that if no one does anything, then nothing will be done. If you are happy with that, then fine.


And I merely ask the question as to what sort of strength they need to show. If it is military force you are thinking of, where will that come from? If it is some other sort of strength what do you have in mind, and how will the UN - an organisation made up of member states - deliver it?
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#40 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,837 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:52 PM

The Nuba are mostly Muslim.


From Wikipedia:

The majority of the Nuba living in the east, west and northern parts of the mountains are Muslims, while those living to the south are either Christians or practice traditional animistic religions.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users