Darfur as a Cause for the Left

Last month rallies were held nationwide to end the genocide in Darfur. Every decent human being on the planet wants to see an end to the holocaust occurring in the Sudan. As always, ignoring the problem and politics has taken precedent instead of a real world solution.

In Chicago Congressional lawmakers including Jan Schawkowsky (D—IL) and Danny Davis (D—IL) addressed the crowd calling for the murders in Darfur to stop. Neither of them offered any solutions to the crisis. Like every rally in America featuring leftist speakers, the crowd held signs and made statements criticizing the Bush administration for not doing anything. The fact that President Bush is the only world leader to characterize the tragedy in the Sudan as genocide is completely ignored by a crowd who view hating Bush a priority over saving lives.

The rally in Washington D.C. was similar to the rally in Chicago on a larger scale. Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism addressing the crowd on the National Mall raised the question,

'Where were our President and Congress? Where was NATO? Where was the EU? Above all where was the UN?  Did they not know? Did they not care? Will you let that happen?'

To answer the well intentioned rabbi, we know that President Bush is the only leader bringing real attention to the issue. Do you honestly expect NATO, the EU and especially the UN to do a damn thing? These organizations and European countries have been ignoring genocide and refusing to defend those who can't defend themselves since their creation. My question to those who attended the rallies is: are you willing to commit to truly ending genocide or are well intentioned speeches and political grandstanding good enough?

In a region where there are few diplomatic channels, which means fewer solutions, the world would have to commit to military action to stop the genocide in the Sudan. I am not talking about peacekeeping troops that are incapable of keeping the peace. I am referring to a world—wide coalition refusing to allow the Holocaust to repeat itself, and using military force to destroy the armies and factions that have caused the death of an estimated 400,000 people and displaced nearly 2 million.  I don't believe the rally attendees and the world are willing to do what it takes to save the people in Africa. They probably would prefer to talk a good game and stop at Starbucks after the rally.

I also must ask the following question to the leftists who claim they are concerned about Darfur. Why are the people of Darfur more important than the people of Iraq? You cry for an end to the tragedy and a few go as far as to call for NATO and UN intervention. But when Saddam Hussein was mass murdering Kurds your voices mostly were silent and adamantly opposed to any military action to save the the massacred men, woman and children.

However Darfur is different in your mind, the people of Africa are suddenly worth saving, while the people of Iraq are not? Dare I say that President Bush did what his father and President Clinton refused to do and finally put an end to the inhumane rule of Saddam Hussein.

Hatred for President Bush amongst the American left is the sole reason why liberating the Iraqi people from a genocidal tyrant is still not a justifiable reason for the war in Iraq. I'm sure if President Bush called for military action in the Sudan, the people of Darfur suddenly would not be that important anymore.

Paul Miller is a conservative activist and has been published in the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Jewish Star and various web—based magazines. You can read his opinions at Paulies Point.

Last month rallies were held nationwide to end the genocide in Darfur. Every decent human being on the planet wants to see an end to the holocaust occurring in the Sudan. As always, ignoring the problem and politics has taken precedent instead of a real world solution.

In Chicago Congressional lawmakers including Jan Schawkowsky (D—IL) and Danny Davis (D—IL) addressed the crowd calling for the murders in Darfur to stop. Neither of them offered any solutions to the crisis. Like every rally in America featuring leftist speakers, the crowd held signs and made statements criticizing the Bush administration for not doing anything. The fact that President Bush is the only world leader to characterize the tragedy in the Sudan as genocide is completely ignored by a crowd who view hating Bush a priority over saving lives.

The rally in Washington D.C. was similar to the rally in Chicago on a larger scale. Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism addressing the crowd on the National Mall raised the question,

'Where were our President and Congress? Where was NATO? Where was the EU? Above all where was the UN?  Did they not know? Did they not care? Will you let that happen?'

To answer the well intentioned rabbi, we know that President Bush is the only leader bringing real attention to the issue. Do you honestly expect NATO, the EU and especially the UN to do a damn thing? These organizations and European countries have been ignoring genocide and refusing to defend those who can't defend themselves since their creation. My question to those who attended the rallies is: are you willing to commit to truly ending genocide or are well intentioned speeches and political grandstanding good enough?

In a region where there are few diplomatic channels, which means fewer solutions, the world would have to commit to military action to stop the genocide in the Sudan. I am not talking about peacekeeping troops that are incapable of keeping the peace. I am referring to a world—wide coalition refusing to allow the Holocaust to repeat itself, and using military force to destroy the armies and factions that have caused the death of an estimated 400,000 people and displaced nearly 2 million.  I don't believe the rally attendees and the world are willing to do what it takes to save the people in Africa. They probably would prefer to talk a good game and stop at Starbucks after the rally.

I also must ask the following question to the leftists who claim they are concerned about Darfur. Why are the people of Darfur more important than the people of Iraq? You cry for an end to the tragedy and a few go as far as to call for NATO and UN intervention. But when Saddam Hussein was mass murdering Kurds your voices mostly were silent and adamantly opposed to any military action to save the the massacred men, woman and children.

However Darfur is different in your mind, the people of Africa are suddenly worth saving, while the people of Iraq are not? Dare I say that President Bush did what his father and President Clinton refused to do and finally put an end to the inhumane rule of Saddam Hussein.

Hatred for President Bush amongst the American left is the sole reason why liberating the Iraqi people from a genocidal tyrant is still not a justifiable reason for the war in Iraq. I'm sure if President Bush called for military action in the Sudan, the people of Darfur suddenly would not be that important anymore.

Paul Miller is a conservative activist and has been published in the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Jewish Star and various web—based magazines. You can read his opinions at Paulies Point.