Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,705
Im not saying you should go now, its already over. But in the 80s and even in the start of the 90s you could have given a chance to a poor poor people. At least something to hope for, but instead you dealt with them in an extreme selfish way by which you cut off every sources and help they had and would have had in the future at that time.


Yet you opted to deal with that issue the same way you did with Somalia, Yemen, Iraq,...etc. Its for this the hate for America keeps on spreading IMO.
Dude you're so off based it's not even funny. Most of the reason for the place that many third world countries are in at the moment is not completely the fault of the United States. Sure the U.S. bungled things in Afganistan, Iraq, and a few central American nations. Organizations such as the World Bank have played huge roles (even more so than the United States) in the lack of industrialization and modernization as have petrol companies such as Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum. Both of which have had at least minor responsibilities for the displacement and murder of native populations.

The reason a Chinese company was able to gain oil rights in the Sudan and Russian companies have oil rights in Chad is because both companies are run by dictatorial governments that have committed atrocities against their own people.
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
So the United States should just hand out cash to third world nations?
Who said anything about handing cash to 3rd world countries?! unless you call medical supplies and basic food supplies, cash. That's what a country torn by civil world and famine(at that time it was even worse than now in Darfur) needs. Yet that's what they didn't get, or at least the Sudanese people didn't. Why? Because they had a so called "dangerous/terrorist" government, so what? you kill whole people for having a fucked up government?!


All Im saying is that the US could have dealt with the Sudanese issue in a different and more decisive way where both inside and outside parties could have ended up gaining.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
Cuba
Nicaragua
Dominican Republic
Swaziland, Congo, Cameroon, Togo, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, Rwanda, Gabon, Egypt, Tunisia


Take your pick of previously Us Supported corrupt dictatorship.
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
Dude you're so off based it's not even funny. Most of the reason for the place that many third world countries are in at the moment is not completely the fault of the United States. Sure the U.S. bungled things in Afganistan, Iraq, and a few central American nations. Organizations such as the World Bank have played huge roles (even more so than the United States) in the lack of industrialization and modernization as have petrol companies such as Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum. Both of which have had at least minor responsibilities for the displacement and murder of native populations.

The reason a Chinese company was able to gain oil rights in the Sudan and Russian companies have oil rights in Chad is because both companies are run by dictatorial governments that have committed atrocities against their own people.
I didn't say its all America's fault man! The Sudanese government along with the Chinese, Russian, weapons black market and even some Arabian governments are involved in this shit.
 

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,705
Who said anything about handing cash to 3rd world countries?! unless you call medical supplies and basic food supplies, cash. That's what a country torn by civil world and famine(at that time it was even worse than now in Darfur) needs. Yet that's what they didn't get, or at least the Sudanese people didn't. Why? Because they had a so called "dangerous/terrorist" government, so what? you kill whole people for having a fucked up government?!


All Im saying is that the US could have dealt with the Sudanese issue in a different and more decisive way where both inside and outside parties could have ended up gaining.
Oh I agree that the U.S. could have helped in Darfur. At the same time. The U.N. has had a heavy presence in the region for a couple of years now. And before that the African Nations and the other regional African alliances also could have helped. SO could European nations. China could have sent in peacekeepers. Russia as well. Jordan too. Egypt's to the north, why didn't they send help? The truth is my friend, no one did anything for Darfur. Why? It probably had something to do with the fact that PetrolChina has had an eye on a resource mining contract in the region for as long as the conflict been on going. China is a major player in the UN, so is the former USSR. They have as much weight as the US in the UN, together they have more. The reason no one helped Darfur is because oil is easier to take when a nation or region is in conflict. Ask a Nigerian.

And next time you on exclaiming how grateful and happy the Sudanese people are that Chinese people are buy their oil. Remember that the majority of the Sudanese people do not live in palaces with millions of yuan or euros in their banks, talking in internet football forums. The people of the Sudan live south of the Sahara. Their lives are hard because they can't eat oil, they can't drink oil. And future they have to look forward involves unsteady, often broken cease fires. Tromping through wadiis hoping not to get shot, dismembered, and raped. In short, the people of the Sudan don't give a shit about their government's treay with China.
 

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
They weren't 3rd world until the Cold War, U.S. puts money in hands of corrupt 'non-communists' to win cold war, countries don't develop, beating soviets more important that doing the right thing, people die, , 3rd world gets more and more poor, cold war ends,pile of shit left.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,962
Funny how China isn't blamed for their own funding of genocide, but it's the US's fault for not doing anything.

Folks in the Middle East can't have it both ways. When we're there, you hate us. When we're not there, you hate us.

That's why I say pull every and all support from everywhere around the world. Let people fend for themselves.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 14, Guests: 107)