Spring Break
Editorial: Students still need to consider Darfur in upcoming election
Issue date: 2/15/08 Section: Editorial/Opinion
02/15/08 - Yesterday, President George W. Bush told the British Broadcasting Corporation that he did not send United States troops into Darfur because he did not want Americans in another Middle Eastern country.
Bush called the conflict in Sudan a genocide and told the BBC that it was a seminal decision during his presidency.
Yet, the United States seems to have done little to stop this genocide. After Rwanda, when Americans were so appalled by our leaders' lack of interest in stopping the Rwandan genocide, Americans said that they would never allow an atrocity like that to happen again. Today, an atrocity on the level of Rwanda is happening, and the United States is doing nothing.
Students have seen and heard about the horrible events happening in Sudan. Some have given to charity. Others have joined more than 500 Facebook groups dedicated to stopping the genocide in Sudan. URI even has its own group called "URI STAND: A Student Anti-Genocide Coalition (Darfur)."
Some groups tell students to start and sign petitions against the genocide, print and post flyers, contact representatives in federal government and to donate to legitimate organizations giving aid to Darfur. These are some of the ways that students can get involved. It may take a few minutes, but it eventually will save a life, maybe even 10 lives.
It is hard to hear a president who is a "compassionate conservative" say that he was unable to send American troops to stop an ongoing genocide. It is just as hard to try to understand how the previous president was unable to send Americans to stop the 100-day genocide in Rwanda, with films and media reports of women and children being murdered with machetes.
Perhaps the next president will take a bigger interest in Darfur and Sudan, but his or her time will most likely be spent on cleaning up the Iraq debacle. Instead, we'll have to hope that another country will be able to stop the steady violence, or that the United Nations will live up to its mission of "Never Again," which was instilled after the Holocaust.
It is not fair to blame the United States government for a genocide in another country, but it is fair to criticize its complete lack of response. If we are the sole superpower on the planet, with an organization of nations that is incapable of backing any of its words, it should be a priority of the United States to stop immoral murders.
As we enter the most competitive presidential race in years, students should take this important issue into account. What will your candidate do when there is a genocide during his or her term? Their opinion and words during this campaign will dictate what they do in their four years in the oval office.
Bush called the conflict in Sudan a genocide and told the BBC that it was a seminal decision during his presidency.
Yet, the United States seems to have done little to stop this genocide. After Rwanda, when Americans were so appalled by our leaders' lack of interest in stopping the Rwandan genocide, Americans said that they would never allow an atrocity like that to happen again. Today, an atrocity on the level of Rwanda is happening, and the United States is doing nothing.
Students have seen and heard about the horrible events happening in Sudan. Some have given to charity. Others have joined more than 500 Facebook groups dedicated to stopping the genocide in Sudan. URI even has its own group called "URI STAND: A Student Anti-Genocide Coalition (Darfur)."
Some groups tell students to start and sign petitions against the genocide, print and post flyers, contact representatives in federal government and to donate to legitimate organizations giving aid to Darfur. These are some of the ways that students can get involved. It may take a few minutes, but it eventually will save a life, maybe even 10 lives.
It is hard to hear a president who is a "compassionate conservative" say that he was unable to send American troops to stop an ongoing genocide. It is just as hard to try to understand how the previous president was unable to send Americans to stop the 100-day genocide in Rwanda, with films and media reports of women and children being murdered with machetes.
Perhaps the next president will take a bigger interest in Darfur and Sudan, but his or her time will most likely be spent on cleaning up the Iraq debacle. Instead, we'll have to hope that another country will be able to stop the steady violence, or that the United Nations will live up to its mission of "Never Again," which was instilled after the Holocaust.
It is not fair to blame the United States government for a genocide in another country, but it is fair to criticize its complete lack of response. If we are the sole superpower on the planet, with an organization of nations that is incapable of backing any of its words, it should be a priority of the United States to stop immoral murders.
As we enter the most competitive presidential race in years, students should take this important issue into account. What will your candidate do when there is a genocide during his or her term? Their opinion and words during this campaign will dictate what they do in their four years in the oval office.
