Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 12/11/2008 9:35 am

Bush's Darfur Meet and Greet Worth 1,000 Words

By The Staff at wowOwow.com
© AP

George W. Bush obviously wants to go out on a high note.

The president yesterday blasted Sudan for its ongoing inaction on genocide in the Darfur region. "I am frustrated with the pace of activities," said the outgoing president, who went on to insist that "the United Nations must expedite on sending troops, peacekeepers to provide security." Bush also stressed that the United States “must continue to rally the international community to put pressure on the government.” (Because we’ve been so effective thus far — Darfur’s been blood-soaked since 2003, when rebel clans took on the Sudanese government and sparked a war that has claimed an estimated 300,000 lives. Bush basically sat back and watched the mess unfold.)

Sudanese national Dr. Halima Bashir, who covered herself to prevent being targeted by enemies, also spoke out against the crisis, albeit with less force than the president: "We do not need to wait any more. We need real action,” said the well-placed Bashir. The soft-spoken intellectual chronicled her own tribulations in the book, Tears of the Desert: A Memoir of Survival in Darfur.

Now, we don’t want to question Bush’s commitment to Sudanese peace, but his stern warning yesterday, which was international human rights day, comes off as a publicity ploy more than anything else. He is, after all, trying to paint the best picture of his presidency as possible. And this one, which shows his deep interest in Bashir, speaks volumes.

31 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Frank Key
Diana: Bush has done more for Africa then any other PERSON in history. Thats a fact. Heres an article for you to read. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/popular-in-africa-bush-ha… Regarding Darfur; What lead do you suggest? Should we go in with aircraft an attack the bad guys? You’d be screaming bloody murder again. What you need to worry about is the breakdown Obama is having right now, involving his associations with crooked politicians. Obama knew all about the Governer of IL being a scammer. He used these people to his own benefit to get into the Whitehouse. Then disowns them all. What does that say about someone who should be upfront and truthful with the American people. He’s not even in office, yet he’s trying to explain himself already. David Axelrod, Obamas campaign manager said Obama talked with the Governer of IL. At a news conference Obama said he never had a meeting of any kind with him. Then Axelrod put out a statement that he made a mistake. The problen with liars, they don’t know who said what to who and when. Obama and all his people are all liars. Why not get tough on the Governer of IL, give his some harsh words. A President needs to be tough, not talk about his “team crunching the numbers”. His gentle voice is getting old quick, grow some cojones.
By Frank Key on 12/11/2008 11:50 pm
Frannie Em
Diana What do you mean by lead the way. The UN is corrupt and China and Russia vote us down in the Security Council. How do we lead the way? I don’t know how much the Sudanese need us when they have Russia and China as cash sources.
By Frannie Em on 12/12/2008 12:29 am
Diana T
Well, I guess we have to remember how we were when we had our mojo working before this administration came into power. When was our diplomatic peak period and what did we do then; i.e. how did we approach problems and how did we communicate with other countries. Old LBJ had a great saying, and I always enjoy hearing Doris Kearns Goodwin quote him: ” ‘Tis better to have your enemies inside the tent pissing out that outside the tent pissing in.”
By Diana T on 12/12/2008 8:58 am
Frannie Em
Diana LOL. Good ole LBJ. I guess we need some mojo. Hope it is coming, otherwise it will be worse.
By Frannie Em on 12/12/2008 9:11 pm
DeBúrca obj
Are you sure the EU is doing nothing?
By DeBúrca obj on 12/11/2008 3:57 pm
beth willis
Our opportunity with the greatest impact was last summer’s Olympics IMHO. Peace and grace
By beth willis on 12/11/2008 5:57 pm
Diana T
This is following up another post I just sent to you. I think we all need to get familiar with the issue in total. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/DarfurCSR22.pdf
By Diana T on 12/12/2008 9:23 am
Frannie Em
The pressure has to be put on the Chinese because they are funding the Sudanese by buying their oil. Many of the weapons that are killing the people in Darfur are from China. China is scouring the earth of all of it’s natural resources and they have a receptive player in the Sudanese. Many of the weapons confiscated in Afghanistan at the beginning of the war, were from China. Chinese weapons continue to get into the hands of the insurgents. Bomb making material is coming from China. Well President Bush, what are you going to do about China? That is where the pressure should be put. You know the UN will do nothing, nor will the international community, they haven’t done anything so far. They drag their feet and creep around international issues unless there is something in it for them. Why do you sit up there and make empty speeches that you know will come to nothing because you are leaving office? Why don’t you get the international community to do something about China, or is it that everyone just wants cheap goods? Maybe if you withdraw our troops from Europe and then they have something at stake (supplying their own security), they will get more involved. They didn’t want to do anything about Bosnia or the Taliban or Osama Bin Laden, although most countries had terrorist activities and bombings. While we are at it, why hasn’t congress done anything about Darfur? Why haven’t they pursued the issue? They have more power than the president. If they wanted to do something about it, they could have. I am not happy with Bush, but c’mon Wowowow, the article seems a little simplistic.
By Frannie Em on 12/11/2008 12:40 pm
Diana T
Darfur is not a simple subject, and Congress can’t do a whole lot on its own. http://www.cfr.org/search.html?q=darfur&ie=&site=cfr&output=xml_no_dtd&c… Here is some resource material. And, it goes back a few years.
By Diana T on 12/11/2008 1:20 pm
Frannie Em
Diana THanks for the links, will check them out tomorrow, late now and eyes tired. Congress cannot do a whole lot unless they start. They can start and bring the issue up for consideration. They can let the White House know they want something done. They can persuade for influence if they want to. There is much that they can do. If airlifts are starting those had to be in process for a while. Diana, why is it the US that has to do it? Our sons and daughters are just as precious to us as the sons and daughters in the EU. If we have nothing to bargain with, or if we try to negotiate and are thwarted by Russia and China, then what? We are in a war with Russia or China? This is so lopsided. If we go in we are imperialistic, if we don’t we stand by and watch genocide as Clinton did in Rwanda. There are many bad actors and China and Russia could boycott the Sudanese and then they would have to deal, but they won’t do that.
By Frannie Em on 12/12/2008 12:17 am
Diana T
It has often been asked by historians what would have happened if the America Firsters had not forced Roosevelt to stay out of the war against Hitler for so long, not to intervene at all costs. And, cost it did. The most calculated Genocide in our history. How many Jews would have been saved if we had become involved sooner? Washington had a pretty good idea what was going on in 1940—after all Hitler had invaded Poland in 1939, he had started his state sponsored anti-Jewish legislation in 1933. The America First Committee organized in 1940 and had some distinguished folks in it, Gerald Ford and Sargent Shriver among them. They did not want us to get involved at all in WW2 period, and we did after Pearl Harbor. The State Department knew that Jews were being rounded up. This country turned back a ship full of Jews in 1939, who attempted to get to the States because they thought they would get a safe haven. Two thirds (2 out of 3!) Jews were killed in “The Final Solution”, as it was called by the Gestapo, during WW2. 6 million. Poles, Gypsies, and so many others—what would have happened if we had not waited so long? This is one reason I believe that as the major world power, we have to take a leadership role in diplomacy. I’m not talking invasions and soldiers. But, we at least need to remind the Europeans, UN, in fact the whole civilized world of their responsibilities to those that are the very least among us. I guess I call it Moral Leadership.
By Diana T on 12/12/2008 10:17 pm
Frannie Em
Diana Very good and solid point. I wish it were that simple. Saddam Hussein gassed many of his citizens with chemical weapons, which was genocide, Bush trumped up another reason, and we went in. Clinton stopped the genocide in Bosnia, but the problem is, we do it with our military. YOU are right, we should do it another way, but that is the way the men in Washington have led the way. The Europeans have their own interests that result in power plays back and forth, can’t always count on them going along with what we want. I like you idea, and if Obama can work it out, that would be great.
By Frannie Em on 12/16/2008 1:47 am
JJ GB
Not to take the attention away from this atrocity, but Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe is another of several unforgivable wrongs being done to humans that should not be tolerated by anyone who has knowledge of it. They are as much a monster as Hitler ever was. i would rather see those wrongs being addressed than Iraq or Afganistan. I know, I know, terrorists and all that, but that’s my opinion.
By JJ GB on 12/11/2008 5:30 pm
Bonnie Oliver
This is really a bit over the top. Of all the Presidents in the history of the United States, President Bush has done more to help the people residing in Africa than any other President. He has led the effort to stem the AIDS epidemic by sending in thousands of medical personnel and spending billions of dollars in supplies. The American effort has made a difference and all for the better. Yes, there is much to be done and a whole hatful of prejudices yet to overcome. However, this President decided to face the AIDS crisis head on and his decision has been lauded throughout the continent. As for genocide occurring in areas of Darfur, what exactly does anyone expect the President of the United States to do? When genocide was occurring in Rwanda, President Clinton was also powerless to stop the killing. He did nothing while perhaps as many as a million or more people were slaughtered. Who is in favor of sending American armed forces into Africa? Anyone? President Clinton could not do it nor can President Bush. If the nations of the world want genocide to cease then the peoples of those countries must offer up their troops in sacrifice to end the killing. And so far not one country on this planet is willing to make that sacrifice because the people are not in agreement. So genocide continues… from one poor African country to the next. By the way, the author of this article for wOw is woefully prejudicial.
By Bonnie Oliver on 12/11/2008 6:18 pm
Frannie Em
Bonnie I read that they figure at this point Bush’s efforts in Africa against AIDS has saved about 225,000 lives. I know he has worked tirelessly to help the African people, but not much has been done about Darfur, it has been going on a long time. I am in a twist about it, I believe he could have done more, yet at the same time, Russia and China would probably block it. I understand that China is having a terrible time during this financial crisis. Their unemployment is soaring, and their standard of living for the average citizen has even lowered. Russia is also feeling the hit of this crisis. Their billionaires are not buying so much, and as the price of oil drops their wealth drops. I think the only country that is not embroiled in the crisis is India, their economy keeps growing. Maybe with the drop in oil prices Sudan won’t have so much disposable cash to buy weapons to commit genocide.
By Frannie Em on 12/12/2008 12:43 am