Constructive gadfly
Published on September 15, 2007 By stevendedalus In Politics
That a nation bred out of Diaspora would deny refugees entry to their land is ironic. Considering Israel’s paranoia of its predominately European make up becoming a minority particularly with the ominous pressure of Palestinian’s “right of return,” in addition to being a very small country, it is understandable despite the besmirched image. Nonetheless, Israel is allowing 500 from Darfur while deciding to expel 1200 to Egypt, but so far only 48 as Egypt is not keen on the idea, having already 2 million Sudanese, including refugees from Darfur. The point here is how long will the UN put up with this impasse in lieu of forcefully rectifying the displaced and genocidal conditions in Sudan? And why can’t the African nations unite and protest these atrocities?
Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Sep 15, 2007

African nations won't unite to protest these attrocities because it might end up shedding light on the attrocities of their own.

Most African nations aren't run by governments, they are run by warlords.  Why should we expect them to act like governments?

on Sep 15, 2007
"And why can’t the African nations unite and protest these atrocities?"

Para's reply and this:

The Sudanese government has not yet succeeded to make up a good explanation for how it is the Jews' or Israel's fault.

Once the genocide can be blamed on the Jews, there will be a world-wide outcry.
on Sep 15, 2007

Why should we expect them to act like governments?
I agree and ditto for Afghanistan and Iraq. 

Once the genocide can be blamed on the Jews, there will be a world-wide outcry.
Interesting take.

on Sep 15, 2007
I agree and ditto for Afghanistan and Iraq.


I'll agree wiht your "ditto" on Afghanistan, but Iraq has a government that was elected by the people in a free election. It's not a matter of whether there is a government in Iraq as much as, will Iran, Syria and the Islamist terrorist groups leave them alone long enough to move forward?
on Sep 15, 2007
The point here is how long will the UN put up with this impasse in lieu of forcefully rectifying the displaced and genocidal conditions in Sudan


For as long as its members insist that the UN are Peace Keepers, not Peace Enforcers. It needs more than BB guns to separate waring factions, and no major power in the UN is going to sanction forceful insertion of troops without some kind of peace accord in place on the ground - no matter how fragile that accord is. Its only happened once, Korea, and then only because the Russians abstained in the Security Council because they had their own problems with the Chinese.

The spectre of the UN becoming a world wide policeforce, acting as Peace Enforcers, separate from the checks and balances of National Governments, is too terrifying to contemplate. So with all its imperfections, Peace Keepers it is, no other structure would be endorsed by member states as a permanent institution.
on Sep 15, 2007
Exactly Zydor! It would be much better to have pockets of attrocious actions around the world than grant any 1 organization the power and authority to try to quell them.

The UN has already proven it can't be trusted with even the terms of its charter. Nothing about their decisions thus far should give anyone reason to believe they will act any better if given MORE power.
on Sep 15, 2007
Since Israel has a law that allows anyone (even a non-Jew) who had a jewish grandparent to emigrate and get citizenship. They have recently even had citizens who were found to be Neo-Nazis. I suspect that they are rethinking this policy to ensure that any future residents have a religious stake in the survival of their country.
on Sep 15, 2007

It would be much better to have pockets of attrocious actions around the world than grant any 1 organization the power and authority to try to quell them.
  Like preemptive action by the US. I gather.

The spectre of the UN becoming a world wide policeforce, acting as Peace Enforcers, separate from the checks and balances of National Governments, is too terrifying to contemplate. So with all its imperfections, Peace Keepers it is, no other structure would be endorsed by member states as a permanent institution.
Well said!

on Sep 15, 2007
they are rethinking this policy
as we should be doing by closing the borders and declaring a moratorium on immigration.
on Sep 16, 2007

Like preemptive action by the US. I gather.

Yawn.  There was a ceasefire agreement between the US and Iraq, it was broken, it as finally enforced.

on Sep 18, 2007
will Iran, Syria and the Islamist terrorist groups leave them alone long enough to move forward?
Good point; yet you can't lay all the blame on foreigners, including us.
on Sep 18, 2007
There was a ceasefire agreement between the US and Iraq, it was broken, it as finally enforced
As I answered you before on another blog: it was not justification to commit ground troops.
on Sep 18, 2007
Since Israel has a law that allows anyone (even a non-Jew) who had a jewish grandparent to emigrate and get citizenship. They have recently even had citizens who were found to be Neo-Nazis. I suspect that they are rethinking this policy to ensure that any future residents have a religious stake in the survival of their country.




funny Hitler and Stalin both would have qualified
on Sep 18, 2007
Funny you should mention Stalin Daniel, the 8 neo-nazi scum were from the former Soviet union. They were stupid enough to videotape themselves giving nazi salutes and beating up old men, and vandalizing Synagogues. Their actual justification for emigration was fairly weak. What I wonder is how all of these kindred spirits found each other. Perhaps the lowest of scum slips to the bottom?
on Sep 19, 2007
they are rethinking this policy
They definitely are; immigrants should be "true blooded" Jews.
2 Pages1 2