The Genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan has already claimed approximately 400,000 lives and forced over 1.5 million people to flee their country. The United Nations response has been slowed by the Arab-controlled Sudanese Government and overwhelmed African Union forces.
The United States has given $270 Million to help solve this humanitarian crisis. In these difficult financial times, many Americans feel that we should concentrate on solving United States' domestic problems first then concentrate on aiding other nations and peoples. What do you think? Should US taxdollars be spent trying to help these refugees and stop future attrocities against the civilian population in Sudan? OR Should our tax dollars be spent solving domestic problems like health care, unemployment, house foreclosures, etc.?
54 comments:
I think that there should be a balance. That neither ignoring domestic problems or ignoring Darfur is a good option. I think that the government should focus on both, but should stop what is happening in Darfur because people are being murdered and that if the world people do not come and help more will be killed until there is no one left. For this urgent reason, I think that the United States government should help Darfur first because we have stood looking on the sidelines for way to long and too many people have died.
On the other hand, domestic problems are also important and need to be taken care of, but I believe that too many people have died in Darfur to ignore it any longer and that action needs to be taken. So in conclusion, I believe that both sides deserve tax dollars but that Darfur needs it more quickly because the world people have stood by and watched for too long without great action.
--Annika Peterson
I believe that the United States has a duty to help the people in Darfur. There are people dying as I'm typing this. Although the African Union doesn't want to help us, the people who are fleeing for their lives, being raped, being killed, and having other horrible things happen to them most likely do. If something as horrible as what's happening in Darfur happened in America, we would want to be able fix it ourselves. However, if that wasn't working we would need help.
There is the argument that we should focus on issues closer to home, for example, unemployment and homelessness. I believe that these are worthy causes, but Darfur is a more pressing problem. Financial issues don't even compare to the awful actions occuring in Darfur. People are being killed and raped, and we are trying to solve debts? There is a time for that, and now is not it. When the genocide is straightened out, then we can worry about those things, but Sudan is more important right now.
By no means is this question an easy one. To be perfectly honest, I'm not even really sure how to answer it. It's awful what's happening in Darfur; that much is true. But on the other hand, there are other things we could be trying to fix instead of wasting time trying to help everybody else. I don't mean to sound selfish or anything, but if we tick off the rest of the world by trying to offer help they don't want, regardless of need, it could end very badly for us.
But on the other hand, by no means do I think it's wrong that the U.S. has been giving money and trying to help out. It's good that our leaders are taking other nations aches and pains into account in their decisions. However, I won't even try and say that we should do 'this' or 'that', because I know that, either way, people will suffer, and I'm not willing to take a side.
I definately think we should be sending money to Darfur. It would be very helpful if the A.U. wanted our help, so I think the U.S. should try to get Africa to let us in to support them and make a difference. I think it seems somewhat selfish not to send money to Darfur when we are spending $275 million per day in Iraq. To me, Darfur is a much more worthy cause because we are trying to save innocent people from being killed.
I believe it is also important to help out here, in the U.S, however the people in Sudan are in general in a much worse situation. If the U.S. could cut back on spending in some other areas, then there may be enough money to spend on Darfur while still working to improve health care and unemployment in the U.S. I don't believe that it is fair to make U.S. citizens (who have worked hard to be in their positions) suffer to help everyone else in the world, but continued monetary support to Sudan would not cause any suffering compared to what people in Darfur are losing-- their lives.
I believe that the United States should remain hepling Darfur, but in defferent measures. It is obvious that Darfur is going through drastic times, and the people are desperate for any aid they can aquire. Yet I also think that money can not solve all problems, esspecially war. The United States should aid Darfur physically. As in actually having some military troops go in, help the people, and try to bring some peace to areas. Even if its so much as just providing clean water and food to the people the smallest amount of support can always help.
Perhaps the United States could even back out of helping Darfur momentarrily just to monitor how things go, and if things keep proceeding downwards we go back in to aid. This would also give Darfur the oppertunity to understand whether or not they really need us, and to understand that we are here to help. Further more it would give the United States time to regain profit, not only benifiting society , but then if we need to go back to aid Darfur we will have more money to do so. In conclusion I believe the U.S. should keep helping Darfur , but in different ways, and after we regain profit and balence with other countries.
In choosing whether or not to involve ourselves – the United States – in global conflicts, we should not consider the cost. Rather, we should consider the scale of the problem. Genocide is the highest crime and worst possible violation of human rights that has ever been committed. Genocide is far worse than any problems faced in the US.
Not only is genocide worse than issues in the US, it is a crime that every country must punish, according to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Genocide is an issue that should go deeper than domestic versus international, Democrat versus Republican. We have a duty as human beings to protect each other. Genocide – any genocide – poses the question: Are we willing to save lives? Besides, the role of most US citizens in bringing an end to the genocide would be paying taxes. By cutting back on some areas of spending or increasing taxes, more money could be spent helping Darfur. The United States should also maintain diplomatic relations – as mentioned above, money is not always the answer. Although the US cannot, and should never, be involved in numerous world conflicts, genocide cannot be pushed aside.
~Elisabeth Meyer
I think we should absolutely be giving more aide in regards to Darfur. We should be giving more money, supplies, and food to charity organizations so that they can help the people. 270 million sounds like a lot. But it's really not that much compared to how much we could be giving, and how much we could be helping.
Sure, we have our share of problems in America, unemployment, homelessness, children without health care, but when it comes down to it, we are NOT starving to death. We are NOT in danger of dying each and every day (or the majority of us at least). Sure, we have poor, hungry people but we also have many ways by which these people can get help. Don't get me wrong, there's a lot more we could--and should--be doing to help US citizens. But at the moment it is more important to realize how many people are dying, right NOW. As I type this. How many people have no families left? The number is nearly incomprehensible. These people need help now. And we have the means to give it.
For obvious reasons, this is not an easy question to answer. Problems in the United States vary from lack of health care to homelessness, to drug addictions and the government's clear disregard for global climate change. However, we will not take more action on many of these issues until a new president is elected, and the current administration is willing to help the people of Darfur now. There are many things in the world that deserve our attention and our tax money. This is a question of priority. If we consider the UN's stubborn avoidance of the phrase "genocide" we must question as to how these nations may be benefiting from not using this word. If these nations are in the same sort of dilemma as is the United States with trade with China, there may be a motive for steering their speeches around "genocide". And though China does supply the United States with goods, they also violate many human rights laws as well as blatantly ignore the concept of energy efficiency. Even if our decisions may affect the low prices of a pair of new shoes, a shirt, or a small plastic toy, the world could benefit when large countries are no longer exploiting the cheap labor from China. We need to help the people of Sudan by sending in aid, because if we are currently ignoring domestic issues, there is no reason to focus on Sudan and still do nothing. We must help the people in dire situations as this is not only a question of money but also of morals. There are many people in the world who need help. We should help the people in Darfur because every person has the right to see a tomorrow and not just the possibility of being brutally murdered. Those people deserve significant action from the world. We, as a country, are part of that and we have the means.
--Lili Bolton
I think that many of our tax dollars should go to the genocide in Sudan. Darfur is facing much greater hardships than Americans like the fact that many women are raped daily and thousands of people are murdered in only one day. Obviously we shouldn't send all of the money away instead of helping our neighbors with healthcare and unemployment financial support but we should split it somewhat but not evenly. I think the money should be split eighty to Darfur and twenty to the Americans.
I know that our nation isn’t necessarily in the best place to be lifting another nation off of its feet but we cannot watch an innocent group of people get slaughtered. It is morally wrong to watch a generation of Sudanese possibly be erased forever.
I believe that the root cause of this genocide is not directly the fault of any Sudanese government, but rather that of the Chinese and American governments. Obviously China has oil intrests in Sudan, which is why they supply millitant groups with weapons in Sudan, however i believe that it is the United States duty to not only stop the killing but to also establish school systems, health care, and infastructure in general to help raise the education level in Sudan. With this, less young Sudanese men will be forced to join the army or the rebels, as they have the education for jobs that can support them. Also the Sudanese people will soon realize that China is frankly ripping them off, by buying their oil for such low prices, and will therefore move to different markets where they can actually make large profits from their natural resouces.
When i think of a perfect example of the modern politician approach to genocide, i think of the UN and America. I think that change at the very roots of our political system is needed, if we can ever hope for politicians to stand for what is right, and not what will get them an easy ride into their next term.
Also im sure a nation like Sudan would become one of our strong trade partners if we develop them into a strong independent Country, which would return at least some of our investment in Sudan back to America.
so yes i am for spending more money in Sudan rather than immediately supporting those in America in harsh, yet much better than the Sudanese, condition.
I am not totally decided on this matter. Although I feel awful about the situation in Darfur and think it is really important to help there is also the issue of the financial trouble America is in.
The best solution I can think of is to keep tax dollars going to domestic problems because they are not to be underestimated. At the same time America should be raising awareness and doing everything in their power to help. Events like live aid and other fundraisers can really help to raise money without taking away what this country needs.
Darfur needs serious help so charities are the best we can do at the moment.
This is a very hard issue. I feel that what is happening in Darfur is awful and can not be ignored. However, there is issues going on in the U.S. that we should being dealing with too. I do feel more strongly about helping the people in Darfur. The money that we have sent them so far has been useful to them and i think we should continue helping. Also, our money can help in so many ways even if that money is just going to shelter or clean water. But this issues is a very though one to solve.
As i stated before, the other side to this argument is helping solve issues here in the U.S. and use our money for that. Issues such as, high rates of unemployment and homeless. These issues should be handled. However, I feel that what is going on in Darfur, the slaughtering of innocent people, should be handled first. What is going on in Darfur is not ok in any sense. I belive we should put them before ourselves.
I am very puzzled on the present Sudanese situation as it is quite a dilemma. However, there is one point I would like to make about this issue. Some have said already that we have the means to give help to Darfur, but do we really? Sure, we can give the refugee camps money and food, but we can’t honestly help people get to these camps – we can’t stop the killers who hunt them down. The complicated problem here is not that we can’t, but that we can. We can take drastic measures and go into Darfur with military forces. We can make a world agreement to boycott China. Who knows? The issue is that it is hard to tell if anything we do will help the situation in Darfur, and drastic measures may put too much risk on the rest of the world.
So I believe that the way we are helping Sudan at present is a good one, and if we agree that we can afford to send even more help, then by all means let’s go for it. The only point that I am trying to make is that it is very difficult to truly improve the situation in Darfur – especially without taking any drastic risks on our part. Despite this near-hopeless fact however, I believe that we should help Sudan in all the possible and immediate ways that we can for the time being.
~ Anita Castillo-Halvorssen
I believe that the U.S. should keep its money. The money that is being spent on the military actions by the AU and the UN could better be used to make some people have a better health care than it will for the possibility of the Sudanese having good health and the certainty of more bloodshed.
I realize that the point may be controversial. The Sudanese are being desecrated through genocide. They are in need of a lot of help. This can only be supplied by the AU and so any money lent to the UN might be not used to its full potential.
Tommy Gebhardt
Leah W
This is a hard issue because no matter which way we decide to go somebody gets hurt. if we decide to give tax money to darfur then we aren't helping the people that are starving or dying here in america. we cant ignore the all the people being murdered in dafur either though. its a lose lose situation. i think for this issue we are going to need more than a few countries to bond together and help.the whole world should be uniting. i think what we should do is use our money to inform the rest of the world of these horrible events that are going on in that part of the world.
giving money is not the answer. informing and convincing is.
While I understand and do not underestimate the domestic problems the United States now faces, I believe it is our responsibility as American citizens and human beings to aid those in need in Sudan. According to preventgenocide.org, in 2004, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan elaborated about Genocide Prevention and launched an Action Plan to Prevent Genocide. The Plan includes preventing armed conflict leading to genocide, the protection of civilians in armed conflict, including a mandate for UN peacekeepers to protect civilians, information gathering and early warning through a the UN Security Council on actions to prevent or halt genocide, a “swift and decisive action along a continuum of steps, including military action,” and more. I personally have not heard about too much action taken by the UN, despite the blatant responsibilities elaborated on by the Plan. It is absurd that UN officials have purposely avoided titling the conflict “a genocide” which requires them to intervene. I understand China’s UN position and strategy with the cheep oil, but this is not a game! These are human lives we are talking about!
It is absurd that people are constantly going through life-threatening terrors every day, while we sit at home debating whether or not we should interfere or help. After reading about the crisis last year in school (What is the What and And God Grew Tired of Us) where we followed the lives of individuals trying to get back up on their feet after life-altering experiences and tragedies, it became very apparent to me an undeniably natural human reaction to want to help these people in each and every way possible. I believe that as a human race, we should spend every additional penny we can to stop these tragedies occurring daily in Sudan; we are after all one race, and what happens to one of us, goes on the record of all of us.
-Soren Frykholm
If we don't even give a dollar a day to help stop murders in Darfur, we don't deserve to have healthcare or welfare. America is the wealthiest country in the world. We are privileged people that can have education in sheltered buildings and have opportunities to work in jobs. We even have the majority our rights protected firmly under the constitution and we can openly oppose the government if we want to. Americans are too close minded about the issues in other damaged countries because of petty financial problems. Unicef is ignoring the rapes, murders, destroyed homes, and all the other horrible things that the government did to the people in Sudan for fossil fuel. Unicif is supposed to protect children from violence, exploitation, and abuse. Now they are saying that they can’t go fight and protect children because these mass killings aren’t labeled as genocide. Americans are siding up with Unicef, ignoring the violence in Darfur. Thousands of children are being orphaned, running away from their burned village, and here we are in America worrying about the No child left behind acts.
It is our job to help these helpless situations in Darfur even if we are in difficult situations for our family and debts. It is easy to help if we have a stable economy with wealthy and healthy people. However, it is difficult to give away our much needed money. But we are fortunate to even have a home and a family. Therefore, we should be generous. We should give away our treasured money to the poor refugees in Darfur. We can feel good about it, too.
This is a very difficult question to answer, and I am somewhere in the middle. On the one hand, no one can argue that the situation in Darfur compares to the problem here in the US, which would lead someone to believe that we should be putting all of our effort into stopping the genocide.
However, I also think people undermine the problems that face us in this country; just because we're sheltered in Boulder doesn't mean there isn't homelessness, health care issues, etc. So I think that there should be an adequate amount of aid given to both situations. I would be in favor of supporting Darfur slightly more - perhaps if we helped the people more there, the AU would regain it's footing in the matter and finally step up and stop the militas. I don't think that many US citizens realize how tragic the genocide is turning out to be, nor do they realize the daily trials some people go through just to survive in such a wealthy country as ours.
The U.S. Government should definitly not forget the people in Darfur. It would be a good idea to keep supplying the A.U. because they are in need of support. If we do not help this "Genocide", many native cultures will be in ruins, and other neighboring countries will be greatly affected. Too many poor civilians have died. Simply because the arabs want revenge. By donating, America definatly builds a good reputaion.
On the Contrary, because so much money is going to Darfur, the economy of the U.S. is falling. We have our own issues to think about. As the people of our country, our tax dollars should rightfully server us in the long run, and not people many miles away. A good stragedy would be to strengthen our own economy before spending so much on other countries, although there is no way we can surely do so in time. Darfur needs our help, so we should help them, but we must focus on other things at the same time.
The genocide in Darfur is a horrible thing that should be aided. obviously the people are struggling over there and need help from someone. I think that America should aid Darfur more than we do now. It is horrible to just sit around and watch all of those people being killed for no reason. Even though we have some problems in our own country , none are as big as this one and the UN should get involved. I don't get how we can argue about if we should change the pledge of allegiance when people are dieing across seas. This issue is a no brainier for me a. This topic is very serious and and the people of Darfur should be helped.
I believe the solution is simple: since we have the resources, why can't we help these people? The key to the situation would be to find a balance, something that everyone would agree to. We don't have to be the country that has donated the most money, and it isn't as if by donating to this cause we are ignoring the other problems in the world, including our own. I think every little bit counts, however small our contribution may be.
In addition, it would hardly be wasting time if we are helping someone else. Just because these people are miles away, it doesn't make us aiding them pointless. It may even improve our relationship with the population of the country and make trade relations easier in the future. We may even need their help someday.
I think that this is a horrible tragedy, but it is really not our fault. We should let them solve it by themselves.
I'm not saying that I think that we shouldn't help at all; people should definitely be able to donate much as they want. However, I don't think that we should spend any tax dollars on it; we should use those to better our own country.
Helping in Darfur is something almost everyone wants to do. However, actually helping is becoming increasingly difficult. I believe that The United States should help in ways we can; sending small groups to help the people in need and so on, but entering Darfur with the full blown army could start another war, and, after the one in Iraq, that might not be such a good idea. We should probably keep the army and most of the tax dollars here, fixing our problems and helping our debt. However, we should by no means abandon the genocide in darfur and we should continue to give help to the people in Darfur in ways we can.
I think that there should be equal balance. Although the people of Darfur have suffered immensely, there are also people in our own country that are suffering. I don't want to sound selfish and uncaring, but there are many problems that we need to fix in our own country. However, much of the suffering in Darfur is far beyond what we have in the U.S. We could attempt to fix both problems by donating equal amounts of money to both the Darfur conflict and our own problems.
I also think that more research is need to fully understand the situation. There have been reports that the U.S. is embellishing this conflict, although the clarity and truth of these reports is uncertain. Another way we could put an end to the Darfur conflict could be boycotting both the Chinese 2008 Olympics and Chinese products that are produced with goods made in Sudan. So, in conclusion, both sides of these tax dollar dispute are not pretty, but i think that equal money needs to be donated to both sides.
Tyler Ollanik
Helping to solve this problem is more important than any domestic problems that the US is facing at this time. Sure the US has problems, and lots of them, but genocide outweighs all of them by far. The problem, I think, is that even though in Boulder, Colorado we have heard much about this issue, there are so many people that don't know the facts about what is happening that there is not enough support in the US as a whole to provoke action by the government.
Also, I believe that how fast troops get out of Iraq has much to do with this issue in that we will not solve this problem by throwing money at it, but there are not any available troops to help solve it by force.
I believe that this is not a political issue it is a moral issue. hahaha. But seriously the decision of helping in a situation where mass killings and mass systematic rape are occuring or helping in a situation where people are getting kicked out of their homes because they borrowed more than they could pay shouyld be a simple one, even if they are not american. I think that the US should keep sending money to help the "rebels" and eventually send in troops. It could be stated that the troops would not go to fight the Sudanese government but fight the militias (which happen to be government supponsored). With this action China would not interfere for it would then be protecting and encouraging the killings and the rapes in other words it would be promoting the genocide. Since China would have no option but to sit and watch from afar and the Sudanese government would not directly oppose the US army i believe it would be a simple mission. It would be simple because the militias would be targeted and no state vs state war would happen. It might sound similar to the war against terrorism but i believe it is different because in afghanistan and neighboring countries they are very well hidden and have a large part of the public on their side in Darfur the militias are not hidding and do not have the publics support.
For once, I agree with Bush. Something, be it economic sanctions or military force, must be done about this blatant violation of human rights. I am appalled that the UN has not even declared it a genocide; one word could provide a huge amount of aid to people who certainly need it. Was the UN not founded specifically to combat things like this, and stop genocide? Although it may not be "our problem", in the minds of some, I believe that genocide is everyone's problem, regardless of whether we are directly affected or not.
There are even ways to help that do not involve getting into another war. Economic sanctions and donations to peacekeeping groups can do a world of good. Our current financial issues pale in comparison to the atrocities going on in Darfur.
I think that we have donated a lot of money to this cause already, but we need to do more to help. I think that there are other ways to help solve this problem. For example, we should boycott chinese goods, because we need to pressure China into voting, as a UN permanent member, to send peacekeeping troops into Darfur and labeling this as what it truly is. Genocide. We need to pressure China, not use our tax money, in order to stop this genocide.
Americans stuck in povery do need our help, but so do the people being killed and raped in Darfur. We need to find other solutions to stop this genocide, so that we can spend our tax dollars on improving our economy. I am definately not saying that we shouldn't help Darfur. I'm just syaing that there are other ways to help. Sending money didn't seem to help, so let's do something that really will. It is our duty as citizens of the world to help those in need. And I would say that the people in Darfur are definately in need. America must do something to stop this, whether it be to send money or troops, or if instead we target the direct sources of the problem: China. Overall, tax dollars may not be the best solution at this point, but there are so many other ways we can help.
I think that some of our tax dollars should go to Darfur. The people over there are going through very hard times compared to us. If we were to help them, maybe they would do something in the future for us. I think it would be selfish of us not to. We have spent billions of dollars on Iraq for practically nothing. So I think that we should spend it on saving innocent people from being killed.
The U.S. should also save money here. We don't need to spend all that money on the war and other thing like that. We could give money to fund things that we need like more of a look into alternative transportation of more ways to become a more self efficient country. So I think that we should help the people of Darfur as well as help the people of the USA.
Nicole Buggy
I am actually not quite decided on this issue. I do know that as Americans our government should help Darfur by maybe getting more nations involved or informing more people of the situation to help raise money. Another way may be to not spend as much money in Iraq and use it some of it to help OUR economy and some of it to help the people in Darfur.
On another issue about Darfur, i believe that the United Nations should called it genocide. Millions of millions of people are dieing and all they care about is a stupid word and not spending a lot of money to help these people. So in the end, what I'm saying is just to declare it genocide ad help these helpless people.
The united states should spend the majority of tax payer dollars to help the people who pays taxes. While still giving some money to countries who are in a crisis and need countries to support them. When you start spending a majority of tax payers money to aid other countries when your country's economy is deteriorating it makes people wonder what the government is doing with money.
The people of Darfur are in trouble so that means we should try and help them out. Since the United States economy is also deteriorating that makes it hard to decide which issue we should be spending money on. The United States donates the most money to helping people in Darfur, but since our own country faces some issues it makes everybody in the world wonder why that country isn't fixing their own problems. So I think that we should fix our problem before getting involved with other countries conflicts
I think that we definetly need to help the people in Darfur. Sure America has things that we need to useour tax dollars for, but we don't have it nearly as bad as the people in Darfur who live in fear of being killed or raped or something worse.
I think we need to send more money but it doesn't hae to be all of it, we should find some kind of way to find balance in between sending out tax money to Darfur and using it for what we need it for.
One thing is sure, nothing is gonna happen if we don't help it, so I think we need to help, the goernment needs to as well as people who donate to organizations such as unicef and red cross.
I believe that the United States has the responsibility to protect the people of its country, while also focusing some of its energy on the protection of peace and civility for the rest of the world. But... I also feel that America cannot be spending money that it doesn't have and as for sending in any troops... we are already at war, a war that we are pouring money into. Not to mention, the problems with our healthcare system (and other domestic problems) The government should not be spending any resources at this time to help out in Darfur.
Now, I think that the way for the people of the United states to make a difference is to personally donate to the cause. Support organizations that work and help in Darfur. We as individuals can help, it doesn't always have to be controlled by our government.
Sure we have domstic problems here in America, but compared to the crisis and genocide going on in Sudan and primarily Darfur, our issues here at home are miniscule.I believe that there are to main problems, first that the U.N. isn't doing shit (excuse my french) to get anything done in the area. And second that China (and some other countries I'm pretty sure) need to stop fueling this war.
We'll start with my anger at the U.N. The first thing that needs to be done is for it to officially lable it a genocide. The fact of the matter is that it is one, and denying it is willful ignorance and in effect is adding to the bloodshed. It's a crime to know a crime is being commited and do nothing, no matter what the reason, and this is exactly what the U.N. is doing. Next, the U.N. needs to send in peacekeepers. The fact that Sudan's government won't let them in is just further proof of what's going on there. Even so it shouldn't matter, if two people are fighting, but one tells you not to get involved, that doesn't mean you shouldn't if you would prevent someone getting hurt (or in this case more people dying). Listening to Sudan when it tells the U.N. not to come in is again, just adding to the problem.
Now to China (and some others who I don't know). By selling weapons to the government, China is fueling this genocide. The U.N. and other countries (i.e. the U.S. and E.U.) need to put serious pressure on China immediately and let China know there will be serious consequences for it if it doesn't stop adding to the killing. We could do this by threatening to stop buying from China (would also help with recession problem domestically) and other such things.
Ultimately, the U.S. needs to step up pressure on the U.N. to take immediate, decisive action. I don't think it would be a good idea for the U.S. to barge in on its own (look at Iraq), because the government is Islamic, it would only fuel hatered against the West and U.S. But if that's what it comes down to, so be it, we need to do something. If two people are in a fist fight, it is VERY hard to break it up just by standing on the sidlines and saying "You know, fighting isn't very nice..." Although peace is a lot better than violence, sometimes stepping in the middle is the best route and in the end it leaves everyone with the fewest bruises and scars.
It is estimated that over 200,000 people have been killed in Darfur and many more have been forced to leave there homes only to endure harsh living conditions due to the Sudanese government. These acts are human rights violations, yet very little is being done. In being a world leader, I think that the United States should spend more money on Darfur while being mindful of the situation of the citizens of the United States.
Simply put, it would be ill-advised to send large amounts of money to help the people of Darfur and neglect the problems in the United States. On the other hand it would be unwise to neglect this conflict. We cannot ignore the death of thousands of innocent people. To help stop the genocide, the United States should spend more of the money collected from taxes to help because the money will provide food and supplies for the people in need and will hopefully improve the situation of those in refugee camps. Stopping the murder of innocent people should be one of the United States top priorities, but the United States is not the only country in this world that can help. I believe that in order to truly stop the genocide in Darfur, many countries should increase the amount of money they are donating. One country can make a slight impact but many countries can make a truly lasting impact.
Though stopping the genocide in Darfur is truly important, the government must also spend money on issues dealing with the people. The United States is encountering problems with the economy and not all the people are in the best situation. These problems cannot be neglected and tax money should go to these people.
A great amount of money should definitely go to the people in Darfur, yet we must be sensible so that there is money to help our own citizens as well.
-Hannah Russek
I think that what's going on in Sudan is defenitly a major issue right now but I am kind of lost on what's more important, America's problems of Sudan's.
I think if we were to focus on Darfur, it would be best to just give more money, rather than send soldiers over to sudan. Since the military is so small today anyway, I don't think it would be right to loose more lifes fighting.
-Hallie Wakely
Although I would like to say after thorough research of this topic I am well versed in it, I am not. I do not think I will ever fully understand the concept of a government being so against its own ethnicities and people that it would create an ethnic cleansing environment, by many standards. I would also like to say that I have a concreter standing on this subject, but in all honesty I don’t know what to say about it. I am torn between the opinions and think that there is a compromise between invading and causing controversy and not invading and being a bystander to what may be a genocide, and currently is known as a health crises. I believe that the United States should propose a plan to the UN to invade Darfur and Sudan so that the government will be overthrown so this wont happen again. Also China’s connections should be halted. China as innocent as it may seem on paper is fueling this fight by providing weapons and ammunition to the Sudanese government to enhance themselves in the worlds’ economy with the oil found in southern Sudan. I guess what I am saying is that I believe with the right plan we should invade Sudan, this way we will not only have the back up needed but also the assurance that the money we give in the future will be put to good use and will show a significant improvement in the health standards in the near future. If not the United States will stop supporting and pull out any troops used. In this plan of action if there is no improvement we pull out and use the tax funds for other American issues or interests.
~Mariam Johnson
Humanity first. But not the richest, most powerful, and best-country-in-the-world first.
All of mankind are promised a right of Life, Liberty, and Property, but the Sudanese government is denying them the simplest right of life. Furthermore, it is a duty to take down the government that denies us of this right.
I agree that we should not aimlessly rush in with our money and fight all of the troops. It seems to me that only the USA is doing stuff (aside from the fact that I live here) and the effort is not united enough to overcome this sad, sad situation. We can't do this alone. We need more support to take down the head of the government (AKA Bashir) who keeps "obstructing" humanity from doing its job.
Unfortunately, another obstacle is China. She is our biggest supplier, and any manouvering must be done carefully to take down the government.
China is after the oil in Sudan, but--be it close or far away--oil is going to "go out of style". It should go out of style. If only our demand of oil wasn't so high, China wouldn't supply the Janjaweed with weapons, and the world would be a better place to live in.
This is one of the hardest points to pick a side on. On the one hand, the people in Darfur are being killed by the thousands. Over two hundred thousand have already died, and it seems that unless we do something about it, it will continue.
However, there's also the other hand. The US has already given more money to this cause than any other country in the world. That counts for something. And no matter how much money we put into helping these people, not much will come out of it. They will still be in reserves, still be murdered, and not much will improve.
So because of this second point, as much as it pains me to say it, I do not think that we should give more money to Darfur. And if we do, we shouldn't give a huge amount, just a little bit. Enough to fight the cause, but not so much that we can't still support other causes, specifically ones in our own country, such as healthcare.
The issue in darfur is very hard to deal with. On one hand we feel the responsibility of helping this country, which is clearly in desperate need. On the other hand our own country is going through it's own problems. I believe we should help the people of sudan. The money we have already spent has made and impact and I think that maybe spending a little bit more of our tax dollars can go a long way.
As for the argument that our tax dollars should be spent to solve issues here I think they should. But I also believe we can find a balance between taking care of our needs and helping with the needs of another country who has much greater needs than ours. As for how much we can do in the long run I'm unsure about. As long as China refuses to help and agree with the U.N. then we can't do more than help those who are already affected as opposed to preventing something from happening to those who haven't been directly, and severely affected yet.
I believe that we should help the people of Darfur. They are in great need of our help, and many people are dying because too many countries do not want to help. Right now, while I think that the US is not doing very well, I think that we are still doing better than most countries in the world, especially Africa, in terms of money. Right now, we are spending billions of dollars on the Iraq war. If we could pull our troops out of Iraq and start spending more money on helping the people of Darfur, we would help out dramatically.
I, being a Democrat, believe that the Iraq war is a big waste of time. We are putting a lot of our money into war, and the Republicans are complaining that our economy is not doing very well. Overall, I think that we not only should, but need to help out these poor people, and that we should definitely do just that.
I think that this is a hard issue. I believe that if people that cannot help themselves need help, other people need to. I feel that even though the United States has our own problems to face, I think that it's important for everyone to look after eachother rather than just ourselves.
I think that many organizations are trying to help and that this is very important. I think that we should be doing all we can to help, while still being able to take care of our own problems. I think that the reasons not to help are easily overpowered by the reason to, people are dying as I write.
I think that we should be over helping these peopl ein darfur and the african countries much more then we should be inteh war in iraq! I say this because these peopel want snd despertly need out help. They have no control over the goverment, and they can't help themselves. People should know about this much more> I know that i didnt even know about this until i was watching a music vedio and that is what mkde me learn about what is going on over there.
When i hear people say this isn't genocide or why should we help them it didcusts me! The ignornt people out there need to learn the facts and then go around talking. If we used the money that the presidental canidates used to campain we cound help so much in those countries. If you don't know how much they spent a example is Mit romney spent over 40 million of his own money. The estmated amout of money that they have spent is over 100 million. That money could be used to help these peopel and the orginisations that help them! that is my stance on the issue.
In a way, the United States should be responding on a much larger scale to this awful situation. Although our country has its own problems, it seems as though Sudan has many more and much larger ones. If no one interferes now, when will they? While it is important to be helping our own country's citizens, only paying attention to ourselves would be putting up walls and shutting out the rest of the world. Also, citizens tend to normally contribute on a more national level, if they want to help out.
Our country will never not have little issues, so we should help other places solve their bigger ones.
The US needs to send a large amount of money to Darfur. The number of people dying there is much too substantial to just write off as something that "isn't our problem". I'm am not saying we should completely forget our own problems, some money should go to helping domestic issues as well, but a majority should go the country in which thousands have died or been displaced.
While the US has taken some action on stopping the genocide, to get control of the issue it will take cooperation from other countries as well. Seeing as we can't be sure we would able to get this cooperation, we should still be sending money and peace-keeping forces to, hopefully, reduce the amount of lives being taken daily.
This situation is basically a fight between human morals and how much we can afford to help without harming ourselves. I believe that we should give more to Darfur and the refugees there. I also believe that the U.S. should put more efforts towards trying to convince China to agree that this is indeed genocide, this will help more than money. But I definitely believe that the U.S. should continue giving money to these refugees that are being exploited.
These people who are being forced to flee their homes and are being murdered and raped in the most inhumane ways definitely deserve this money. It is not just the aid provided with the money, it is knowing that there are people and nations out there that care. It is hope.
In my opinion, I think that we, the United States have a duty to personally do more research on the situation at hand. How do we know that we aren't getting all the facts, that we're just getting propaganda? Trust me, I'm not saying that there aren't people dying or that there isn't a problem, all I'm saying is that there is two sides to this issue. All we're hearing is the devastation and all the deaths, but in many cases, if you ask people in organizations such as UNICEF and Red Cross, they don't feel like Darfur is in the devastation that we are all lead to believe.
I think all the U.S. can do for now is keep sending money to the organizations there helping what hardships the Darfur people are experiencing. Until we as a nation form our own opinion on the facts and devastation over there, then I think all we can do at this moment is just keep helping the organizations there financially. Remember, the Darfur situation hasn't officially been labeled a genocide yet. And until it has, we have no evidence of us needing to go there and help there nation.
I think that American should balance out where and how they spend their money. On one hand, America does need it's health care and other needs, but the genocide in Darfur is also just as big of an issue. This is our country and it is our money, and we should be able to decide on how we spend it. We do need to give to our country, but if a country in the need of such help like eastern Sudan, why not help them. Wouldn't we want other countries to do the same for us if we were in their situation?
I think that we can give up some of our wants and desired objects and give a little more to people who actually NEED it. They need help, and i don't see why we can't be some of the ones who do help them. I think it's rediculous that we are spending money trying to make our lives a little more pleasurable, while they are using every day just trying keep their's.
I believe that the genocide happening in Sudan is being far too overlooked. I have to say, not to be unpatriotic, but Americans are selfish. I think it's ridiculous that we would even consider choosing cheap health care or stopping the murder and rape and destruction that's happening in Sudan. We are far too lucky and blessed to even be complaining about our domestic problems. I also find it sad that we spend more than the 270 million given to Darfur, building bigger and better buildings or companies.
Before we can help ourselves, we need to balance out the problems happening around the world in order to better aid each one. Although this argument may sound like an approach for communism, it only makes sense that we help the dying before we help the financially distressed. We need to send more money to Sudan and actually take action to end this genocide. America desperatly needs a reality check.
I understand that the Sudanese people need a lot of help right now with their current condition, and I do believe that the more wealthy and fortunate countries in the world should be contributing money to help these people. It feels like the right and moral thing to do.
However why does the United States always have to be the country that comes and saves the day? There are other countries in the world that have the money to support Sudan, so why do we have to be the ones to go into countries and make things just. We are already in a financial crisis and the value of the American dollar is plummeting. So we should continue to keep giving away money that we don't have? We as the United States should continue to support Sudan and donate money, but not so much that we put ourselves in a worse position as a nation. It may seem immoral or cruel, but that is what I believe.
Rick S.
I think that this is a horrible tragedy, but it is really not our fault. We should let them solve it by themselves.
I'm not saying that I think that we shouldn't help at all; people should definitely be able to donate much as they want. However, I don't think that we should spend any tax dollars on it; we should use those to better our own country.
Post a Comment