Meanwhile, one of the ugliest wars ever rages on
 

In Congo, people are being eaten (yes, eaten), raped and killed by one of the many factions that fight each. These factions are sponsored by outside parties, amongst whom are western corporations and neighbouring countries.

Why do they do this? For money. They'll sponsor the rebels, and in turn, they get to rob the land of it's natural resources. Congo is one of the richest countries in the world when it comes to natural resources like diamonds.

Children are being forced to join the army (there is this group where every family had to donate one child to the cause - if they did not do so voluntarily, the soldiers would take what they wanted). Recruitment goes on inside the schools. Brothers and sisters, aged 12, fight each other to the death.

I'm shocked at all this, because I had no idea things were this bad. And most of all, because this has been going on so long, and it hardly ever gets mentioned in the news.

Could there be an international agreement not to talk about this? (unlikely, but you never know) Or do we just not care, because they're black?

Either way, I'm outraged to find that the level of civilisation in our world is even lower than I had estimated. Something has to happen here. The african continent, if anything, should be the worlds focal point for the next years.

it's amazing how th press can concentrate on liberia (agreed that it was created by the US) when these atrocities are going on.

i think there was a time that this story was on the front page and it has slowly slipped away. i've seen some isolated reports on tv about the civil wars that are going on.

as for who is responsible, i would lay the blame directly on the colonists. they created country lines just based purely on what's good for them. today, countries exist where tribes of people have nothing in common and dont want to be part of that country.

i think the whole map of africa should be redrawn.

Er... so the fact that a colonial power set some arbitrary borders, dividing certain tribes and putting other tribes into one country, is somehow reason enough to *eat* each other?

I've got another theory: these savages are fucking insane and will do what they do no matter what "reason" you make up.

And yes, I do agree that the map of Africa should be redrawn. I just wonder who would do it, and how many wars would start because of it.

But who would do such a thing? There is no governing authority with the power to change borders.

The most probably option to end the conflict which I can see, is for the same thing to happen to Africa as has happened to the indians. Total annihilation. Some tribe will take control in the end, and wipe all the others out. That is not something I want on my conscience.

I think it would be good if the western world allowed Africa to develop on its own. Remove all weaponry (if need be, a prolonged quarantine) and western involvement there - and eventually the war will have to end. What we cannot have is this duality. On one hand, we supply them with weaponry, western weapons and luxury - and on the other hand, we don't help them with any infrastructure.

The answer here is not to make africa more like our world, but to stay away from theirs. Then, those who now have all the power, because of our involvement, will see their influence fade away, and common sense will take over.

Savages, are they?

Holocaust. Hiroshima. Vietnam.
That's savages.

Overall, africans are a lot more social and less selfish than we are. They'll treat you like a king if you're their guest. We won't even let them into our houses, because they might be dangerous.

Ho, ho, ho. That is a whole other can of worms. Needless to say, regarding Hiroshima and Vietnam I'm right and you're wrong, lets just leave it at that. The holocaust wasn't even our thing, it was really more of a German thing.

And how are you going to defend a race of people (which we aren't talking about, this is a segregated group of people who are *EATING EACH OTHER*) by making a blanket statement about how they're generally one way or the other? Americans generally don't let ANY stranger in their house, because they most likely are dangerous, that doesn't mean to say we aren't less social, or selfish. I dare say that's the most ignorant statement I've heard all day.

Stabilizing Africa is also a waste of time. Unless you're stabilizing it with napalm, it's just always going to be effing crazy.

hmm...these cultures werent supposed to co-exist together in one nation. period. and just cuz some colonizers wanted to doesnt mean that they will.

look @ isreal and palestine. those are two conflicting cultures that are not meant to co-exist together.

I tend to agree with Phaenx- Africa has been unstable for a long time. Apparently certain geographical areas (read Middle East, Africa, Ireland) just weren't meant to be peaceful. I say this half-jokingly, but it almost seems like it's true.

Peace is brought about by the destruction of ones enemies...

Germany isn't civilised? If you're claiming that what happened over there could not happen in the USA, you're wrong. Let's just leave it at that. As for hiroshima and vietnam - nuking innocent people/napalming innocent villagers is never civilised.

I don't know every african out there, that's true. But I have been to less civilised countries, and I know for a fact that out there, people are far more caring than they are over here. There's this story I've heard that might illustrate what I mean.

One day, a reporter from Belgium was walking around in a third world country. He was there making a documentary. And, as if often the case when you're a westerner, he had been bothered by the local population, who were trying to sell him things, all day long. So in the evening, when yet another kid was trying to sell him chewing gum, he had finally had enough. So when the kid asked him if he wanted to buy some chewing gum, he just told it off by saying: "No. I dont have any money".

This kid, who probably would probably never own as many as what this reporter made in one day, then felt pity on this guy, and gave this guy one of it's few chewing gums.

That's african hospitality. And that's what we no longer have. Go into an african town, and chances are good that almost everybody you meet will invite you into their homes, feed you, let you sleep over, and share what little they have with you.

Somebody once said that you can measure how civilised a society is by how it treats it's weakest members. I think that's the best way to look at it. And that's why I say that their society is perhaps more civilised than ours is.

You're saying that the United States is going to start genocide on say, arabs? It's possible, but there's next to no chance it'll ever actually happen.

As for your story, that's bullshit. A kid gives someone a stick of gum, then gets a gun and kills all his neighbors and eats them -the end.

Great story, BURN AFRICA!

wtf?? what did they ever do to u?

just cuz they dont have the technology that US posseses, they should be burned??

Oh, yes. What I'm saying is bullshit. As opposed to this, in which it was a response.

So I'm to believe that, because somebody drives a car, has a nice job, and watches late night television every day (your average american), he's the moral superior of somebody who lives in a hut in Africa (your average african).

Tell me why this is true.

I'm under the impression that people, no matter where they live, and no matter what colour their skin is, are the same. Both where their intelligence level, and their moral code are concerned.

What I was trying to prove in my points, is this equality. I illustrated that we are capable of the same 'savage' actions as they are. You disagree.

Go ahead. Bring your point home, so we can continue to discuss the actual issue here - which is that of the a huge problem in africa which we've ignore far too long.

Hahaha, I really enjoy your posts Dude, I really do. How did you get from Africa slaughtering and eating each other to the United States technology!?

I don't really care what happens to Africa, anything BUT burning it would be futile though. However, when the year 4000 rolls around and I need diamonds to fuel my robot body life support system that encases my brain, Africa is going down, no questions asked.

Well, I guess the colonial countries are taking responsibility. The European Union is sending/have sent 1400 men to Congo in order to stop the massacres in the east, the participating countries are Sweden, France, UK, Germany and Spain. They have gotten a fire-first approval and orders to force a truce.

No-one can deny that Congo is a shithole but these tribes/gangs/rebels are equiped by western companies with anti-air missiles, tanks, armoured veacles, and some air units. I guess these companies will have a hard time explaining themselves if their 'investments' are used to kill UN personel.

Still bullshit I'm afraid. Defending someone who eats other people is questionable as well, there's no need to waste my time explaining, you should know cannibalism is an abomination.

They could possibly be on the same I.Q. level as the average American (which admittedly is quite easy) if they had education on par with our own. Physically, you can't be on par with the average New Jersy resident if you're a starving trembling unfed mass from Somalia. Perhaps if you take them out of Africa and feed and educate them (and show them how to not kill people and eat them) they'll be "the same," but as things are, no way.

We're capable alright, but we're mostly not in a situation where we have to do terrible things. They always seem to fall on our lap, save the free world twice, save Grenada, liberate Kuwait, liberate Iraq, why doesn't your country do something about it rather then spend all their time trying to stick it to the U.S.? Hopefully they know it's a waste of time.

let's not generalize africa as being savages.

yes, there are some places where this is going on and there are also lots of places where this is not going on.

countries like nigeria are on the path to sucess with the help of a good leader. south africa is already on the way after apartheid.

I think that these people could use a hardassed dictator, at least they would get some order.

Cannibalism is a tactic these people use to instill fear into the population. It can be compared to what the mongols did back when genghis khan and his horde terrorised europe. They used to slaughter entire villages when they conquered them. Or, if you'll allow me to go this far, to what the USA did when it parked a huge number of ships outside Iraq. It's basically saying: "you do not want to mess with me"

It's meanth to scare the enemy into submission. Again - these people are not doing it because they like it, or because it's a part of their culture. They do it because it's a very powerful weapon.

I'm not defending these practices, but do realise that the people who do this are a minorty.

America is the country with the highest amount of serial killers in the world. If I remember correctly, some of those serial killers have commited canibalism as well. They are as representative of the American people as these soldiers are of the average African.

Eating people just screams: "fucked up savage." Not, "Don't mess with me." You're proving Dragonlich's point, the people who did this are savages, but you may think what you want of them.

Our serial killers are in prison getting violated by big scary men, or put to death for their crimes.

And because of these few people who are savages, all the countless innocent victims of these wars can continue to burn to hell?

I really take offense at your insinuation that all Africans are savages. I really hope, for your sake, that you don't really believe this.

Whoa whoa whoa - cannibalism is in the eye of the beholder. Some civilizations/cultures never had problems with it - now most do.

Don't let the influence of Western Civilization get into your judgment and tell you what is right and wrong - although of course we all already have too far - but the fact of the matter is what we think is hardly what others think - the only reason they agree is pretty much because we forced them to. :/

:lol:

I really enjoy having my words spun out of context. It really makes me feel like posting here.

Heh, allright. I'm glad to see you're not a racist.
I hate racists. I hate them almost as much as I hate black people.

"Either way, I'm outraged to find that the level of civilisation in our world is even lower than I had estimated. Something has to happen here. The african continent, if anything, should be the worlds focal point for the next years."

No, no, no, and no! Have we (meaning the USA) learned nothing from our foriegn policy bungles throughout history? Sticking our nose into the problems of other countries simply does not work. Viet Nam is only the most visible of the disasters we've caused. Afghanistan is our fault (we funded and trained bin Laden and his boys so he could defeat the Soviets), Iran is our fault (We arranged to remove the democratically elected leader and replaced him with the Shah - great move eh?), Iraq is our fault (We armed, funded, and trained Saddam so he could fight the Iranian government we put in place). Ever seen Black Hawk Down? Great idea to be in Mogadishu!

We're now in Afghanistan failing to complete our real mission (find bin Laden and all of his fellow terrorists) because we're in Iraq on a BS mission (Saddam was NOT a threat to us AT ALL, and Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, is the hotbed of Arabic terrorism) which we're also failing at (still don't have Saddam, still don't have control of Iraq, still haven't found the fictional Weapons of Mass Destruction), and we're moving into Liberia (Duh! We're stretched thin enough as it is!) I for one am tired of seeing people who signed up to DEFEND OUR COUNTRY get killed fighting wars that have nothing to do with defending our country!

The focus of the USA should be in cleaning up its own back yard. Get out of the foriegn countries that don't give a damn about us (what have we gained from the first Gulf War other than a larger debt and soldiers who are either dead or suffering from Gulf War Syndrome?). What we should be doing is worrying about our own domestic problems - homelessness, joblessness, poverty, the rampant murder rate, and many other issues which we're ignoring in favor of messing around where we don't belong.


As bad as the situation in the Congo may be, intervention from the USA or the UN could only make it worse - after all it's essentially a civil war. What would the USA have done had a foriegn country tried to step in during OUR Civil war? We'd have kicked their asses, then gone right back to fighting each other. That concept added to the fact that we're in debt up to our eyeballs right now and simply cannot afford yet another global conflict means we should adopt a far more isolationist policy than we have had since before world war 2.

shakran, you make a remarkable amount of sense. The problem being I think, war is big business. The companies supplying the weapons/vehicles/equipment for war are making a fortune of it. The same companies that spend hundreds of thousands of dollars each year greasing up politicians so they will make the "right" decisions ie. war, more war. If a governments decisions had anything to do with what was right or good for it's people, I think there would be a lot less turmoil in the world today.

Dont get me started on this one

As for the congo they eat each other as a ritual, they belive that they will gain their enemies strength, and also his soul will never be at peace.
Let them at it IMO last man standing wins

I think it is the responsibility of the Western World to go in and help make peace. Get rid of the evil warlords and kill the mass murderers.

As someone said above, western europe is getting involved in this, as is Canada to some extent.

The US however I can't see them doing much untill Oil is discovered in mass quantities.

this is not the time for US to play world cop.

it was something the UN should've done, until we invalidated them.

The UN invalidated themselves. And the US will always have to play world cop, world nurse, world bank, and world bitch. For every good deed we'll do we'll have two seemingly bad deeds come out of it. Somebody has to do it though because the world is shrinking and the problems of any other region are quickly becoming ours. The UN isn't going to ever have the resources or the backbone to follow through on many of their promises. Not just because they don't want to, but because in many cases they can't. The US will constantly be pissed on for sticking its neck out, but if we didn't do it nobody would, and then next thing we know there are either terrorists at our door, or AIDS, or drugs, or famine, or economic strife, or angry dictators, or starvation, or {insert world problem here}. This doesn't mean we are right, but it means that we are trying. And that we believe.

Well the failure of the UN can be blamed on the US simply because the US refuses to support it (ironic considering we basically created it only to turn our backs on it a few years later and suddenly people think the UN is an international creation - not really).

The thing is, the country has pretty much been screwed in the last 50 years.

Washington in his famous Farewell address warned hte U.S. of being entangled in foreign alliances and issues. We have turned our back on it.

Eisenhower warned the country of the military-industrial complex - we turned our back on it. THe country is now, more than ever, a military-industrial complex. The economy goes by the military - the nation is basically run by the military. Its not official but you can already see our issues and policies and life revolve around how to support it.

WE dug ourselves our OWN hole.

im sorry but the UN is lame. they can't get anything done. we had to tell them what to do, it was our duty

The U.N. is useless... it's an institution that takes American funding, and uses said money to try and curb American power.

They're useful every now and then. Too passive, good idea, there's just no execution on their part.

WHAT American funding? We haven't paid our U.N. dues in YEARS!

its not necessarily on their part..

we can't blame the failures of the U.N. w/o blaming ourselves

you gotta remember that we basically created it in the first place, but when we ourselves started going outside of it, the other members took note and played the same game...

at teh same time, think of it as the Articles of Confederation in U.S. history...

It was like the Congress of then - basically a forum of discussion w/ no actual pwoers to declare war, tax, etc. - because of the weak weak WEAK executive branch.

In this case, the UN is the same way - its executive power is severlye weakened (not to mention recent arguments between countries esp. in the security council has only weakened it).

IMO a system like the UN is a good idea - the thing is, it needs to be stronger to enforce its ideas.