Peace Keepers, what a joke

[Larkinn]

Yes, I see, and can you provide ONE example EVER of the UN sending troops in blue helmets to FIGHT anyone? There are 2 examples of UN allowing combat of course, Korea and Kuwait. But they are NOT saying or doing anything except calling the mission to this place a "Peace Keeping" mission.

Please feel free to enlighten me Mensa boy, provide a transcript of the mission statement for the mission, be sure to highlight the part that allows offensive action, since . after all I am to stupid to ever find it myself. Do your civic duty and teach me.

So I was wrong before, but don't worry you were as well.

The 26k who they are going to send it won't be sent in until Sudan agrees for them to be sent in. Hence they are not a violation of sovreignity, and probably just won't be sent in. I assumed that because it was a UNSC resolution it would be binding, but they just voted to only do it if Sudan agreed...awesome. However they did say the mandate would be stronger than for the AU troops...they don't seem to have specified how strong however.

BTW...the AU troops are claiming that its not that they couldn't fire back, but that they were hugely outnumbered and outgunned by the rebels. The AU doesn't exactly have money to give its troops top-notch equiment.

 

[Josephwendland]

the only reason why their sending troops is because oxfam and the peace groups all started to pull out....why....because they were getting fired upon and hurt...why...no strong military presence...why...because everyone in the UN has their own agenda and it seems that genocide in Darfur is not on the list