Whoever said headlines have to be objective? U.S. Sends (Another) Warning on Darfur - New York Times.
That looks more like a blog heading than anything I'd see in NYTimes,
but then again, who could phrase it any other way even remaining
objective?
Someone who deals in foreign policy told me that America is never going to do anything about Darfur. The Administration fielded this issue when it became "hot" with the American people and the resounding response was "we don't care." He calls it African fatigue. We're sick of helping Africa - this was the response America gave them, so the administration will not send our military forces there.
What we will send are warnings; more warnings. This time, Bush is sending Condi's second in command, John Negroponte, to "deliver another strong message to the Sudanese government about the killings." "Or what?" is what the Sudan is asking. If they don't stop, what will we do? Maybe we'll actually send Condi with the next warning. "The administration has been trying to come up with a way to make good on repeated threats that the United States will hold President Omar Hassan al-Bashir accountable for the violence in Darfur."
As a kid, my father would give me several warnings when I acted up. "Don't make me get in your back pocket," was his way of saying I was going to a slap on the fanny if I didn't stop. He would say it over and over again, but he never did it. And even though this man was 6 '2' and all-powerful, I would stop what I was doing when I was bored doing it. When do you think the Sudanese will get bored? They've killed 200,000 and have displaced more than 2.5 million. Seems to me that they aren't anywhere near bored.
Someone who deals in foreign policy told me that America is never going to do anything about Darfur. The Administration fielded this issue when it became "hot" with the American people and the resounding response was "we don't care." He calls it African fatigue. We're sick of helping Africa - this was the response America gave them, so the administration will not send our military forces there.
What we will send are warnings; more warnings. This time, Bush is sending Condi's second in command, John Negroponte, to "deliver another strong message to the Sudanese government about the killings." "Or what?" is what the Sudan is asking. If they don't stop, what will we do? Maybe we'll actually send Condi with the next warning. "The administration has been trying to come up with a way to make good on repeated threats that the United States will hold President Omar Hassan al-Bashir accountable for the violence in Darfur."
As a kid, my father would give me several warnings when I acted up. "Don't make me get in your back pocket," was his way of saying I was going to a slap on the fanny if I didn't stop. He would say it over and over again, but he never did it. And even though this man was 6 '2' and all-powerful, I would stop what I was doing when I was bored doing it. When do you think the Sudanese will get bored? They've killed 200,000 and have displaced more than 2.5 million. Seems to me that they aren't anywhere near bored.
