My Shows
News on your favorite shows, specials & more!
pixeltracker

Okay, Rwanda and the U.S.'s non-involvement

Okay, Rwanda and the U.S.'s non-involvement

SallyBrown Profile Photo
SallyBrown
#0Okay, Rwanda and the U.S.'s non-involvement
Posted: 6/13/05 at 10:33pm

So I'm writing a report about America's non-involvement with the genocide of Rwanda.

I did a lot of research only to discover, to my dismay, that the U.S. wouldn't stpo genocide in Rwanda but we would go to war in Iraq or Afghanistan, with the excuse that we're "warding off the terrorists and helping the people", when actually we want their oil.


The missing piece to my report is other people's opinions. I've looked for essays and interviews, but have not found the ones I needed. I don't need your names or anything, but if anyone would like to add their 2 cents it would be much appreciated. Thanks!


"It's a great feeling of power to be naked in front of people. We're happy to watch actual incredible graphic violence and gore, but as soon as somebody's naked it seems like the public goes a bit bananas about the whole thing."

Justice Profile Photo
Justice
#1re: Okay, Rwanda and the U.S.'s non-involvement
Posted: 6/13/05 at 11:28pm

I agree that America is at fault for not invading Rwanda, and starting wars on other countries because of their leader. However, the fact is that the genocide in Rwanda was not a "war" brought on by a Presidential figure. It was formed by the people of Rwanda (Hutus), led by non-government officials, but more, those in the Hutu Power.
When we invade other countries, we are protecting our country from a possible take over/attack. There was no threat to ours, being that it is the smallest country in Africa.
Where we were wrong with Rwanda was that no one could admit that it was a Genocide.
It's as if we only care when there is something for us (i.e. oil), but yet, Mr. President claims that he is saving the people. Sad news is, there are other countries all over the world to this present day, where their leaders are tyrants who murder innocent women and children, but we won't do anything to protect those people, because they have nothing for us.


"Do you know what pledge time is, Andrew"? said the PBS Executive. "Yes", Lloyd Webber replied. "My 50th birthday special must be one program that gets done a lot." "No", mused the man from PBS heedlessy. "Not so much. Our Stephen Sondheim Carnegie Hall concert. That's a big one." Spoons, forks and knives seemed suddenly to suspend their motion in horror, all around the table.

jrb_actor Profile Photo
jrb_actor
#2re: Okay, Rwanda and the U.S.'s non-involvement
Posted: 6/14/05 at 12:48pm

My opinion is really just rehash of what you two have said. We only go into other countries when it benefits us. We are hardly as altruistic as some would have the world believe. We don't even make sure our own people are being fed and housed and given equal rights until well after we "have to".


SallyBrown Profile Photo
SallyBrown
#3re: Okay, Rwanda and the U.S.'s non-involvement
Posted: 6/14/05 at 12:49pm

PLUS, how come we don't learn about genocide in school? I took a look at the cirriculum of my high school and middle school, and we never learn about this stuff. That's why my mom wants to move back to France...


"It's a great feeling of power to be naked in front of people. We're happy to watch actual incredible graphic violence and gore, but as soon as somebody's naked it seems like the public goes a bit bananas about the whole thing."


Videos