NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/04/africa/chad.php

Considering how deplorable human rights are in Chad (as can be seen in the following article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Chad) which, incidentally, I wrote), they should just let the rebels overthrow the bastard. Of course, though, France (which has a more deplorable reputation for supporting dictators in Africa than any other country) won't stand to have their pet dethroned.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/04/africa/chad.php

Considering how deplorable human rights are in Chad (as can be seen in the following article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Chad) which, incidentally, I wrote), they should just let the rebels overthrow the bastard. Of course, though, France (which has a more deplorable reputation for supporting dictators in Africa than any other country) won't stand to have their pet dethroned.

I love this statement by the French Ambassador:

but he added that he could not say whether France would provide military help.

Oh brother. :rolleyes:

I know next to nothing about the rebels, so...

I know next to nothing about the rebels, so...

Me, neither, but it's hard to believe they could be any worse than the Chadian government.

(In response to Cornelieu 2)

France already has over 1,000 troops in the country, and recently sent more.

(In response to Cornelieu 2)

France already has over 1,000 troops in the country, and recently sent more.

Ahh but what precisely are their orders? Are they going there to repel the rebel fighters or something else?

Ahh but what precisely are their orders? Are they going there to repel the rebel fighters or something else?

If things get bad enough, probably.

I know this is hopeful thinking but, maybe the French government is hoping if they have more control of the slaughter they can stop it (then provide evidence of human rights abuse, as even the presence of foreign troops might make the government get it's act together).
I know this is looking through rose-tinted glasses but it is a possible reason for supporting this dictatorship.

If i'm wrong then i suggest telling the French government to move troops in a different role and use them as a peacekeeping force to curb the government.

One thing is certain, every decision made in this will be a choice of bad or worse, it's a matter of choosing which poison you prefer.:(

If things get bad enough, probably.

That's the kicker. Right now, according to the article, it is unsure if military help will be given.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/04/africa/chad.php

Considering how deplorable human rights are in Chad (as can be seen in the following article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Chad) which, incidentally, I wrote), they should just let the rebels overthrow the bastard. Of course, though, France (which has a more deplorable reputation for supporting dictators in Africa than any other country) won't stand to have their pet dethroned.

1) You wrote a Wiki article. According to which the US State Dept. severely criticises the Chadian government - yet you highlight France as the one who is to blame for letting the govt. stay in power. You realise the US is also on the Security Council? According to the article you linked to, the US didn't object to the resolution.

Surely the US then (according to your two links) should be blamed more so for speaking out on those alleged crimes, and then backing a resolution to support the govt?

2) Your Wiki article says the following Deby's re-election in May 2006 - in which he won a third term - was boycotted by the opposition, who denounced the results as fraudulent. seems to indicate that purely because the opposition party boycotted the election it was deemed 'fradulent'. This does not necessarily mean so.

The BBC link you quoted (9 I believe) makes no reference to a disputed election in 2006 nor to any internationally recognised fradulent election.

Methinks you need to lose the bias when typing up articles.

3) Why do you assume the rebels would be any better in charge?

Mad hatters in jeans,

France will support any dictator in Africa, without question, so long as they meet just one important criteria: They speak French.

Let's go over some of the francophone thugs they supported: Paul Biya, Omar Bongo, Denis Sassou-Nguesso, "Emperor" Bokassa (whose coronation they even paid for!), Juvenal Habyarimana, Felix Houphouet-Boigny, Mobutu Sese Seko, Francois Tombalbaye, Hissien Habre, Leon M'ba, Hassan II, Gnassingbé Eyadéma, Ahmadou Ahidjo, and the list goes on and on...

France has intervened militarily to keep several of these tyrants in power. Bongo would not still be in power today had the French not intervened there. They intervened multiple times to keep Mobutu in power (during Shaba I and Shaba II, for example), and even sent a few hundred East European mercenaries to prop up the bastard shortly before he was overthrown.

And of course, there's France's support of the Hutu Power government in Rwanda and the genocidaires there, which has been well documented.

And of course, there's France's support of the Hutu Power government in Rwanda and the genocidaires there, which has been well documented.

As opposed to the other side which was also committing genocide as well?

Methinks you need to lose the bias when typing up articles.

Methinks you need to read it again, more carefully, and look over the footnotes.

3) Why do you assume the rebels would be any better in charge?

Because you can't get much worse than Deby.

As opposed to the other side which was also committing genocide as well?

What are you on?

Me, neither, but it's hard to believe they could be any worse than the Chadian government.
Oh no, not at all. I could believe them being worse.

What are you on?

Funny! I was going to ask you the samething.

Funny! I was going to ask you the samething.

Considering I know a hell of a lot more than you about the subject, you might want to refrain from asking that. Show me the genocide "the other side" allegedly committed. I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.

Methinks you need to read it again, more carefully, and look over the footnotes.



I did. See link 10 -
However, a team of foreign observers said last week that polling had taken place "without major problems or intimidation."
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/05/28/chad.election/index.html


Because you can't get much worse than Deby.
Sure you can.

Mad hatters in jeans,

France will support any dictator in Africa, without question, so long as they meet just one important criteria: They speak French.

Let's go over some of the francophone thugs they supported: Paul Biya, Omar Bongo, Denis Sassou-Nguesso, "Emperor" Bokassa (whose coronation they even paid for!), Juvenal Habyarimana, Felix Houphouet-Boigny, Mobutu Sese Seko, Francois Tombalbaye, Hissien Habre, Leon M'ba, Hassan II, Gnassingbé Eyadéma, Ahmadou Ahidjo, and the list goes on and on...

France has intervened militarily to keep several of these tyrants in power. Bongo would not still be in power today had the French not intervened there. They intervened multiple times to keep Mobutu in power (during Shaba I and Shaba II, for example), and even sent a few hundred East European mercenaries to prop up the bastard shortly before he was overthrown.

And of course, there's France's support of the Hutu Power government in Rwanda and the genocidaires there, which has been well documented.

If what you say is true, then why has no one to my knowledge done something about it?
Is it due to lack of information?
Lack of political willpower?
Is it because money overrides morality?
I thought in a modern world countries wouldn't support dodgy governments?
Is it perhaps due to keeping trade with that country, in exchange for political support in the UN? (ie blackmailing other countries for a hidden agenda)

I did. See link 10 -

And you believe that shit?

Sure you can.

Chad consistently ranks extremely poor in terms of human rights, according to virtually all human rights organizations. It's one of the most corrupt nations in the world. Yes, you can get worse than Deby, but not by much.

If what you say is true, then why has no one to my knowledge done something about it?

Why would they?


Is it due to lack of information?
Lack of political willpower?
Is it because money overrides morality?

Yes.

I thought in a modern world countries wouldn't support dodgy governments?

Tell that to the U.S., which has supported and continues to support legions of tyrants.

Is it perhaps due to keeping trade with that country, in exchange for political support in the UN? (ie blackmailing other countries for a hidden agenda)

Probably.

And you believe that shit?


.......

You linked it in your article and now you're saying "DON'T BELIEVE IT!!"

*slow hand clap*


Chad consistently ranks extremely poor in terms of human rights, according to virtually all human rights organizations. It's one of the most corrupt nations in the world. Yes, you can get worse than Deby, but not by much.
Which could easily be the rebels.

.......

You linked it in your article and now you're saying "DON'T BELIEVE IT!!"

*slow hand clap*

Read the part about what the opposition said regarding the "election."

Which could easily be the rebels.

Possibly, but they'd probably be just as bad, or slightly better. I doubt they'd be worse.

Read the part about what the opposition said regarding the "election."

Right. I'd rather believe the international observers who are there for, you know, that exact reason.


Possibly, but they'd probably be just as bad, or slightly better. I doubt they'd be worse.
Great, so swap the current govt whom you don't like for a group that in your own words could be probably just as bad.

May I ask, what would be the fucking point?

Right. I'd rather believe the international observers who are there for, you know, that exact reason.

Even if said observers are full of shit? If you really believe a government that commits extrajudicial killings and torture and has a widely documented record of repression would hold a "free and fair election," then that's just sad.

Great, so swap the current govt whom you don't like for a group that in your own words could be probably just as bad.

May I ask, what would be the fucking point?

It's better than wasting money supporting the current douchebag.

Even if said observers are full of shit? If you really believe a government that commits extrajudicial killings and torture and has a widely documented record of repression would hold a "free and fair election," then that's just sad.

So what makes you think that the Rebels will be better? I mean...they very well could take retribution out on the feds for what they did to them. Ever thought of that?

It's better than wasting money supporting the current douchebag.

Even if they turn out to be worse?

So what makes you think that the Rebels will be better? I mean...they very well could take retribution out on the feds for what they did to them. Ever thought of that?

What's wrong with that? So long as they take retribution only on the Deby government, and not civilians, who cares?

Even if they turn out to be worse?

No.

Edit: And who said we should support the rebels? I didn't. I just said we shouldn't support Deby. IMO, we should stay the hell out of it.

Even if said observers are full of shit?
Prove they are. Have you any sources to dispute their observations (that don't stem from the opposition (and losing) party of said election).

If you really believe a government that commits extrajudicial killings and torture and has a widely documented record of repression would hold a "free and fair election," then that's just sad.

Must.... not..... mention..... United..... States......

I actually agree with Corny on this one.


*whoa..... who said that?

What's wrong with that? So long as they take retribution only on the Deby government, and not civilians, who cares?

So if they torture the former members of said government by the most painful of means and killed them without trial and just massacred all who supported the regime without cause you would support that?

No.

Very good. You just destroyed your very own premise.

Prove they are. Have you any sources to dispute their observations (that don't stem from the opposition (and losing) party of said election).

Go to the websites of some of the following organizations: Freedom House, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc. and look up "Chad."

Must.... not..... mention..... United..... States......

Don't get me wrong, the U.S. is just as despicable in that regard.

I actually agree with Corny on this one.


*whoa..... who said that?

You did. :p

So if they torture the former members of said government by the most painful of means and killed them without trial and just massacred all who supported the regime without cause you would support that?

No, but I wouldn't shed any tears, either.

Very good. You just destroyed your very own premise.

I edited my post.

No, but I wouldn't shed any tears, either.

Then you would be hypocritical. If you condemn the actions of the current government and turn around and say nothing if the samething happens to them....

I edited my post.

So your response is ignore it?

Then you would be hypocritical. If you condemn the actions of the current government and turn around and say nothing if the samething happens to them....

Except that the government uses that actions against people who don't deserve it.

[quote]So your response is ignore it?

It's not our place to interfere. The fact that the rebels may very well be as bad if they come to power is no reason to support the current dictator.

Then you would be hypocritical. If you condemn the actions of the current government and turn around and say nothing if the samething happens to them....

Except that the government uses that actions against people who don't deserve it.

So I guess its ok if the rebels do the exact same fucking thing as long as it is to the people that deserves it? I am sure glad we got that clarified because it is really really stupid thing to say.

It's not our place to interfere. The fact that the rebels may very well be as bad if they come to power is no reason to support the current dictator.

In that case, then I guess it is helpful to note that the international community did not get involved in the genocide in Rwanda or really getting involved in Sudan.

So I guess its ok if the rebels do the exact same fucking thing as long as it is to the people that deserves it? I am sure glad we got that clarified because it is really really stupid thing to say.

No, it's not okay, but it's not worth losing sleep over, either. Ideally, they would simply send the Deby government into exile, but I don't know how likely that is.

In that case, then I guess it is helpful to note that the international community did not get involved in the genocide in Rwanda or really getting involved in Sudan.

France and Zaire got involved in the Rwandan genocide. They helped support the genocidaires.

if we happen to prop up another shady African regime (which is not so by Chad standers) to stop the whole region descending into a land of barbarian raiders so be it

Sorry, but it's a little late for that. The region has gone to hell in a handbasket, and shows few signs of changing.

No, it's not okay, but it's not worth losing sleep over, either.

Not worth losing sleep over? Boy is that stupid.

Ideally, they would simply send the Deby government into exile, but I don't know how likely that is.

Not bloody likely.

France and Zaire got involved in the Rwandan genocide. They helped support the genocidaires.

As I said...the international community did not get involved in the Genocide in Rwanda and the UN took a very very big hit because of it.

I'm sorry but these "rebels" happen to include such beacons of freedom as the Janjaweed (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3613953.stm) so no I don't want Sudan's problems to spread further into its neighbors in the same sense that I don't want Vikings to start raping the British coast again

if we happen to prop up another shady African regime (which is not so by Chad standers) to stop the whole region descending into a land of barbarian raiders so be it

The UN should be supporting the rebels not the dictatorship in Chad. However the I would not be surprised if the Chinese stopped such an action.

Not worth losing sleep over? Boy is that stupid.

Maybe. I disagree.

Not bloody likely.

Probably true, but we'll probably never know.

As I said...the international community did not get involved in the Genocide in Rwanda and the UN took a very very big hit because of it.

Sending weapons to support the genocidaires is "not getting involved?"

The UN should be supporting the rebels not the dictatorship in Chad. However the I would not be surprised if the Chinese stopped such an action.

The UN should support neither side.

The UN should be supporting the rebels not the dictatorship in Chad. However the I would not be surprised if the Chinese stopped such an action.

Probably the French and the Russians would.

Probably the French and the Russians would.

True.

if we happen to prop up another shady African regime (which is not so by Chad standers)

It's true Deby's not nearly as bad as Tombalbaye or Habre (who HRW called "Africa's Pinochet"), but he still doesn't merit support.

Maybe. I disagree.

Which pretty much means that you would support the same atrocities from the rebels that you condemn the government of committing

Probably true, but we'll probably never know.

Maybe but then...we do have some lessons from history to look at.

Sending weapons to support the genocidaires is "not getting involved?"

Two nations do not make up the international community.

which, incidentally, I wrote

Poorly I might add.

Poorly I might add.

Do you have anything constructive to add? No? Then take your flames elsewhere.

Do you have anything constructive to add? No? Then take your flames elsewhere.

Nice. Dismiss criticism is the best way to ignore facts.

Nice. Dismiss criticism is the best way to ignore facts.

There's a difference between helpful criticism and flaming.

There's a difference between helpful criticism and flaming.

Um Euadnam? That was not a flame in reality. It was a fact that it was written poorly. If you thought it was flaming then report it but it was in no way a flame especially if you post the link that he said was written poorly.

Um Euadnam? That was not a flame in reality. It was a fact that it was written poorly. If you thought it was flaming then report it but it was in no way a flame especially if you post the link that he said was written poorly.

It wasn't supposed to be fucking Shakespeare.

And a better thing would be to say, "Your article is lacking because of such and such," or "you can prove it by..." not just by insulting me.

And I did report it.

It wasn't supposed to be fucking Shakespeare.

HAHA!

And a better thing would be to say, "Your article is lacking because of such and such," or "you can prove it by..." not just by insulting me.

It was not an insult.

And I did report it.

Good job in wasting the Mods times.

I believe the UN is going to use this plea for help from Chad as an opportunity to put an international presence of military personnel and human rights monitors within the country, under the auspices of protecting the sovereign government.

The situation in Chad is complicated. There are in act three parallel conflicts occuring within the country; the internal conflict between government and rebel forces; cross-border militia attacks from Sudan and Chadian ethnic community violence.

Within Chad, especially the eastern region, horrendous human rights abuses are being committed, with hundreds of women and children being shot and/or raped, and thousands of Chadian's internally displaced. These atrocities are commited primarily by cross-border Sudanese militias and ethnic militias within Chad.

The conflict between the government and rebel forces exarcerbates this nightmare of ethnic killings, as the government is too preoccupied with it's own survival to attempt to stop them. Instead individual villages form thier own "self defense forces" to protect themselves, allying themselves alongside neighbours on ethnicity. These SDF's are usually supplied by Sudanese rebel groups, backed by the Chadian government to attack Sudan by proxy.

Whenever Chad government officials actually take an interest in these citizen militias, it is only to fan the flames of ethnic conflict, setting villages against each other for short term strategic gain against communities suspected of supporting rebel groups.

The request for help from the Chad government may be the perfect opportunity for the UN to implement the various recommendations made by the Secretary General's 2006 report on Chad, and Human Rights groups, which include sending a substantial international presence of military personnel and human rights observers to protect civilians, monitor insurgent group movements and investigate and report on cross-border attacks.

The UN may also be able to pressure the Chad government to cease support for ethnic armed groups and the recruitment of child soldiers.

"They came here to kill us", Militia Attacks and Ethnic targeting of civilians in Eastern Chad (http://hrw.org/reports/2007/chad0107/chad0107web.pdf)

It was not an insult.

Yes, it was.

Good job in wasting the Mods times.

What, reporting trolling/flaming (coming into a thread just to insult someone, without adding anything constructive, is trolling) is wasting their time? Yes, you're right, God forbid they actually do their jobs!

I believe the UN is going to use this plea for help from Chad as an opportunity to put an international presence of military personnel and human rights monitors within the country, under the auspices of protecting the sovereign government.

The situation in Chad is complicated. There are in act three parallel conflicts occuring within the country; the internal conflict between government and rebel forces; cross-border militia attacks from Sudan and Chadian ethnic community violence.

Within Chad, especially the eastern region, horrendous human rights abuses are being committed, with hundreds of women and children being shot and/or raped, and thousands of Chadian's internally displaced. These atrocities are commited primarily by cross-border Sudanese militias and ethnic militias within Chad.

The conflict between the government and rebel forces exarcerbates this nightmare of ethnic killings, as the government is too preoccupied with it's own survival to attempt to stop them. Instead individual villages form thier own "self defense forces" to protect themselves, allying themselves alongside neighbours on ethnicity. These SDF's are usually supplied by Sudanese rebel groups, backed by the Chadian government to attack Sudan by proxy.

Whenever Chad government officials actually take an interest in these citizen militias, it is only to fan the flames of ethnic conflict, setting villages against each other for short term strategic gain against communities suspected of supporting rebel groups.

The request for help from the Chad government may be the perfect opportunity for the UN to implement the various recommendations made by the Secretary General's 2006 report on Chad, and Human Rights groups, which include sending a substantial international presence of military personnel and human rights observers to protect civilians, monitor insurgent group movements and investigate and report on cross-border attacks.

The UN may also be able to pressure the Chad government to cease support for ethnic armed groups and the recruitment of child soldiers.

Yay, finally someone actually contributes a post with substance, without resorting to douchebaggery.

Yes, it was.

Whatever. When the mods say otherwise...

What, reporting trolling/flaming (coming into a thread just to insult someone, without adding anything constructive, is trolling) is wasting their time? Yes, you're right, God forbid they actually do their jobs!

They have much more to do than waste time with a comment like that that was not a flame. If ya want a flame, I can give you some good ones :D

Whatever. When the mods say otherwise...

Then that's up to them. At the very least, they should take it into consideration.

They have much more to do than waste time with a comment like that that was not a flame. If ya want a flame, I can give you some good ones :D

I'll take your word for it. ;)

Then that's up to them. At the very least, they should take it into consideration.



I'll take your word for it. ;)

I recommend not taking any language directed at you as in insult (even if you think it is), as it's the internet so communication can be lost, and typically you'd write your thoughts down as they come rather than with face to face interaction where generally there are stronger ties to being nice.:)

I haven't contributed anything to Wikipedia, i guess i'm too busy with other commitments, but i think it's worth mentioning it's good people try to add new information to wikipedia as i rely on it occiasionally.
And besides it's easy to think of insults, i try to think of comments that confirm or deny what i think is true, or in some cases just talk a load of rubbish, sort of a useful outflue for emotion if i'm bored.:p

Considering the fact that what the rest of us are saying actually has some facts behind it whereas you are just coming from one side of the conflict...

Considering the fact that what the rest of us are saying actually has some facts behind it whereas you are just coming from one side of the conflict...

As I said, I don't support either side.

And looks like you were right about the mod thing. I stand corrected.

Oh and the mods stated it was not a flame as predicted.

Oh and the mods stated it was not a flame as predicted.

Beat you to it. :D

(see my last post)

So are we going to comment on the topic, or what?

Do you have anything constructive to add? No? Then take your flames elsewhere.

Formatting:

no indents
no spacing between paragraphs


Spelling and grammar:

starting a quote with a capital
using both round brackets and hyphens


Overall readability:
Essentially reads like a mashup of quotes from various sources with little synthesis, and little attempt made to rank human rights abuses, or go into necessary detail. You've expected the reader, essentially, to simply follow your links to find out just how many child soldiers might be used in Chad, when you could quite easily have provided that information yourself. You provide no background, no context, just a list of things you pulled from the internet. It's boring, and that's saying something considering how horrific the situation acutally is.

Formatting:

no indents
no spacing between paragraphs


Spelling and grammar:

starting a quote with a capital
using both round brackets and hyphens


Overall readability:
Essentially reads like a mashup of quotes from various sources with little synthesis, and little attempt made to rank human rights abuses, or go into necessary detail. You've expected the reader, essentially, to simply follow your links to find out just how many child soldiers might be used in Chad, when you could quite easily have provided that information yourself. You provide no background, no context, just a list of things you pulled from the internet. It's boring, and that's saying something considering how horrific the situation acutally is.

That's better.

That's better.

Sorry, I was too busy reeling in agony from the litany of abuse you directed my way after my initial comment to respond in a timely fashion before this. I am ecstatic at your figurative 'pat on the head'. Now go fix the article.

Sorry, I was too busy reeling in agony from the litany of abuse you directed my way after my initial comment to respond in a timely fashion before this. I am ecstatic at your figurative 'pat on the head'. Now go fix the article.

Why? There are much more capable people to do it.

The UN should be supporting the rebels not the dictatorship in Chad. However the I would not be surprised if the Chinese stopped such an action.

Do you even realise how dangerous that sounds? That the UN should support insurrections against the governments of its constituent members, dependent upon criteria set by the Security Council?

You'd have member nations withdrawing en-masse. And not just autocratically governed nations, democratic nations as well.

Why? There are much more capable people to do it.

Speaking from experience...

It's a real pain in the ass to come across a poorly written wikipedia entry. It's like renovating instead of just building from scratch. You often try to keep as much of the original construction as possible, but in the end, you realise it would have been much better to just torch the thing and start from the ground up.

When you are responsible for a poorly written entry, it would be nice if you'd do those renovations yourself, rather than expect someone else to do it.

Speaking from experience...

It's a real pain in the ass to come across a poorly written wikipedia entry. It's like renovating instead of just building from scratch. You often try to keep as much of the original construction as possible, but in the end, you realise it would have been much better to just torch the thing and start from the ground up.

When you are responsible for a poorly written entry, it would be nice if you'd do those renovations yourself, rather than expect someone else to do it.

Ouch. That thing hurts to read (the article).

Oh, to hell with it. I would like to put two things on the public record here.

One. Euadnam, your attitude in general hasn't particularly struck me as useful. The situation in Chad does appear to be deplorable, but you aren't presenting a very good case for it. If you want a few suggestions, try ensuring you're holding consistent positions, and make extended arguments with facts to back them up. As a more specific comment, make sure your evidence says what you want it to.

This is NSG, people who disagree will often be fairly personal and/or blunt about things, especially if your posts leave people in doubt as to your intelligence. In general (if you'll pardon the pun), the best method is to attempt to carry out a sensible and reasoned discussion, demonstrating why you are right. Then people will prove to be willing to carry out constructive debate.

Two. I will fix up that wiki article, and I promise to at least have a new draft version up by this time next week, if not sooner. This is a direct statement, feel free to bully me, blame me, etc, if I back down on it. I'm not an expert on the topic, but I'll attempt to pull together what there is into a more coherent article, and rehash the whole thing if needed.

Speaking from experience...

It's a real pain in the ass to come across a poorly written wikipedia entry. It's like renovating instead of just building from scratch. You often try to keep as much of the original construction as possible, but in the end, you realise it would have been much better to just torch the thing and start from the ground up.

When you are responsible for a poorly written entry, it would be nice if you'd do those renovations yourself, rather than expect someone else to do it.

Well, I've cleaned it up a little and at least given it a more fluid reading look to it.

Too tired to heavily re-write the bloody thing though.

Considering that these rebels appear to have the backing of the Sudanese government, it might not be much better if they do win.

Me, neither, but it's hard to believe they could be any worse than the Chadian government.

Because you can't get much worse than Deby.You really should read up on the people you say deserve backing. Because a group that is commiting genocidal acts and supports the government of Sudan should probably not control a nation that a) borders a state which is commiting genocide and b) has millions of refugees from said genocide.

The UN should be supporting the rebels not the dictatorship in Chad. However the I would not be surprised if the Chinese stopped such an action.

Why should anyone support the rebels? Yes, Chad has a dictatorship. However, they are not currently a genocidal state, and I'd personally like to see that remain the same.

Considering that these rebels appear to have the backing of the Sudanese government, it might not be much better if they do win.

As I mentioned before, the situation is far more complex than simply the rebels vs the government. There are the indigenous rebels, Sudanese militia's, Junjaweed, civilian militia's... Heck, the rebels themselves are a vast coalition of small militant groups, each of them with thier own political agendas. After the overthrow of the government, violent anarchy would reign.

Sending in an international force to keep the status quo until a resolution can be found is perhaps the best option.

It's true Deby's not nearly as bad as Tombalbaye or Habre (who HRW called "Africa's Pinochet"), but he still doesn't merit support.

better of two evils I say, at the very least the operation will be vital in keeping the peace in Sudan and as brutal as the president is he doesn't pose an immediate threat to the stability of the larger region

Yeah, France has a very long interest in Chad, going right back to the war with Libya.

I love this statement by the French Ambassador:



Oh brother. :rolleyes:

Leave to both the French and the UN to do nothing. They are both very good at that especially when it comes to wars. :mad:

The UN should be supporting the rebels not the dictatorship in Chad. However the I would not be surprised if the Chinese stopped such an action.

The Chinese are on the side of the janjaweed against the Chad dictatorship.

Ahh but what precisely are their orders? Are they going there to repel the rebel fighters or something else?

I heard they're there to evacuate foreign nationales and ensure the safety of French citizens.

As I mentioned before, the situation is far more complex than simply the rebels vs the government. There are the indigenous rebels, Sudanese militia's, Junjaweed, civilian militia's... Heck, the rebels themselves are a vast coalition of small militant groups, each of them with thier own political agendas. After the overthrow of the government, violent anarchy would reign.

Sending in an international force to keep the status quo until a resolution can be found is perhaps the best option.

I suppose so, but the question would be, what would the mandate of that force be? would they have authority to act to protect citizens? or would they be like the UN Force in Rwanda during the Rwandan genocide?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/04/africa/chad.php

Considering how deplorable human rights are in Chad (as can be seen in the following article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Chad) which, incidentally, I wrote), they should just let the rebels overthrow the bastard. Of course, though, France (which has a more deplorable reputation for supporting dictators in Africa than any other country) won't stand to have their pet dethroned.

I'm sorry, I admit that I don't know an incredible amount of info about the situation in Chad, but I have been keeping current with the situation respectively through CNN, and I don't recall the United Nations Security Council backing Deby. Nor did the article that you linked specify that, it merely mentioned that Deby enjoyed strong French support in the past.

Where did you get the info about the UN Security Council?

I heard they're there to evacuate foreign nationales and ensure the safety of French citizens.

that's precisely their operation parameters, nothing more, nothing less (as of now though, who knows what the future will bring)

Ahh but what precisely are their orders? Are they going there to repel the rebel fighters or something else?

Apparently the French forces control the airport in the capital. I read that they already repelled one attack. Didn't say how big of a attack it was.

I heard they're there to evacuate foreign nationales and ensure the safety of French citizens.

So pretty much the normal routine.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/04/africa/chad.php

Considering how deplorable human rights are in Chad (as can be seen in the following article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Chad) which, incidentally, I wrote), they should just let the rebels overthrow the bastard. Of course, though, France (which has a more deplorable reputation for supporting dictators in Africa than any other country) won't stand to have their pet dethroned.You mean the rebels that are backed by Sudan so that the Janjaweed can continue their genocide? I timidly object.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/04/africa/chad.php

Considering how deplorable human rights are in Chad (as can be seen in the following article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Chad) which, incidentally, I wrote)

Great way to improve your own credibility.:rolleyes: