This is opine lite copied from conversation elsewhere.
Darfur may compete with Somalia for launching and sustaining the ravages of political anarchy and social chaos throughout the countryside: even less than the provisional government in Mogadishu, Khartoum hasn't government or military enough to impose its will, whatever that has been or may be, on the bandits, tribes (and their internal rivalries), and thugs partying hardy in wallows of blood and violence.
Carter's folly, and that of many here, lies in interpreting "Darfur" as a political event, an event in which violence may be attenuated through negotiation, rather than a social one where rape and rapine would anywhere else be treated as criminal matters.
For those who seem to hate American government and would even want a world without government, look again at Sudan.
Comments