Hey all. Don't know if you're still reading this, but... I have some news. (well, you probably all heard it but... it's cool news.)
During Bush's State of the Union Address on Tuesday, he officially used the term "genocide" for the situation in Sudan. As we know from our experiences last semester, this means that the US has officially taken the initiative. We are responsible for stopping it. (or intervening in some way)
"America opposes genocide in Sudan. (Applause.) We support freedom in countries from Cuba and Zimbabwe to Belarus and Burma. (Applause.)" - President Bush's State of the Union Address, 2008.
-coe
6 comments:
That's great! has he said if he will be intervening?
he didn't mention what he'll do about it, but he must have SOMETHING planned, right? i mean, he wouldn't declare it a genocide if he didnt... right? XD
-coe
I actually watched almost of his address, and I was actually disappointed. I definitely noticed that he mentioned the genocide in Sudan, but the only thing he said was this once sentence. He talked FOREVER about our current situation in Iraq, but he only gave mention to the genocide occurring in Sudan. I know that recognizing the genocide means that we are inclined to stop it, but given our current political and economic situation, I don't see much happening in the near future on the U.S.'s part.
i actually wasn't disappointed at all... i thought it was great that he even acknowledged it, considering that he didn't even have to add that little tidbit at all. he could have elaborated a bit on what to do about it, but at least he's taken the first step. perhaps now, it'll be up to the next president to actually take action, since president bush is almost out of office.
i really liked his whole address, actually. as the last one for him, i think it was one of his better ones. :)
-coe
i haven't actually read any of Bush's previous addresses... so i can't really compare this last one to anything... but, although he did mention it, I don't think that that was enough... coe - i know you said that at least he did mention it, but i mean... he kinda has to... after all it is a pretty important piece of current US situation...
plus, the US has already declared the genocide... so just mentioning it isn't really a big step forward or anything... on some of the other topics he covered he explained what he thinks should be done next... he didn't do anything like that about the genocide...
okay, so i did some research. i think that congress declared it a genocide (maybe?) but president bush hadn't yet acknowledged that fact. i actually don't think he really addressed it directly at all.
so in my opinion, his statement during the state of the union was serving two purposes - he was officially declaring the genocide (since HE hadn't done it before) and telling congress (which HAD declared it a genocide) that they had to do something about it (and that he would work with them to find a solution). :) i think.
and as of right now, i don't really see how we can do much... especially since we're kind of stuck in iraq right now (it's not like we're pulling out anytime soon, EVEN IF the dems get into power). iraq is kind of... pulling away military resources...
-coe
Post a Comment