Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
Because the media covers the Israel Palestine war.
Because Palestinian journalists have been able to get media reports out, albeit at a declining rate now since so many have been murdered by IDF.
Sudanese War
- Thread starter Purple
- Start date
Because the media covers the Israel Palestine war.
Because Palestinian journalists have been able to get media reports out, albeit at a declining rate now since so many have been murdered by IDF.
losttheplot
Registered User
- Messages
- 714
This becomes a circular argument. The media cover it because of the public interest. Why does this conflict interest the public and not Sudan?
Most of the anti-war protests only seem interested when it involves NATO or US.
Yes, but why does the Irish and Western media cover the Israel Gaza war to a far greater extent than other wars?
There os lots of information and reports available about other wars, conflicts and natural disasters but they aren't covered.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
That's a fair point. The US is an ally of Ireland? Is it not? As opposed to the warring factions in Sudan?
So when our allies are acting in ways contrary to the ways we consider them to be allies (ie - we are against genocide, so stop facilitating a genocide) it makes sense that gets more coverage.
Israel was, until recently, considered an ally, or within the sphere of Western style, liberal, democracies.
Now its just a pariah apartheid, genocidal state and it is only proper that the West should treat Israel with the same contempt as it does Russia, and apartheid South Africa before it.
The protests here, and elsewhere throughout the Western, liberal, democracies against Israel would not occur if the governments of these nations took the appropriate actions against Israel.
Last edited:
losttheplot
Registered User
- Messages
- 714
I don't know, are we not neutral?
And yet UAE and other Muslim States in the middle East get a free ride.
Working in the UAE is far worse than working in Apartheid era South Africa as they treat their under class far worse than the White South Africans ever treated the Black population. They are also funding was and genocide on a far greater scale than Israel is now or South Africa did in the past.
Despite that lots of Irish teachers and nurses go to work there, thinking it's great that they don't have to pay income tax but never stopping to ask why they don't have to pay it. They are supporting and materially benefitting from a slave economy. It's a morally repugnant thing to do. But owning shares in an Israeli company gets you suspending from your political party. How come?
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
I wouldn't have thought so. Routinely facilitating US warplanes and Israeli weapons cargo through our ports and air-space would suggest that we (the Irish State) has a blind-eye in that regard. We (the Irish Nation, the people) are firmly in favour of neutrality.
We have a policy of militarily non alignment. That means we don't join mutual defence pacts etc.
We are not neutral. We aren't even militarily neutral. To be that we'd need a credible military. As we don't have that we are under the umbrella of the UK when it comes to hard military defence.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
The UAE is consistently targeted by humans rights organisations, UN rapporteurs for violating human rights and it is a failure on the UN and the International community to impose any measures of significance to deter the UAE.
You can point to dozens of nations throughout the world for the same.
What makes things different, and is a significant factor in all of this is the reaction of the native, indigenous populations.
In Palestine, the population has resisted the Israeli oppression through foul and fair means, yet Israel is illegally occupying its country and continues to persecute the civilian population. In Gaza, it applies collective punishment including children and babies. The resistance organised itself and the outside world can see exactly what is occuring there, and it is not the 'liberal, democracy' it paints itself to be.
In South Africa, the civilian population, overwhelmingly black, resisted a regime that was blatant in its discrimination. The people resisted until it became apparent, despite the best efforts of Western governments to sustain the apartheid regime, that South African had become ungovernable. But pressure was applied by civilians in Ireland, Britain, US on Irish, British and US govts to take action.
It shouldnt be that way, governments should govern and do their jobs. Palestine has long had a civilian protest movement here that has propelled the situation into the public eye, along with good media.
For the UAE, you are absolutely right, it shouldnt be tolerated. By all means start an Irish-UAE-Solidarity Campaign in the same way as the Irish-Palestinian-solidarity-campaign.
It shouldnt be that way, but it is.
Last edited:
An update on Sudan, from the excellent Nicholas Kristoff.
It's black Africans getting killed. Therefore nobody cares. If the victims were white this would have been stopped years ago.
"But what American, European and United Nations officials won’t say openly is that the power behind the R.S.F. is the United Arab Emirates. Although the Emirates denies it, its backing of the R.S.F. is well established. Yet the Emirates is rich and influential, so it has become The Country That Must Not Be Named."
If this is true, what has "The Country That Must Not Be Named" to gain from the war?
The now independent South Sudan seems, historically, to have the bulk of the oil-fields and, although land-locked, Sudan seems to have access to some means of refining their much smaller crude oil production and exporting it, apart South Sudanese facilities. What's in Sudan for the UAE?
If this is true, what has "The Country That Must Not Be Named" to gain from the war?
The now independent South Sudan seems, historically, to have the bulk of the oil-fields and, although land-locked, Sudan seems to have access to some means of refining their much smaller crude oil production and exporting it, apart South Sudanese facilities. What's in Sudan for the UAE?
Good summary from the BBC here
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
I had a chance to read up more on this conflict in Sudan. I cannot say I have it altogether as it is appearing to be very complex the more I dig into to it.
As far as I can make out there is the RSF who are battling the 'official' Sudanese Army for power and have committed so awful atrocities, mass killings, sexual violence. These guys appear to be rampant resource driven profiteers wanting to exploit Sudan's gold industry. Their primary customer, UAE, are supplying weapons and money.
On the flip-side, the Sudanese 'official' army, the SAF - 'official' as in their grip on power is none too strong, are intent on sustaining their power through a hardline Islamist military dictatorship and appear to having the backing of the Egyptians
Worse, the RSF and SAF are simply two factions of the military that collaborated to oust the previous leader in coup back in 2019, I think?
Both leaders of RSF (Hemedti) and SAF (Abdel Fattah al-Burthan) are sanctioned by the US.
Hemedti, accused of genocide, war crimes and sexual violence. Al-Burthan accused of war crimes and using chemical weapons on civilians.
It is quite the human catastrophe.
The only plus note I can find is that I found zero evidence of Irish teachers, doctors and nurses enriching themselves on slavery and murder.
Irish teachers, doctors and nurses enriching themselves on slavery and murder by working in the UAE and supporting the country which is funding the RSF and has caused the current chapter of the conflict.
The SAF are quite like Hamas is that they are a hard-line Islamist dictatorship who have the backing of other hardline Islamist dictatorships.
Where is differs from the Israel Palestine conflict is that in Sudan the conflict is far more brutal and the casualties are far higher, oh, and few people care, especially those utterly deplorable and morally bankrupt Irish teachers, doctors and nurses enriching themselves on slavery and murder. They will come back to Ireland metaphorically dripping in blood. Disgusting people all of them.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
I've seen zero evidence of this.
If anything, I would guess that they are 'enriching' themselves on teaching children and providing medical aid and assistance to the ill and elderly. Same probably in Egypt.
Mícheál Martin has called out the international actors on all sides to stop financing and arming the conflict in Sudan. He has called it the 'forgotten war'.
He says the deserves the same attention from the international community as other conflicts in the world. This morning I can only see the media response with headlines about his comments about Palestine only. Why is that?
I don't think that at all. I think people need to be informed. That responsibility lies in the editorial boardrooms of the private and public media outlets.
They are helping to sustain and support a country which is committing genocide.
They are providing medical treatment to the people ordering and funding that genocide.
They are probably treating the soldiers who are participating in that genocide.
They educating the children and the young men who will soon be participating in genocide.
Because Irish people don't care about black people killing each other.
They don't care about Sudan. They don't care about the DRC. They didn't care about Rwanda.
It's like a form of post-colonial virtue signalling. We cared about a white minority oppressing the majority in South Africa but we don't care about Black minorities oppressing a black majority elsewhere in Africa. We care about what we see as white Israelis oppressing what we see as non-white Arabs in Palestine but we don't care about Arabs oppressing other Arabs in Yemen. We need simple narratives where there is a "bad guy" who can be placed in the coloniser bracket and a "good guy" who can be placed in the oppressed indigenous bracket.
Our indignation seems to be rooted in history, where one side has a historically pure and unquestionable right to the land/identity and the other doesn't. I think it's a reflection of the simplistic and childish version of our own history we were all taught when our newly formed nation had to make up a version of history which not just validated "our" (Catholic and Nationalist) heritage but invalidated the "other" (protestant and Anglo) heritage. We are draws to similar simplistic narratives as is morally validates ours.
Last edited:
I suspect we, as a nation, have an affinity to conflicts where the oppressor can be linked to the British Empire
Yes, but I think that extends to the Americans as well as they kind of replace the British Empire.
I still think it's a white colonial thing more than a British colonial thing and a very Euro-centric view of the world. For example we all know about Dr. Josef Mengele, the Angle of Death, and what he did in Auschwitz but we aren't as familiar with Japan's Unit 731 and the hundreds of thousands of people they murdered in China.