Jamie Jackson

3rd Hour
12/10/08
Pro Troops to Darfur
Con Position

One million forty eight thousand eight hundred and eighty four; the number of

daughters, sons, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, aunts and uncles that were deployed

to Iraq from 2001 to 2005 alone. With numbers that high the U.S. military has already

been stretched to its limits. We cannot afford to deploy anymore troops to Iraq to finish

the job, let alone to Darfur in attempt to fix another problem.

That is exactly what there is in Darfur, a problem. It all started when a civil war in

Chad spilled into Darfur. Chadian militia became alliances with Arabs from Darfur who

have become poverty stricken by a severe drought. The shortage of water and good land

has led to increasing conflict between the nomadic Arabs, and Africans. The well armed

Arab alliance, which is known as Janjaweed has launched attacks and raids on farming

communities, killing many. These communities have developed militias of their own in

response.

Even though we would like to help by sending troops to Darfur, there are multiple

reasons as to why we can’t. The U.S. Military couldn’t handle it and neither can our

economy. According to the United Nations Secretary-General it will cost up to 1.7 billion
US dollars to deploy troops to Darfur. George Bush has recently flat out said “We are in

a recession”. We have racked up a debit of $10,660,500,534,895.81 as of 11 Dec 2008 at

01:56:20 AM. We simply can’t financially afford to take on the crisis in Darfur.

Furthermore we should not intervene with troops for the simple fact that we would

be getting mixed up in a civil war. A civil war is “a war between opposing groups of

citizens of the same country” emphasis on “same country”. Who are we to get in the

middle of things? Sometimes the best thing you can do is let people fight it out. If they

fight it out and come to a resolution they will be happier with it knowing that no side had

an advantage and thus less likely to fight again.

Also there are better ways to fight violence then with more violence. What would

we be trying to do by sending troops? Bring peace, right? Well it makes no sense to fight

for peace. Why not send peace makers and keepers instead of troops. After all “It is more

difficult to organize a peace than to win a war; but the fruits of victory will be lost if the

peace is not organized.“ (Aristotle) In other words if they do not find peace the right way

in the first place it will only come back to bite them.

You may ask “From a moral standpoint don’t you feel like you must help?” And

the answer is yes, and we can help without getting our troops into the middle of the

conflict. But helping doesn’t necessarily mean sending troops. We can send foreign aid in
the form of doctors, food and some money. Peace won’t matter if a person is hungry,

cold or dying.

Besides, it would be better off for everyone in the long run if we don’t stretch our

resources to the max all at once. It’s like the quote “You must love yourself before you

love another.” We must help ourselves before we can help others. When we get to the

point that we have “Regrouped” only then should we help. Darfurians deserve the best

help we can give them and at this point in time we can’t give them it, especially in the

form of troops.

It’s not like Darfur isn’t getting help from anyone else either. “UN humanitarian

agencies are leading the largest current relief effort in the world aimed at assisting the

approximately 4.2million conflict-affected people in the Darfur crisis. Of these,

2.2million are internally displaced, and an additional 238,000 are refugees in eastern

Chad. More than US $650million in aid to Darfur is planned for 2007 by the UN and its

partners, and more than 12,000 humanitarian

Workers are deployed in the region to bring assistance to those affected by the crisis.

They include staff from 13 UN agencies, the Red Cross/Red Crescent societies and more

than 80 non-governmental organizations.” When we have regrouped we can add on to his

list of help.
 Lastly, Sudan is trying to help Darfur with the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army

and the Justice and Equality Movement. The Sudan Liberation Movement/Armies

objective is the “creation of a free, secular, democratic State in Sudan, based on equal

civil rights, the rule of law, and market economy.” “Despite the chaos of the current

situation and years of political repression, the SLM says it is on the rise and supported by

millions people in Sudan.” The Justice and Equality Movement have declared a merger

with the Sudan Liberation Movement, along with other rebel groups, to form the Alliance

of Revolutionary Forces of West Sudan. All these groups are working toward peace in

Darfur, why interrupt their progress with our troops and their guns.

Ultimately we should not send our troops because our military and economy

cannot take the strain. We’d be biting off more than we can chew. There are better and

more peaceful ways of handling this crisis than bringing in more violence. We should sit

this one out for the most part; it’ll give us time to regroup so we can help more in the

future. We should not send troops to Darfur.