"A catastrophe is now unavoidable in Sudan's Darfur region, the United Nations and aid workers say. Some 300,000 people will starve, even if emergency aid is delivered immediately, according to the head of the United States aid agency."Then via Jim Moore, Ingrid Jones writes:
"The UN asks for $236m like it is a drop in the ocean and puts the blame for today's situation on donors and the Sudanese government. Who's blaming the EU, UN and the charities funded by the public? After all that's been said and done about the Holocaust, Bosnia and Rwanda: what is going on with these cash mountains of aid in this day and age?"If I were Microsoft, I'd withdraw 0.4% of the cash from my bank account and give it to the UN to sort this out, just because I could. Then I'd do the rest of what Ingrid is saying:
"After Bosnia and Rwanda, they can't be allowed to get away with it. They've had enough years. Let's shake them up. Monitor them. Make them work better. Put the heat on them. Name and shame them. If their jobs and reputations are put under real pressure, they will put real pressure on politicians. And perhaps the whole business of providing timely help and protection to people in times of crisis - such as genocide in Darfur - could be made to run much more efficiently and effectively.After all,
"How can the EU and UN allow this happen? Or is it just a fact of life. Like we are all ants. Squish. There goes another 300,000. Who cares? America and Europe sure cared about 3,000 of their own on 9/11. Is an American or European life of more value than an Sudanese life? And if it seems so, who says it has to continue that way?"