The comparison - Tsunami to Darfor is niave.

How can someone compare a natural disaster to a man-made disaster.

How can anyone claim the "spontaneous outpouring of generosity" toward our neighbours in Indonesia and around South East Asia is "hypocritical" because we have not, supposedly, exercised the same "outpouring of generosity" for the tradegy of Darfor.

One reason might be that the Tsunami was an event which consumed all before it in literally a moment. Darfor comes along and is in an area of Africa which has been a cesspool of violence and attrition for decades, regardless of the amount of private Charitable and government Aid and Western support which has been poured in as well as numerous UN declarations and pontifications over that time.

If you want to criticise Australias "spontaneous generosity" and call it "hypcrisy" because of the bad behaviour of "Arab colonists" (your words) - I would suggest that such a view is comparable to me criticising Kurds for their lack of tangible charitable support for the victims of IRA problems of the past 30 years - and such a view would be as offensive to you as your view is offensive and bigotted to me.

If every Australian gave every cent they had to the people of Darfur it wouldn't make the least bit of difference. They only thing that can help these people and others in similar circumstances is armed intervention by the UN.

The only problem with this is the UN is the most spineless, pathetic and useless organisation the world has ever known. They stood by and watched as 800 thousand Rwandans were slaughtered with machetes, hoes, knives and axes and didn't raise a finger to help - even though they had plenty of warning that the slaughter was imminent. All this slaughter took six months. The UN would need longer than this for all the bureaucrats to find a convenient slot in their busy schedules so they could discuss the matter.

The UN knows how to have good meaningful "dialogue" and they sure know how to build bureaucracy, they are great at gathering statistics, spending billions of dollars every year on themselves and employing every euro trash pacifist they can find, and they are the world experts on how to sit down and do nothing while hundreds of thousands of people every year are murdered by their governments. Until this impotent and bloated organisation is given a good dose of viagra nothing is going to change.

I agree with Col Rouge here Dr Kamal should be asking this question of the African countries not having a go at us.

Cranky, Your attacks on the UN sounds to me like the usual uninformed right wing rants that are taught in some right wing churches. The UN works as effective as the members allow it to just like any other org like it. The UN has no standing army it has no ability to make executive decisions. The UN is a council have and as such behaves like a council. Can you tell who brought this issue up at the UN, did the US or anyone else do anything ? Belgium had troop in country what did they do? The UN was set-up to try and stop another world war from happening not civil wars. It has taken on that role but it’s current structure and rules make it hard. What is your alternative Cranky what would you do to change the UN to make it more effective, it is very easy to point out faults much harder to come up with fixes

Kenny, I haven't been in a church for 20 years. Before you go off on your own rant go and read the UN charter, then tell me that they have no responsibilities in civil wars.

You can hardly defend an incompetent organisation by claiming that it must be incompetent by it's very nature! What's the point in its existence?

Yes Kenny the Belgians were in Rwanda at the time and pulled out. Not only that, they urged other nations not to go in! And the UN listened to them! This just backs up my argument.

If it's "right wing" to criticise a lot of useless blow-hards who sit by and watch 800 thousand people slaughtered then I'm quite comfortable with the tag. I find it quite unbelievable that anyone could defend them! I wonder what your attitude would be if it was the United States who failed in this responsibility?

Well said.. our hypocricy... sure.. even our 'good works' are as filthy rags to God.. because by and large they are for our own satisfaction than for the genuine help of those we assist.

The Sudan situation (and Ruanda. and Ivory Coast) is but an example of the realities of our world. Any one who has hopes in ANY 'United Nations' type organization is living in cloud cuckoo land. The people at the top of our nation-states represent those largest and wealthiest stake holders in those countries. THEY don't want to go further than the point at which their interests are threatened. The UN is nothing but a power balance resulting from the past wars.

So, on balance .. the bible is right "All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God"

Its not a new 'organization' we need.. its new hearts on a national scale.

BOAZ

BOAZ_David

I see little in your post to either defend or object to the article in question, merely what seems to be some quasi-religious condemnation of the democratic processes and that you disagree with the elected national leadership which is the outcome of that process.

Religious zealotry has no place in a secular society - and we are a secular society.
Religious zealotry has no place beyond the confines of the cloister or cult-centres which are the usual realms of delusion in which the zealots hide from the reality of life. I suggest - Keep it to yourself - It has no credibility with a balanced and educated population.

And whilst you may suggest that all have sinned and their response of "spontaneous charity" are like filthy pieces of rag etc... I will respond with - So What!

Those who contributed to the Tsunami appeal did so as a gesture of compassion for their fellow human beings, without thought of divine credit or Godly enlightenment - Please never criticise the generosity and compassion of others who you do not know - unless you are prepared to show how much more "wonderous" your contribution was.

Finally, I humbly suggest - do not bother to criticise our democratic process - unless you have a better system. It may be imperfect - but it is still the best and surpasses the archaic social structure where individuals were subordinate to the self annointed authority of priests and churches.