The World's Greatest Tragedy
While reading blogs, i came across this comment:
"Everyone has been harping on the 250 000 people who perished in the Tsunami since last December. But do you know that 4 million people have died in a civil war in rebel-controlled East Congo for the past 6 years... Why do we not hear of this? Because they are black." - sheabutter
Although i've known Congo to be repressed and war torn, i never knew about the extent of the war horror. On the other hand, i knew intimately about the death toll created by the Asian Tsunami. Why is there such a discrepency? Media manipulation? Or do people only want to know what they are willing to help?
I suppose the difference is the method of salvation. To put it coldly, money will eventually rebuilt all that was lost to the tidal waves. yes, people died, but with money, lives will be rebuilt, villages restored. and life goes on.
but with Congo, nothing short of declaring war and taking back the country from the rebels will change anything. So why isn't the Bush administration charging in with it's democracy fighters and all that bullshit?
sheabutter makes a point. Because they are black. In Iraq and Afganistan, there was oil to gain; revenge to be taken. But to take control of Congo, what can the Americans hope to gain? Nothing much. So there's no return of investment.
So there you have it - invading a country to liberate it is crap, American crap. If George Bush was truly that righteous, let's see him charge into Congo.
So which is a greater tragedy, one caused by nature or one by war? to me, both seem incontrollable. to wish that we will one day live in a world where there are no desperados or power-hungry dictators is foolish. people are just that way. selfish and greedy for more.
oh yeah, what more details on the horrors of Congo? Check this out.
No comments:
Post a Comment