Why did nobody intervene?
>>1387981
The only people with the power to intervene (the West) were/are a cowardly bunch of hypocrites slaved to the will of the barely educated masses who hardly care about events inside their borders, let alone on another continent.
Because the west wanted to observe how shit went down for future reference
>>1387999
Remind me what genocides the west has intervened in?
>>1387995
>slaved to the will of the barely educated masses
Is there anyone who genuinely believe that? Since when the masses exercise power upon the people with power?
>>1387981
people were watching slavs chimping out
>>1388059
Since the French Revolution.
>>1388025
Does committing them count as intervention?
>>1388084
Rwanda was much more violent though
Business as usual in africa
>>1388098
but it was in the middle of africa, not just a few flight minutes from all european capitals
>>1387981
1. nobody cares about Africa
2. the most involved power, confused France, supported the genociding government
3. UN is too slow to accomplish anything during only 100 days
>>1387981
Because niggers.
>>1388162
>the most involved power, confused France, supported the genociding government
I can't believe more people don't know about this.
>durr they speak French so I must support a hon hon hon
>>1387995
> western intervention: imperialism, neocolonization blabla
> do not intervene: why you dun nuthing? west is evol!
Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Because the UN is a joke
who cares
>>1388213
After losing Algeria, France's foreign policy has been to make sure every third world country kept kissing their ass no mater what. The amount of stupid shit and shady deals France got involved during/right after the Cold War is fucking unbelievable.
>>1388086
You fucking retard. The French Revolution was the uprising of the Bourgeoisie. The masses who opposed it were slaughtered.
>>1387981
1. Black Hawk Down happened six earlier and President Clinton didn't want to risk his political career getting the U.S. involved in yet another civil war in an obscure African country no one can find on the map. He was thrashed in the midterms that year and it would've been worse if he had sent troops to Rwanda and it turned into another shit show.
2. Even if Clinton had decided that stopping the Rwandan Genocide was worth risking reelection and ordered troops in, it would still have been too late for the majority of victims. Rwanda is a landlocked country in the heart of Africa (meaning that Marine Expeditionary Units couldn't just sail there in 96 hours and start kicking ass) with few sizable airports (the few airports in country that could take a C-130 were in the heart of warzones). The only option for an intervention in Rwanda would be a ground incursion from from a neutral country, which would involve setting up a command and control center (this was 14 years prior to the establishment of AFRICOM), setting up a logistics network, flying in the actual combat troops, and then having march into Rwanda to do battle with an enemy that doesn't wear a uniform. All of this would take weeks, if not months.
>>1387995
Like the average Rwandan would give a shit about the persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany or the Rohingya in Burma.
>>1388025
The best example of the West actually stopping a genocide would be the UN intervention in East Timor in 1999.
A well-equipped force of elite troops from the Australian Army supported by the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit were quickly brought into the country and having learned their lessons from Yugoslavia, the peacekeeping force was empowered to use swift and overwhelming violence against anyone caught with a weapon.
You can read more about it here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Force_for_East_Timor
Would be pretty imperialist and racist to intervene t b h famalam
>>1387981
The UN troops on the ground DID intervene, along with the Catholic church. Churches were burned and Nuns were raped and then burned for taking in those fleeing. Several UN troops were murdered for trying to protect civilians.
If you don't know about Romeo Dallaire, and haven't read his book, y'all should shut the fuck up. His hands were tied by the UN security council who told him not to get involved. He did anyway. The problem was they were understaffed and stretched incredibly thin.
The failure of the world to respond is well studied and (as usual) you'll do better to read books and watch documentaries on it than to ask the fedoras here on /his/.
- Somalia was fresh in people's mind
- Home-front politics; it was felt public appetite for another intervention was non-existant
- Yugoslavia was busy disintegrating
- lol Africa who cares.
- considered French-Belgian responsibility at first.
- these were the days before omnipresent smartphones and twitter. It took for details to filter out, and they weren't believed right away.
