Analysis: Bush falls short on Darfur

Analysis: Bush falls short on Darfur
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer
26 minutes ago


WASHINGTON - It has taken President Bush nearly three years to match his impassioned rhetoric about what he decries as genocide in Darfur with tougher U.S. action against some of those blamed for the suffering.

When Bush announced sanctions on Tuesday, advocacy groups and lawmakers wished the president had been harsher and wondered whether it was a case of too little, too late for Darfur. The violence has killed 200,000 people and forced 2.5 million more from their homes since it began in February 2003.

The sanctions target three people with suspected links to the violence as well as about 30 companies in Sudan.

"Three people? After four years? And not one of them the real ringleader of the policy to divide and destroy Darfur?" asked John Prendergast, policy adviser to ENOUGH Project, an advocacy group to prevent genocide and mass atrocities. "This will not build multilateral pressure, and this will not end the crisis in Darfur."

Rep. Tom Lantos (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also faulted Bush. "They could have sent a stronger message months ago and saved many lives from being disrupted or lost," he said.

more...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070530/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_darfur_analysis_5

What does he NOT fall short on? That would be newsworthy. Sorry to be a smart aleck, but I am disgusted with all the failure in every possible venue. How much more can we endure?

Are fighting it out over control of the oil and heavy minerals in Darfur, including the heavy metals used in cell phones. (by the way, those heavy minerals are even more finite than petrochemicals, and we aren't recycling them, which we damn well should be.)

This is the wild west, and the Fur and other black tribes are on the losing end. The US isn't doing anything about it except financing the strife.