The U.S. would rather keep the oil flowing than stop the bloodshed.

The United States is supposedly engaged in a “global war on terror”. So naturally, we are focused on ending terrorism around the world, for the benefit of all mankind. Sounds great on paper, but why is it that the only “terrorism” that our government seems to want to take on is that which exists in oil-rich Middle Eastern countries? Where are our nation’s efforts to end the terrorism that has gone on for years in Darfur?

Unless of course our government doesn’t consider genocide to be a form of terrorism. I’d sure like to hear their explanation on that one. The fact is, Darfur doesn’t appear to be a “priority” for the U.S. government. We would rather invade a sovereign nation, under false pretenses, to depose a leader we don’t like than to prevent the needless murder and mutilation of hundred of thousands, perhaps millions, of innocent people. As a nation, we should be ashamed of ourselves.

Nobody knows for sure how many have died in the ethnic strife in the Darfur region of Sudan. Low estimates are at 70,000 people; higher (and more accurate) estimates put the number at more than 400,000. My question is, how many will it take before the United States, the world’s only remaining superpower, gets involved? And I’m not talking about the lip-service type of involvement that we’ve seen so far. You know, where Condi Rice, or dubya issue a sound bite about what a human tragedy this is, without actually doing anything about it. Talk is cheap, and talk doesn’t stop death squads.

Our nation in general, and this administration specifically, will be harshly judged by history over our inaction in Darfur, and rightly so. For I would submit that we have a responsibility, if not simply as the most powerful nation in the world, but as citizens of the world, to act to end this bloodshed. I know people have argued over the years that the U.S. should not be the world’s police force. Perhaps. But how ‘bout being the world’s referee? How ‘bout being the world’s peacemaker, rather than the world’s warmongers? If you would argue that it’s not our job to end the slaughter in Darfur, then I would ask you, whose job is it? And who will guarantee that the job gets done? If we are truly the leaders of the free world, then when, exactly, are we going to start to lead??

And our government, and our nation’s people are not the only ones complicit in a criminal failure to act in this situation. A good portion of the guilt should also be placed at the feet of the mainstream media. The genocide in Darfur has gotten a passing reference in the national news, but no real in-depth coverage. But suddenly, when someone like George Clooney gets involved in drawing attention to the issue (thank you Mr. Clooney, you’re a great American), the media is all over the story. Why? Because corporate media feels that the can “sell” an “entertainment” story, but not a story about a humanitarian tragedy.

Today, tomorrow, and for the foreseeable future, countless of innocent people will die in Darfur because the U.S., and the rest of the world has failed to act. So President Bush, as the leader of the free world, I have one question for you: Why is killing insurgents in Iraq more important to you than saving the lives of innocent people in Darfur? See if you can give me an answer with a straight face.