Jump to content

Rwanda Genocide


Cade

Recommended Posts

This weekend marks the 25th anniversary since the start of the Rwandan Genocide, one the most appalling acts of modern times.

Rwanda had been locked in a civil war for four years by this time, despite a peace treaty being signed in '93 and UN troops being on the ground to monitor the peace.

 

Rwanda had been ruled by the minority Tutsi for years until a revolution in 1952 put the Hutus in charge.

Tensions had remained ever since and this led to the civil war as a Tutsi rebel army invaded from Uganda.

When the president was assassinated on the 6th of April 1994, a long-planned "final solution" was put into full swing.

Every single Tutsi in any role in government or the armed forces were the first to be killed.

The majority Hutu people then went on the rampage, determined to exterminate the entire Tutsi race.

Civilians had been armed with and taught how to use rifles and machetes in the years leading up to this and huge arms dumps had been stockpiled.

Government radio stations had been whipping up anti-Tutsi hatred.

 

In just 100 days, an estimated 800,000 civilians were killed, mostly with machetes.

Neighbour turned on neighbour.

People trying to hide from the militias would seek refuge in churches, only to be burned alive or have the building flattened with bulldozers. 

Compulsary ID cards made it easy to identify Tutsis. Many were shot at checkpoints manned by the army as soon as they handed over their ID cards.

 

The government released inmates at HIV clinics and formed them into rape squads, who would go on to gang-rape any Tutsi survivors, male or female.

Victims would then commonly have their genitalia mutilated to ensure that no more Tutsis would ever be born.

 

UN observers saw much of this first-hand but were powerless to intervene.

Even after 10 Belgian troopers were killed, the UN simply left.

The French govt had even been supporting the Rwandan government during the civil war and may have continued to do so even after the genocide began.

1,000 European troops arrived in Rwanda, but all they did was evacuate European citizens then leave again, abandoning the Tutsis to their fate.

 

The genocide only ended after the Tutsi army took the capital and won the civil war.

 

The Tutsis themselves then launched into bitter reprisals, with almost every branch of government being purged and hundreds of thousands of people suspected of being involved simply rounded up and throw into overcrowded jails and left to rot.

In later years, the Tutsi Rwandan government would be involved in two wars in Zaire/DRC and itself be accused of multiple war crimes on civilians, with many millions of deaths recorded.

 

Only a year later, in 1995, we saw another genocide in the former Yugoslavia, and again the UN did nothing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron Burgundy

Pretty sure Rwandans think Kofi Annan was meant to have known what was coming but did nothing.

 

He certainly did nothing once the killing began.

Edited by Ron Burgundy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bindy Badgy

I went to the Rwandan genocide museum a few years ago. Really knocks the shit out of you looking at all of the pictures of the victims and so on. It's a conflict that ourselves and all other developed countries should have stepped into.

 

I was 12 when it started so wasn't really aware of what was going on at the time. Was much made of it on the news and so on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Craig Herbertson

I have a friend who was one of the soldiers involved in "peace keeping' in Rwanda. The UN had to wait outside villages being massacred then go in and clear up. Scarred him for life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron Burgundy
18 minutes ago, Stokesy said:

I went to the Rwandan genocide museum a few years ago. Really knocks the shit out of you looking at all of the pictures of the victims and so on. It's a conflict that ourselves and all other developed countries should have stepped into.

 

I was 12 when it started so wasn't really aware of what was going on at the time. Was much made of it on the news and so on?

Yip, watched it all unfold on television and did absolutely nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron Burgundy
2 minutes ago, Craig Herbertson said:

I have a friend who was one of the soldiers involved in "peace keeping' in Rwanda. The UN had to wait outside villages being massacred then go in and clear up. Scarred him for life.

What was the official reason for not getting involved and stopping it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Barack said:

Not even in the top 5 for Genocide, historically.

 

Eye-opener.

It’s the speed of it that’s alarming. 8000 a day with no organised centres for it just open slaughter everywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Barack said:

Not even in the top 5 for Genocide, historically.

 

Eye-opener.

 

I'm guessing Stalin would top that particular chart?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, Nazi death camps as a whole top the list. That was a deliberate act to systematically exterminate certain groups of people.

The starvation of Ukraine in the early 1930s was Stalin. That was a deliberate act.

Other soviet starvation was not a deliberate act of genocide, rather gross incompetence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Cade said:

Nah, Nazi death camps as a whole top the list. That was a deliberate act to systematically exterminate certain groups of people.

The starvation of Ukraine in the early 1930s was Stalin. That was a deliberate act.

Other soviet starvation was not a deliberate act of genocide, rather gross incompetence.

 

And that differs from Rwanda how exactly? Other than being a state-sponsored activity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, trotter said:

 

And that differs from Rwanda how exactly? Other than being a state-sponsored activity?

It's exactly the same as Rwanda.

I never said otherwise.

 

Definitions of what constitutes genocide vary widely and even death tolls vary widely depending on whether you count just the direct murders or also secondary effects like relocations and starvations.

"Worst" can be defined by deaths in terms of numbers, or of percentages of populations killed or their lasting effects on those populations.

 

We're grazing the top of the murky world of International Law here and that's a whole other topic on its own.

(The USA just revoked the visa of an International Criminal Court prosecutor who is in the country gathering evidence of alleged American war crimes in Afghanistan)

 

Also today, President Macron has formed a commission of historians an researchers to get to the bottom of France's role in Rwanda.

Can Of Worms.

Edited by Cade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
1 hour ago, Cade said:

It's exactly the same as Rwanda.

I never said otherwise.

 

Definitions of what constitutes genocide vary widely and even death tolls vary widely depending on whether you count just the direct murders or also secondary effects like relocations and starvations.

"Worst" can be defined by deaths in terms of numbers, or of percentages of populations killed or their lasting effects on those populations.

 

We're grazing the top of the murky world of International Law here and that's a whole other topic on its own.

(The USA just revoked the visa of an International Criminal Court prosecutor who is in the country gathering evidence of alleged American war crimes in Afghanistan)

 

Also today, President Macron has formed a commission of historians an researchers to get to the bottom of France's role in Rwanda.

Can Of Worms.

The Belgians also have a few questions to answer regarding thier conduct .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Turks still won’t accept any blame for the Armenian genocide. And not so long ago when France recognised it the Turkish government cancelled huge financial deals to buy weapons from them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Geoff the Mince said:

The Belgians also have a few questions to answer regarding thier conduct .

And the Israelis and Albanians for arming the government. In 2016 the Israeli supreme court ruled that the documents of that period can remain locked away and out of the public's hands. Read into that what you will.

Never mind that a UK based company Mil-Tec has receipts from Israel and Albania for all kinds of weapons delivered to Rwanda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎05‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 20:26, Cade said:

Nah, Nazi death camps as a whole top the list. That was a deliberate act to systematically exterminate certain groups of people.

The starvation of Ukraine in the early 1930s was Stalin. That was a deliberate act.

Other soviet starvation was not a deliberate act of genocide, rather gross incompetence.

Nazi death camps don't even make the top 5.

 

Stalin's Holodomor's estimated at 7-10 million ; not forgetting Mao and the native populations of the Americas; Congo and India.-

which in terms of genocides (along with Rwanda) often do get forgotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay

Let's have a pissing contest to see who's Genocide's are worse. Left wing or right wing ones. When the stark truth is there is no difference. All murdering *******s the lot of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Findlay said:

Let's have a pissing contest to see who's Genocide's are worse. Left wing or right wing ones. When the stark truth is there is no difference. All murdering *******s the lot of them.

Not so much about which one's worse than the other John; more about which murdering ******s we choose to remember, and which ones we  forget.  That's the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/04/2019 at 20:26, Cade said:

Nah, Nazi death camps as a whole top the list. That was a deliberate act to systematically exterminate certain groups of people.

The starvation of Ukraine in the early 1930s was Stalin. That was a deliberate act.

Other soviet starvation was not a deliberate act of genocide, rather gross incompetence.

You missed the Number one out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

GB is the biggest mass murderers the world has ever known.

How do you come to that conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trapper John McIntyre
7 minutes ago, H2 said:

How do you come to that conclusion?

He could have added that the Scot's were among  the evil empires top killers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
On ‎05‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 20:26, Cade said:

Nah, Nazi death camps as a whole top the list. That was a deliberate act to systematically exterminate certain groups of people.

The starvation of Ukraine in the early 1930s was Stalin. That was a deliberate act.

Other soviet starvation was not a deliberate act of genocide, rather gross incompetence.

The Nazis were the most organised- that is true- they mechanised it and were incredibly efficient and that caught the imagination.

 

Stalin it was not incompetence- he shipped people on masse to guaranteed death sentences through cold and starvation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The British Empire's worst atrocities:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/worst-atrocities-british-empire-amritsar-boer-war-concentration-camp-mau-mau-a6821756.html

 

"Between 12 and 29 million Indians died of starvation while it was under the control of the British Empire, as millions of tons of wheat were exported to Britain as famine raged in India.

In 1943, up to four million Bengalis starved to death when Winston Churchill diverted food to British soldiers and countries such as Greece while a deadly famine swept through Bengal. 

Talking about the Bengal famine in 1943, Churchill said: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trapper John McIntyre
2 hours ago, Ray Gin said:

The British Empire's worst atrocities:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/worst-atrocities-british-empire-amritsar-boer-war-concentration-camp-mau-mau-a6821756.html

 

"Between 12 and 29 million Indians died of starvation while it was under the control of the British Empire, as millions of tons of wheat were exported to Britain as famine raged in India.

In 1943, up to four million Bengalis starved to death when Winston Churchill diverted food to British soldiers and countries such as Greece while a deadly famine swept through Bengal. 

Talking about the Bengal famine in 1943, Churchill said: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.”

Total Bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Craig Herbertson

It's a long time ago he talked about it. As far as I remember he said the UN had to remain neutral. There we're all sorts of protocols they had to observe which included regions and when they could enter them.  I do know he never slept properly afterwards. Every night nightmares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bindy Badgy
23 hours ago, Craig Herbertson said:

It's a long time ago he talked about it. As far as I remember he said the UN had to remain neutral. There we're all sorts of protocols they had to observe which included regions and when they could enter them.  I do know he never slept properly afterwards. Every night nightmares.

 

I started reading a book written by the guy that was in charge of the UN forces on the ground. I got about 5 pages in before I had to put it down. Anyone that had to witness that has my sympathy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diadora Van Basten

I am sure the UN set up a safe zone then left. The going rate was to pay $25 for the militia to shoot you or you got hacked to death with machetes.

 

There was a real hero UN commander think he was Canadian who refused to pull his forces out and played cat and mouse with the militias.

 

Hotel Rwanda is a good film a bit like an African Schindlers list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Craig Herbertson
On 10/04/2019 at 17:01, Stokesy said:

 

I started reading a book written by the guy that was in charge of the UN forces on the ground. I got about 5 pages in before I had to put it down. Anyone that had to witness that has my sympathy.

 

I understand why. They hacked men to death but specialised in breaking the backs of young kids and often left the mother's just alive enough to be able to do nothing for them. I'd struggle to read any book about it myself.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how this turned into a genocide world championship.

 

Anyway, as someone highlighted, it’s the speed of the slaughter, rather than the scale, that’s so terrifying; how friends and families turned on each other so quickly. I read an article recently about Paul Kagame and how he appears

to have healed the wounds. However there’s concern that when he dies or passes on the presidency, grievances will rise back to the surface. It was an absolute tragedy and, with what happened in Yugoslavia, demonstrated to all the pointlessness of the UN. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doctor FinnBarr
2 hours ago, Zico said:

Not sure how this turned into a genocide world championship.

 

Anyway, as someone highlighted, it’s the speed of the slaughter, rather than the scale, that’s so terrifying; how friends and families turned on each other so quickly. I read an article recently about Paul Kagame and how he appears

to have healed the wounds. However there’s concern that when he dies or passes on the presidency, grievances will rise back to the surface. It was an absolute tragedy and, with what happened in Yugoslavia, demonstrated to all the pointlessness of the UN. 

 

Yep, sky blue hard hats sitting back watching

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ibrahim Tall
11 hours ago, Zico said:

Not sure how this turned into a genocide world championship.

 

Anyway, as someone highlighted, it’s the speed of the slaughter, rather than the scale, that’s so terrifying; how friends and families turned on each other so quickly. I read an article recently about Paul Kagame and how he appears

to have healed the wounds. However there’s concern that when he dies or passes on the presidency, grievances will rise back to the surface. It was an absolute tragedy and, with what happened in Yugoslavia, demonstrated to all the pointlessness of the UN. 

 

I wouldnt 'praise' Kagame too much tbh, he's an oppressive dictator himself that's responsible for various deaths and assasinations himself along with problems in Congo, Uganda etc.

 

Rwanda is 'stable' now, relatively peaceful by African standards and the economy etc is growing but he's still a dictator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...