Nearly 6,500 Tamilians dead in Sri Lanka in the last 3 months

At least 6,432 civilians were killed in the intense fighting over the past three months and 13,946 wounded, according to a private U.N. document circulated among diplomatic missions in Sri Lanka in recent days. The casualties were reported as "verified data" in the document, which was given to The Associated Press by a foreign diplomat Friday.

The U.N. has declined to publicly release its casualty figures and had no immediate comment on the document.

The level of civilian deaths has increased dramatically as the fighting has worn on, according to the U.N. An average of 33 civilians were killed each day at the end of January, a number that jumped to 116 by April, the document reported. More than 5,500 of those killed were inside a government-declared "no-fire" zone, the report said.

Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gVoaDFmbCYS-Usz9ACDRIengj21QD97OQCTG0

 

Don't be concerned. It is their affair. People have to be left to conduct their affairs how they will.

 

C'mon... people are dying! They are real people, not just numbers...

Oh God, where are you? Won't you help your creation? Your children! Why have you forsaken them to die and kill each other...

I hope God comes to the DP forums and reads this topic. Coz He ain't answering my prayers... and this is the only way I can communicate with Him...

 

I've been away from this forum for quite a while now, but this issue is very close to my heart. So, here I am. GauharJK, the number you've mentioned here is very small. The actual number of civilians died in Srilanka is huge. What's happening there is pure, unadulterated genocide - worse than Gaza, worse than Rwanda. The sad part is no one can do anything since the Srilankan government has India's support.

 

I am sorry for them too. Are you going to create a new "religion" DPionism ?

i don't understand those who say it is ther fault for victims. It must be Iraqis fault because Saddam supposed to have done some crimes, it can justify of killing many peoples .

 

Actually, Ziya, my mind is pushing me away from my religion, from any religion. This world is too imperfect, corrupt & unjust. Is this how God works? Maybe God does nothing...

Tamil Tigers Claim 150000 Civilians on Brink of Starvation

 

Why you are bringing India in to this?? Glad that you didnt say RAW isbehind this...

 

Let me guess, you are a George W. Bush fan. Where do all these Bushies come from? What part of "We now don't meddle in the affairs of others" do you not understand? So what if the Sri Lankans are killing each other en masse? So what if Fidel and Chavez hold their own people down, and are arresting and torturing dissenters. This is NOT OUR PROBLEM!

For many years the U.S. was supposedly very unpopular abroad, especially in Europe, for meddling in the affairs of others and trying to bully people like the big kid on the block. As Pres. O says, people have to be left to sort their affairs out how they will. We are aware cultural difference exist and we should respect the cultures of others. Unfortunately, the culture in Sri Lanka right now is one of mass killings, but look at the bright side. At least it is your own.

If these killings really bother you, you should publish a well written letter to your representation at the U.N. for quick and immediate relief from a coalition of countries around the globe.

God bless you, and I wish you luck.

 

USA was/is unpopular in Europe and Latin America and Middle East because of its unqualified support for dictators and rouge regimes and suppression of freedom. Thats called meddling in others affairs.

I am a Libertarian, Ron Paul guy... But my heart hurts when I see human suffering...

Indian government is the regional power there, but is doing nothing to help the civilians caught in this civil war. They have a duty to help the innocents, which is far more important than their foreign policy goals.

 

Actually, the USA is unpopular because of it's illegal invasion of Iraq to effect regime change on a dictator who gassed his own people, invaded and slaughtered his neighbors, plundered their resources, and continually violated the U.N. resolutions they agreed to as part of the terms of surrender. Nobody questions the mass graves found in Iraq. Anyway, this is all beside the point. No matter how you cut it, sending troops into any nation is definitely "meddling in the affairs of others" and Mr. O. has made it very clear that is something we just don't do anymore, and I think it makes perfect sense. It is about time we restored our reputation in the world, so those Sri Lankans need to suck it up, or petition the U.N.

Edit: By the way, Ron Paul was definitely for isolationist foreign policy. One of his biggest beefs was about our wasteful spending on war.

 

Well if you assasinate a couple of democratically elected prime ministers because 'you didn't like their policies' wouldn't you expect this to happen?

They've caused a lot of bother in the region and brought the whole country to its knees a number of times. It's Indians fighting Indians, not a lot we can argue with.

I am sad for the deaths here too but from what I understand of the hostilities here, I think the army has a legitimate reason to fight them.

How can India succeed as a country if their leaders keep getting blown up by the fanatical Tamils?

 

Tamilians are not fighting against Indians. They're fighting the Sri Lankans. They're wrong and have assassinated many people, including a former Indian Prime Minister. Let them fight or do whatever they want to do...

But the civilians caught in the cross-fire are innocent. They should be protected.

 

Nobody is innocent.

 

I thought Sri Lankans are Indians and the fight is being backed by the Indian government. And the Tamils took out Ms Ghandi, then her son, then were also linked to the recent Mrs Abuto slaying. That's 3 prime ministers that I believed were taken out by Tamils.

 

Mrs. Gandhi was assassinated by Sikh extremists. Her son, Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated by the LTTE. Most Tamils are citizens of India, but some of them live in Sri Lanka, a neighboring country, where they were forcibly taken by the British, centuries ago, to work in plantations.

In Sri Lanka, Tamils are treated as outsiders and second class citizens and have little rights. Thats why the resistance began in 1983.

No one cares about the LTTE, they're an extremist violent group. But the common people suffer...

 

That is really worst. We have to think about humans. Not about the labels which are given to them. I feel really bad I hope every thing gets well.

 

We've supported right wing dictatorships when the alternatives were worse, a left wing dictatorship sympathetic with the USSR; a "coalition" of powers that had no problem annexing, subjugating, even killing millions via a doctrine of centralized control, which as a Ron Paul guy, you should be very much against and glad the the US opposed it so vigorously for so many years.

Take Cuba for example, we opposed the takeover by their left wing megalomaniacal leader and failed, and look how well off Cuba is doing.

Sure you'll point to US sanctions as being the sole culprit of the Cuban people's troubles, while dismissing any of the actions or laws passed on behalf of the dictator, because you always blame America first.

But the truth is, the biggest obstacle to the US lifting sanctions has been Cuba's unwillingness to be more open and allow more freedom for its people. And our policy towards Cuba in more recent years has been mostly pushed by Cuban exiles in Florida; the people who lived under those conditions.

Take another example, in South Korea, where we supported democracy but the Soviets opposed the idea, so we supported what was basically a dictator, because it was better than the alternative. Then we gave tens of thousands of lives to protect the country after it was invaded by the communist north and then we maintained support -- even to this day -- which enabled SK to blossom into an economically strong, liberal democracy.


We've supported dictatorships in the middle east because, well deciding not to support dictatorships in the middle east almost means not supporting anyone.

I guess this brings me to Israel, which goes to the heart of your premise which is wrong. Your assertion that we are unpopular because of our "unqualified support for dictators and rouge regimes and suppression of freedom" is complete rhetorical nonsense.

We've supported dictators but it's been very much qualified. If you could please point to one example where we supported a dictator with the intention that it would have a net effect of a loss a freedom, that would be great.


Our unflinching support of Israel is by far the biggest source of criticism and hatred and they are the most liberal(liberal like free) country in the region.

If we didn't really support liberty like we say we do, then supporting Israel -- by far the most liberal, in a region mostly devoid of liberty -- would just be retarded. If our objectives were purely to have a "friend" or presence in the region we could do much better by not supporting Israel, since our support for Israel is the single biggest recruitment tool of our enemies. I mean people like you, btw.

 

Well actually, Cubans are much more educated than Americans, everyone and anyone has the freedom to go to university and be whatever they want, of course the USA dosen't offer that freedom to everyone in it's country.

And yeah, Cuba is doing quite well, i believe the life expectancy is longer in Cuba, and they have a better literacy rate. Amirite?

It's a shame about Americas unwillingness to be more open and allow more freedom for its people....alot of them are suffering.

 

Exactly. Those Cuban's who risk their lives on rafts in the open sea to touch the sands of the shores of America are the ones who just don't get it.

 

Well, I guess Its obvious you have not been in cuba for a longer than a 2 week vacation.