UN troops fired on a crowd of protesters in Congo today:
KINSHASA, Congo - U.N. troops fired on rampaging protesters in Congo's capital Thursday, killing at least two, as the surprise capture of an eastern city by renegade commanders sparked the most violent protests here since the outbreak of the country's 1998-2002 war.
What were the crowds protesting? That would be the UN peacekeepers they were "protesting"
...rioters attacked U.N. compounds, furious at the world body for not stopping rebels from seizing a key town, a senior U.N. official said on Thursday.
What did the UN have to say in response?
In New York, U.N. Undersecretary-General for Peacekeeping Jean-Marie Guehenno blamed the violence on unreasonable expectations among Congolese about the U.N. peacekeepers' ability to control militants."There's an expectation that MONUC (the U.N. mission) with its limited resources could do everything," Guehenno said. "I think it's likely we will need more troops."
So it they can't keep the peace, what the hell are they doing there in the first place?
To shoot the victims of their failure?
Got me.
The UN has a history of not standing between the rival forces and interests for which they are supposed to be keeping the peace. Their adventures in the Balkans comes to mind easily.
But they certainly are quick enough to shoot people willing to attack them.
Now I'm all for self-defense, don't get me wrong, but when you claim to be peacekeepers and you do nothing to actually keep the peace, don't be surprised if folks get angry at you.
Now keep in mind that it's these very people Sen John Kerry would like to put in charge of security in Iraq.
Between helping Saddam steal billions from the people of Iraq and being completely incompetent at providing security for anyone but themselves, I think they would be a poor choice.
