Violence Will Not Solve Problems

I wonder why some folk write to encourage using violence to address some political crises?

Let us say, OK we will use that violence to solve our political problems and then engage in this violence to cause different killings. How could such acts be progressive acts for resettlement?

I read to someone who encourages using violence to solve the political problems in Sudan in one of Reuters posts about the last clashes in Sudan.

That voice says, "think sudan is now entering a new era where the different ethnicities question their position with in the state and their share of power and resources.

The only way possible they can narrow down the difference and marginalization is through the use of force. I think the recent violence is a clear manifestation of this. this has shown a turning point for the different factions fighting amongst themselves in remote places, how to direct their forces to challenge the ruling elite. And clearly the government has started to feel the heat."

I have replied to that call by the following:

Use of force is the cause of many disasters in Sudan. If this action helps, we do not have to have the longest civil war in Africa. However, unless the force is used by a united Sudanese revolution there is no way for tribal forces to get democracy. I have no wonder about the regional and international conspiracy against Sudan to devastate this united 1 million squire miles land.

The real problem of the civil dictatorship and the military dictatorship we have in our luck store since independence from Britain is that, the Sudanese people work separately in so many different groups but not one. Let them achieve unity in the revolutionary struggle first to assure that we will have unity in the country in the future.

I hate to see discriminating and bad intentions in this moderate discussion. Please be wise when you publish any input.

More at Darfur Rebels| Darfur Crisis| Fur| Afrojournal Blog.