As thinly stretched as the United States military is today by the war, I'm glad the UN is stepping up to take care of this.  I'm especially glad to see the activity from other, more-stable states in the African Union.

Does it fall on the U.S. to solve every problem in the world?  And why single the U.S. out?  Is the U.S. some how more to blame than any other nation in the world?  And if so, why?

It's our moral obligation never to allow genocide.  As long as America spends a half a trillion dollars of taxpayer dollars each year maintaining the most powerful armed forces in the history of the world, the actions of that military should reflect the morality of those taxpayers.

God doesn't just bless America, God holds us responsible.

are our brother's keeper when it comes to genocide.  Thank you, The Grey Havens, for saying it so clearly, eloquently and so rightly.

So, if it is our moral obligation to stop genocide, then other wanton acts of violence must also be included in that moral imperative, correct?

Under your argument of a moral imperative, let us look to a favorite topic: Iraq.  Saddam Hussein was clearly a vile human being.  He persecuted his own people, and he started the Iran-Iraq War.  Now as you say, we spend the most money maintaining "the most powerful" armed forces in the world.  Was it not then our moral imperative to bring Saddam Hussein to justice?

We could also go around the world and it would be hard to find a country that has not been torn by strife.  Sudan is not alone in Africa.  Civil wars have raged across West Africa and really the whole continent for the past two decades.  Is every life lost to strife on earth the fault of the U.S.A. because we didn't do anything or enough to stop it?

Why does a genocide of 200,000 Iraqis mean the US should get the hell out, but 200,000 Africans means get the heck in.  Isn't the answer we can't solve other people's centuries long problems by sending in our troops.  The Brits couldn't stop it in Northern Ireland with troops, and that was a heck of lot closer and more developed than Sudan, or Iraq. 

Different missions, different effects, different policies.

Moreover, the comprehensive truth of Africa is that the developed world has failed to sustain the Continent's development, thus engendering the long term death spirals of instability, war, hunger, disease, instability... ad mortem.

How would an uninvited incursion into the sovereign state of Sudan not constitute an invasion even if it were for the purpose of protecting rebel groups?

How is Darfur different from Chechnya?

anticipated subsequent death of many, many Iraqis:  this is an incredibly hard, if not impossible, hell hole that George W. Bush has put the world (not just us) into. 

I say, if he leaves Iraq, then we should put him on trial as a war criminal.

And, oh yeah, if he stays in Iraqn we should put him on trial as a war criminal.