The Day That The USA Invaded Russia And Fought With The Red Army

INSTANT ARTICLES
WORLD WAR I

Nov 17, 2016 Nikola Budanovic

Soldiers and sailors from many countries are lined up in front of the Allies Headquarters Building. The United States is represented. September 1918.


The US Armed Forces and the Red Army, although great rivals, only once met in battle. Even though during the Cold War a number of conflicts were considered to be proxy wars between the two superpowers, it was during the Russian Civil War that the Soviets and Americans fought each other directly.

On March 3rd, 1918, the Bolshevik government of Soviet Russia signed a separate peace treaty with the Central Powers, in Brest-Litovsk, thus leaving the war and closing the Easter Front. Immediately, the Allies organized an expedition intended to regroup the Imperial Russian Army and subdue the Bolshevik revolution. Several contingents of Allied troops deployed to Russia.
U.S. troops in Vladivostok, August 1918.
U.S. troops in Vladivostok, August 1918.

The British regiment landed in Arkhangelsk, on the far northern tip of Russian coast on August 2nd, 1918, occupying the city and securing it as a base of operations for further actions. The city was of great importance, as it held many supplies sent by the Allies to support the last Russian offensive against the Germans in 1917. By the time the British troops arrived, the supplies had been seized by the Bolsheviks, who engaged the Allies in combat almost immediately upon their arrival.

In September that same year, a contingent of American troops was sent to Siberia as a peacekeeping force, but they never saw combat. Some 189 soldiers died from the cold or other causes. All operations in Russia conducted by the Allies were of an international character. Soldiers from different Allied countries were sent to aid the expedition or were already in Russia as part of the Entente war effort against Germany and Austro-Hungary. These included French, Belgian, Romanian, Greek, Polish, Canadian, Italian, Japanese, Czechoslovak, Yugoslav, and Australian soldiers.

In fear of communism spreading throughout Europe, the Allies quickly agreed to provide open support for the members of the Tzarist White Russian movement, which hoped to restore the Russian Empire.

As the First World War was coming to its end, the Allied attention had shifted to the crisis in Russia. Some units, organized by volunteers and POWs from different ethnic backgrounds, were now stuck in a complicated conflict that was tearing Russia apart. The largest of these divisions was the Czechoslovak Legion, consisted of Czechs and Slovaks, who refused to serve, or deserted from, the Austro-Hungarian Army, in hopes of creating their own state after the war.
Czechoslovaks with armored train, Russia. Wikipedia/ Public Domain
Czechoslovaks with armored train, Russia.

One of the main concerns of Allied expeditions was the extraction of 40,000 members of the Czechoslovak Legion, who, at the outbreak of the civil war, assumed control over the strategically vital Trans-Siberian railway. At first, a verbal non-aggression pact existed between the Bolsheviks and the Czech Legion, but in 1918, the Legion became deeply involved in the conflict, siding itself with the White Russian movement.

The American contingent stationed in Arkhangelsk was dubbed the Polar Bear Expedition due to the position of the city near the Arctic circle. The freezing weather added up to the nickname, as the soldiers faced extremely low temperatures. Elements of the 85th division were sent by General Pershing to aid the British in Arkhangelsk.

The main bulk of the American force was the 339th Infantry Regiment. There were also troops from the First Battalion of the 310th Engineers, plus a few other ancillary units from the 85th Division. The Americans arrived in Arkhangelsk one month after their British counterparts and joined the fight as the British fought their way through to reach the remnants of the Czechoslovak Legion. A far-fetched objective was to restore the Eastern Front with the help of the Czechoslovaks and White Russians as the war was still happening at that time.

A CANDID ADVICE, PLEASE:

I was on my own o, a friend of mine come
invite me to his church for a thanksgiving
service, and I sat at the front row.

When it was time for offering, the
offering basket was passed around.
Despite the Pastor's charge for good
offering, I still hurriedly and secretly pulled out as
usual N20.00 from my pocket and dropped it
inside d offering basket.

Just then the man
behind me tapped me
on the shoulder and handed me 3 notes of 1000.
I smiled, and to sow generously as received,
I majestically looked around
and called back d usher and put
the 3k in the basket and passed it on.

Then I turned and thanked the man seriously
for being so generous.

He replied "don't mention my dear, be more
careful next time when bringing out money".

Then I realized the money fell from my
pocket.

#Whaaaat!!!!!???????!

Please, help a friend in this #BuhariTime, what do you think I should do?

United Nations Finally Acknowledges US-Backed Rebels in Syria are Murdering Civilians

Baran Hines November 2, 2016

United Nations Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura stated Sunday that he is “appalled and shocked by the high number of rockets indiscriminately launched by armed opposition groups” which have killed hundreds of civilians in Aleppo during recent weeks. The attacks from groups supported by the United States were described as “relentless and indiscriminate” while targeting civilians and killing children, according to the statement released by de Mistura’s office.

The battle for eastern Aleppo has become more violent as the Syrian army continues to regain control of the strategic city while targeting the UN designated terrorist group Jahbat Al Nusra, which is known as Al Qaeda in Syria. Most of the attacks by opposition groups have targeted civilians as almost 100 civilians were reported killed in 3 days in western Aleppo, which is controlled by the Syrian government.

US officials and others claim that opposition groups supported by the United States are also being targeted by the Syrian army and civilians are being killed. However, US-backed groups have continued to work directly with Al Nusra in Aleppo, and, for more than six months, have refused requests by the United States and Russia to separate from terrorist groups.

UN Envoy Staffan de Mistura condemned the attacks by these groups because they continue using inaccurate weapons to launch attacks which are claimed as self-defense against the attacks from the Syrian army.

“Those who argue that this is meant to relieve the siege of eastern Aleppo should be reminded that nothing justifies the use of disproportionate, indiscriminate [attacks,] including heavy weapons on civilian areas and it could amount to war crimes,” de Mistura said.

Opposition groups have also used chemical weapons with the most recent attack occurring on October 30, killing 3 and injuring 40 civilians in western Aleppo areas controlled by the government. Non-governmental organization Amnesty International said the attacks show “a shocking disregard for civilian lives” in a statement released Monday.

“The goal of breaking the siege on eastern Aleppo does not give armed opposition groups a license to flout the rules of international humanitarian law by bombarding civilian neighborhoods in government-held areas without distinction,” said Samah Hadid, a senior Amnesty official in the Beirut regional office.

The Syrian war has seen an increase in violence after the collapse of the September 9 ceasefire agreement negotiated by diplomatic officials from the United States and Russia. Opposition groups contributed to the collapse of the ceasefire after violating the ceasefire over 300 times in the first two weeks, according to the Syrian news agency SANA. Amnesty International also cited the United States being responsible for more than 300 civilian deaths in recent weeks.

The ceasefire agreement called for Russia to influence the Syrian government forces to stop fighting for control and for the US to influence rebel groups to separate from terrorist groups Al Nusra and Islamic State so they could be targeted by joint US-Russia military campaigns. The US has failed to achieve this since February 2016 despite US officials claiming to be in daily contact with rebel groups.

Another significant incident causing the Syrian ceasefire to fail was the September 17 attack by the United States on Syrian troops fighting the Islamic State near the city of Deir Ezzor, killing more than 80 troops and wounding over 100 others — including civilians. That incident, which the US called an accident, led to public accusations from Russia that the US is intentionally helping the Islamic State.

A few days later on September 19, Russia was accused by the US of bombing a United Nations aid convoy for Aleppo, a charge denied by Russia citing forensic evidence indicating that the attack was not an airstrike. The ongoing public tension led to the United States ending direct negotiations with Russia over the Syrian conflict on October 3, and both sides have since traded public declarations which many see as heightened war rhetoric.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.c....om/syrian-rebels-mur

Boko Haram overrunning Chibok communities, leaders cry out
November 22, 2016-Abdulkareem Haruna


Weeks after they celebrated the release of 21 of their abducted daughters, the people of Chibok in Borno State say their communities are being overrun by suspected Boko Haram insurgents.

They said at least nine communities under Chibok local government area have been either attacked, sacked or burnt down by rampaging Boko Haram insurgents.

The federal government has said that talks are continuing with Boko Haram for the release of some 196 Chibok girls still in captivity.

But the recent upsurge of hostilities by Boko Haram within and around Borno State, has raised concerns about the prospect of such talks.

The chairman of Chibok local government area, Yaga Yarkawa, on Monday, told journalists in Maiduguri that the most attack on Chibok communities took place was in Thlaimaklama village.

He said hundreds of persons fled their homes as the insurgents torched houses, looted foodstuff and stole livestock.

“Chibok is now under Boko Haram siege,” he said.

“Contrary to claims by government and security operatives, Chibok is not safe. There has been series of renewed attacks on our communities. As I am talking to you now the villages of Kuburmbula, Tsilari, Kamdzilari, Kuburnvwu, Kautikari, Kwada, Buftari and Kakulmari have all been attacked, and burnt down completely in the past weeks.”

Most of the villages bordering Damboa and Sambia forest parts of the state.

He said the latest attack took place at the weekend in Thlaimaklama village where the insurgents carted away farm products in 15 vehicles, after setting ablaze three vehicles and several numbers of houses without any confrontation from the military.

He said the insurgents came at the peak of the harvest period, and loaded their vehicles with the fresh harvests from the villagers’ farms.

“I have no doubt that the insurgents are in control of Kuburmbula, Tsilari, Kamdzilari, Kuburnvwu, Kautikari, Kwada, Buftari, Klaima and Kakulmari villages,” he said.

Confirming the development in Chibok, a leader of the vigilante group in Chibok, Commander Aboku said, “The Boko Haram terrorists have been on the move destroying every community they enter”.

He added that the fluid nature of their movement makes it difficult for them to confront them.

Mr. Abogu however said that the vigilante were able to kill two of the insurgents and recovered two AK47 rifles and a Hilux vehicles mounted with anti-aircraft gun.

He called on the military to move into the area and collaborate with the local vigilante who have better understanding of the difficult terrain.

Obama: Police Must Admit Their Failures if They Want to Stop Being Killed.

CNN recently reported that police officers deaths from guns has gone up 72 percent compared to last year. Now, Barack Obama is finally doling out some blame. Unsurprisingly, Obama is singling out the actions of law enforcement — not the killers — as the primary cause of these murders.

This accusation comes right after five cops were killed in Dallas, and three more were killed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. All eight men were targetted because they were police officers, and all eight were murdered by Black men who were affiliated with Black Lives Matter, or other like-minded organizations.

Of course, it was always unlikely that Obama would ever single out these anti-cop movements for the violence they have incited. Obama has spent much too of the last year praising the organizations to admit that they have gone so far off their intended path.

Now, his only option has become to blame the police — which is exactly what he has done.

U.S Election 2016: Donald Trump Finally Bans T.B Joshua From America Over False Prophecy

Donald Trump has banned Synagogue Church Of All Nations T.B Joshua from entering the United States of America after his horrendous prophecy.

Joshua is not allowed to step one foot in America after he predicted a “narrow” win for Hilary Clinton in the just concluded U.S. presidential election.

And of course uncle T.B Joshua was left red faced.

BREAKING: Nigerian Army Declares 46 Soldiers Missing

The Nigerian Army has officially declared one officer and 45 soldiers missing.

According to PREMIUM TIMES, the declaration was contained in a November 20 notice sent by M. Jimoh, the new commander of the Nigerian Army 145 Task Force Battalion in Damasak, Borno State.

Army authorities have formally informed the families of the 46 personnel of the fate of their loved ones and requested that their next of kin forward bank details for onward remittance of accrued payments.

South Sudan’s Independence and the Irony of Defeat in Victory
Osita Ebiem
BREAKING NEWS

Russia Advances Missiles Into the Heart of Europe as NATO Tensions Rise
Obama Does Not Plan on Stepping Down
"We Are Coming Nineveh” Obama Must Win in Mosul or Donald Trump Will Do it For Him
Last Remaining Neighborhood in Muslim Quarter No Longer Off-Limits to Jews
As Trump Charts New Mideast Policy, White House Contemplates Sabotage
A Tiny Minority of a Million Muslims in America
Donald Trump, Naftali Bennett, and the End of the Two-State "Solution"


November 17, 2016
south-sudan
Share This:

For more than 25 years the people of South Sudan fought their powerful common enemy to a standstill. The enslaving Arab Islamist forces of north Sudan were matched fire for fire until the northerners acknowledged that the southerners who are Animists and Christians have rights to live free and on their own cultural and religious terms. The southerners fought valiantly as men, they fought as one people; they fought long and won their freedom from the oppressors on July 9, 2011.

Vicariously, those of us who are fighting to free Biafra from the vicious grip of the Islamic state of Nigeria participated in the South Sudanese victory like it was our own. Yes, in more ways than not, the Sudanese victory tends to foretell how the eventual Igbo freedom from Nigeria will look like. Why the Biafrans saw in the South Sudanese victory their own is because in Nigeria Igbo people are also faced with the same Arab-Islamist forces of Hausa, Fulani and Yoruba oligarchies which are bent on the total extermination of the Igbo. So, since the South Sudanese withstood similar enslaving forces and defeated them, the victory has remained an evergreen source of inspiration for the Igbo in Nigeria.

While they fought in the trenches, on the hills and in all the many battlefields; the South Sudanese leaders had some squabbles and disagreements. But they always found ways to settle their differences and disputes and sustained the fight against the enslavers. At the end of the battle they won a country but now this is 2016, they need to win a nation.

Unfortunately, by 2013 the people lost their hard won country to personal interests and power flexing of their leaders. The leaders’ individual interests and show of power plunged the entire country into a civil war which has raged on to their shame and the disappointment of their admirers. These leaders need to put aside for one moment their pursuit for personal prestige and show some example of caring and benevolent leadership styles. Urgently, they must find solutions now; find ways to end childish things and begin the onerous and matured business of governing and managing a country and the welfares of its people.

Earlier on, at the southern tip of the continent, South Africans who had also fought long and arduous against those who oppressed them through Apartheid system, celebrated their freedom in 1994. Some of the leaders of the fight were imprisoned for more than 25 years. But their fight for equality had lasted for about a century. In the end the South Africans also won freedom and the right to be equal participants in the affairs of their country. But perhaps that is where the similarities of the two fights end. Today, and unfortunately so, the leaders of South Sudan are turning their laudable and prideful victory into a tragedy and nightmare. The attitude of the South Sudanese leaders toward leadership and power is largely to be blamed.

In South Africa there were Nelson Mandela and others like him who to a greater extent understood the nature and concept of victory and power – altruistic, magnanimous, camaraderie; transient and flitting. While in South Sudan there are Salva Kiir, Riek Machar and others who believe that victory is personal, individualistic and an end in itself. And that power should be held onto permanently and used vindictively to witch-hunt opposition while the opposition egoistically asserts that it is not weak, after all. That it also has influence. But the truth is that good leaders, whether in opposition or not cannot be vindictive and sour or constantly trying to prove some points.

The big guys of South Sudan are shamelessly flexing unattractive and unimpressive muscles, trying to prove personal superiority while their lowly citizens to whom the victory and power truly belong continue to suffer in pain and devastating impoverishment. In the mind of these leaders, they have come to erroneously think that because they were opportune to be present at the moment of the people’s victory therefore they have become some divine beings who are now infallible and indispensable. This attitude shamefully violates the memory and honor of those heroes who also fought and died before July 9, 2011. Sometimes one wonders if these leaders have ever considered that old saying of leaving the stage while the ovation is still loud.

Down through time, history has not lacked noble and honorable achievers and victors who left exemplary records which those that care can imitate. In the following story we learn that sometimes, because of the feelings of others that good leaders learn to let go of personal pleasures and comfort, even when they can afford them. In other words, true leaders cannot always take it just because they can. The biblical David was a military commander of ancient Israeli army who is still recognized as a successful leader of his people because he understood how to handle victory and power without being sucked into the twilight zone of those two impostors. It is reported that at one point during the heat of a battle, when an enemy force occupied Bethlehem his hometown, David thirsted for water from a well in Bethlehem. When he made his wish known, three of his officers volunteered and risked everything by cutting through the ranks of the enemy to fetch the water from the well. On their return, David would not drink the water but poured it out as libation, saying that there was no way he could drink it because the water equated with the blood of these men who risked their lives in order to satisfy his personal fancies.

As the leader, nothing prevented David from drinking the water but he resisted greed and insensitivity and instead poured the water away. We can play the story forward and contrast it with the attitude of the present South Sudan generals who it seems would rather impoverish and drink the blood of their fellow country men, women and children merely to hold on to power and prove how right and indispensable they have become.
lev-haolam-building-israel
The Monster is in us

My poet friend Jonathan Wilson said that as a little boy he looked for the monster under his bed. But now as an adult he suddenly discovered that the monster was himself. These South Sudanese generals fought so gallantly to win their many battles only to be defeated by mere selfish pursuit of personal glory and the unwillingness to let go and concede personal fancies in the interest of peace in the country for which they have already sacrificed so much. The present arch rivals President Salva Kiir and his former Vice-President Riek Machar fought side by side in the military until the enemy was defeated and the people of South Sudan became free and independent. Now, they are finding it impossible to defeat the enemy in their individual selves. Good leaders aim to leave behind legacies which acceptably, are more difficult to do than winning battles. In trying to win wars the aim is to defeat the enemy, while in building legacies true leaders must defeat their selves. At first it was believed that the problem of the South Sudanese people was the hegemony and evil devises of the Islamic Arabs in the north. Sadly, due to the selfish interests of their leaders, the people seem to be doing a rethink.

To many observers, that victory over the bigoted fanatical forces of Islamic Arab feudalism will not be complete until the leaders are able to defeat their personal demon. But they still have the time and opportunity to save themselves, the country and the people in it. These leaders must come to the realization that power as everything else is only a means and not an end in itself. All powers and attained positions are transient and temporal and should be treated as such.

Nevertheless, we are not pretending to believe that sentiments and emotions may be all there are in making these men to do the right thing. Sometimes there may be need for something extra. So, while we are appealing to the conscience of these men, to reconsider and solve this problem in the same way they had solved other disagreements they had when they fought for their liberation, we are not ruling out the need for genuine external assistance in helping solve this problem. The international community should find a way to use sanctions and other forms of economic and political pressures to force these men to do the right thing.

Part of what I consider to be the right approach in solving the problem is to avoid an obtuse and blanket kind of condemnations and approvals. Let the guilty be blamed and those who out of a sincere and honest heart have done the right thing should be praised and encouraged. It will be more beneficial, especially in the interest of posterity for those who do intervene in this matter to be specific when dealing with all aspects of the issue. There is the need for a comprehensive and holistic approach in trying to solve South Sudan. As an example, in my opinion, I think that the time has come for the review of the country’s political and social structure. The prevailing National Constitution was drawn under the circumstances of strife and war with an external force. As a matter of necessity, since the country as an independent state is now under a civilian regime, it may be a good idea to produce another constitution which takes cognizance of present realities.

Israel Rising | Breaking News & Analysis on Israel logo


BREAKING NEWS

Russia Advances Missiles Into the Heart of Europe as NATO Tensions Rise
Obama Does Not Plan on Stepping Down
"We Are Coming Nineveh” Obama Must Win in Mosul or Donald Trump Will Do it For Him
Last Remaining Neighborhood in Muslim Quarter No Longer Off-Limits to Jews
As Trump Charts New Mideast Policy, White House Contemplates Sabotage
A Tiny Minority of a Million Muslims in America
Donald Trump, Naftali Bennett, and the End of the Two-State "Solution"

South Sudan’s Independence and the Irony of Defeat in Victory
Osita Ebiem
November 17, 2016
south-sudan
Share This:

For more than 25 years the people of South Sudan fought their powerful common enemy to a standstill. The enslaving Arab Islamist forces of north Sudan were matched fire for fire until the northerners acknowledged that the southerners who are Animists and Christians have rights to live free and on their own cultural and religious terms. The southerners fought valiantly as men, they fought as one people; they fought long and won their freedom from the oppressors on July 9, 2011.

Vicariously, those of us who are fighting to free Biafra from the vicious grip of the Islamic state of Nigeria participated in the South Sudanese victory like it was our own. Yes, in more ways than not, the Sudanese victory tends to foretell how the eventual Igbo freedom from Nigeria will look like. Why the Biafrans saw in the South Sudanese victory their own is because in Nigeria Igbo people are also faced with the same Arab-Islamist forces of Hausa, Fulani and Yoruba oligarchies which are bent on the total extermination of the Igbo. So, since the South Sudanese withstood similar enslaving forces and defeated them, the victory has remained an evergreen source of inspiration for the Igbo in Nigeria.

While they fought in the trenches, on the hills and in all the many battlefields; the South Sudanese leaders had some squabbles and disagreements. But they always found ways to settle their differences and disputes and sustained the fight against the enslavers. At the end of the battle they won a country but now this is 2016, they need to win a nation.

Unfortunately, by 2013 the people lost their hard won country to personal interests and power flexing of their leaders. The leaders’ individual interests and show of power plunged the entire country into a civil war which has raged on to their shame and the disappointment of their admirers. These leaders need to put aside for one moment their pursuit for personal prestige and show some example of caring and benevolent leadership styles. Urgently, they must find solutions now; find ways to end childish things and begin the onerous and matured business of governing and managing a country and the welfares of its people.

Earlier on, at the southern tip of the continent, South Africans who had also fought long and arduous against those who oppressed them through Apartheid system, celebrated their freedom in 1994. Some of the leaders of the fight were imprisoned for more than 25 years. But their fight for equality had lasted for about a century. In the end the South Africans also won freedom and the right to be equal participants in the affairs of their country. But perhaps that is where the similarities of the two fights end. Today, and unfortunately so, the leaders of South Sudan are turning their laudable and prideful victory into a tragedy and nightmare. The attitude of the South Sudanese leaders toward leadership and power is largely to be blamed.

In South Africa there were Nelson Mandela and others like him who to a greater extent understood the nature and concept of victory and power – altruistic, magnanimous, camaraderie; transient and flitting. While in South Sudan there are Salva Kiir, Riek Machar and others who believe that victory is personal, individualistic and an end in itself. And that power should be held onto permanently and used vindictively to witch-hunt opposition while the opposition egoistically asserts that it is not weak, after all. That it also has influence. But the truth is that good leaders, whether in opposition or not cannot be vindictive and sour or constantly trying to prove some points.

The big guys of South Sudan are shamelessly flexing unattractive and unimpressive muscles, trying to prove personal superiority while their lowly citizens to whom the victory and power truly belong continue to suffer in pain and devastating impoverishment. In the mind of these leaders, they have come to erroneously think that because they were opportune to be present at the moment of the people’s victory therefore they have become some divine beings who are now infallible and indispensable. This attitude shamefully violates the memory and honor of those heroes who also fought and died before July 9, 2011. Sometimes one wonders if these leaders have ever considered that old saying of leaving the stage while the ovation is still loud.

Down through time, history has not lacked noble and honorable achievers and victors who left exemplary records which those that care can imitate. In the following story we learn that sometimes, because of the feelings of others that good leaders learn to let go of personal pleasures and comfort, even when they can afford them. In other words, true leaders cannot always take it just because they can. The biblical David was a military commander of ancient Israeli army who is still recognized as a successful leader of his people because he understood how to handle victory and power without being sucked into the twilight zone of those two impostors. It is reported that at one point during the heat of a battle, when an enemy force occupied Bethlehem his hometown, David thirsted for water from a well in Bethlehem. When he made his wish known, three of his officers volunteered and risked everything by cutting through the ranks of the enemy to fetch the water from the well. On their return, David would not drink the water but poured it out as libation, saying that there was no way he could drink it because the water equated with the blood of these men who risked their lives in order to satisfy his personal fancies.

As the leader, nothing prevented David from drinking the water but he resisted greed and insensitivity and instead poured the water away. We can play the story forward and contrast it with the attitude of the present South Sudan generals who it seems would rather impoverish and drink the blood of their fellow country men, women and children merely to hold on to power and prove how right and indispensable they have become.
lev-haolam-building-israel
The Monster is in us

My poet friend Jonathan Wilson said that as a little boy he looked for the monster under his bed. But now as an adult he suddenly discovered that the monster was himself. These South Sudanese generals fought so gallantly to win their many battles only to be defeated by mere selfish pursuit of personal glory and the unwillingness to let go and concede personal fancies in the interest of peace in the country for which they have already sacrificed so much. The present arch rivals President Salva Kiir and his former Vice-President Riek Machar fought side by side in the military until the enemy was defeated and the people of South Sudan became free and independent. Now, they are finding it impossible to defeat the enemy in their individual selves. Good leaders aim to leave behind legacies which acceptably, are more difficult to do than winning battles. In trying to win wars the aim is to defeat the enemy, while in building legacies true leaders must defeat their selves. At first it was believed that the problem of the South Sudanese people was the hegemony and evil devises of the Islamic Arabs in the north. Sadly, due to the selfish interests of their leaders, the people seem to be doing a rethink.

To many observers, that victory over the bigoted fanatical forces of Islamic Arab feudalism will not be complete until the leaders are able to defeat their personal demon. But they still have the time and opportunity to save themselves, the country and the people in it. These leaders must come to the realization that power as everything else is only a means and not an end in itself. All powers and attained positions are transient and temporal and should be treated as such.

Nevertheless, we are not pretending to believe that sentiments and emotions may be all there are in making these men to do the right thing. Sometimes there may be need for something extra. So, while we are appealing to the conscience of these men, to reconsider and solve this problem in the same way they had solved other disagreements they had when they fought for their liberation, we are not ruling out the need for genuine external assistance in helping solve this problem. The international community should find a way to use sanctions and other forms of economic and political pressures to force these men to do the right thing.

Part of what I consider to be the right approach in solving the problem is to avoid an obtuse and blanket kind of condemnations and approvals. Let the guilty be blamed and those who out of a sincere and honest heart have done the right thing should be praised and encouraged. It will be more beneficial, especially in the interest of posterity for those who do intervene in this matter to be specific when dealing with all aspects of the issue. There is the need for a comprehensive and holistic approach in trying to solve South Sudan. As an example, in my opinion, I think that the time has come for the review of the country’s political and social structure. The prevailing National Constitution was drawn under the circumstances of strife and war with an external force. As a matter of necessity, since the country as an independent state is now under a civilian regime, it may be a good idea to produce another constitution which takes cognizance of present realities.