Mark Helprin, a fellow at the Claremont Institute, writes in the New York Times that we need to threaten with Sudan an "offer it can't refuse" - stop the genocide or face major military action to stop the rapping, razing and killing in Darfur.
I agree. Military action should be an option in all situations of international conflict. Just like everyone of the real Democratic candidates for president said that the military option will be on the table for Iran, we in the activist community, must be willing to say air strikes, tactical assaults and violence are useful to end this humanitarian disaster.
If we are willing to fight Iran over the words uttered about Israel, isn't it time to fight Sudan - with what Helprin suggests would be about three days of ammunition - to end an actual genocide?