Sudan has oil, it sells a great deal to China. This is why China is against tough resolutions on Sudan.

Interesting.... I had not put those two factors together. Excellent observation.

Is there a difference between sending troops to Iraq instead of Sudan?? Or Sudan instead of Iraq??

The similarity is that in both cases a significant proportion of the population were being persecuted' date=' and intervention was made difficult by certain other foreign countries having a vested interest in maintaining the [i']status quo[/i]. The difference is that Sudan has a smidegeon of oil, Iraq is overflowing with it.

It is my belief that the primary reason for invading Iraq was not to locate and destroy non-existent WMD, nor to rescue a people from a vile dictatorship, but to secure ME oil supplies. (Incompetent way of doing it, but that's just another opinion.) Sudan stands little chance of being rescued from itself by the West because they just don't have enough oil to deserve rescue.

...and the sudan genocide is happening NOW while anything large-scale in iraq ended 9 years ago