Like all ‘humanitarian’ disasters, Haiti to Somalia, Darfur to Bangladesh, the West is supposed to feel awful about the local natives chopping each other’s body parts off. Why? Believe it or not, not all atheists are leftwing sentimentalists or Marxist agitators hoping to turn tragedy into world revolution.  For those of us who don’t respond to the pleas of Franklin Graham, the Pope, Islamic mullahs or Episcopalian gay do-gooders, why on Earth is Darfur of concern to us.  If indeed there is sufficient oil to ensure prosperity for civilized beings(e.g., practically no one in sub-Sahara Africa) for decades, well fine. Let us sanitize the area of its current dysfuncitional human offshoots and replace them with hard working people from abroad who can extract the wealth, transport it in safety and perhaps after rational investigation, see if Godforsaken(even atheists use these trite expressions)Sudan can be re-developed into useful farmland if rational water practices and conservation can be introduced.  The current inhabitants have had a few milennia to prove they can do something useful with this so far desolate area:  Time’s up. Invest in the area by all means to develop it with a population that understands investment, savings and civil law.  “Aid” to the current masses in Sudan and elsewhere in Africa, whether infected with AIDS, Ebola, malaria or whatever diseases bush meat brings is an utter waste of resources.  Branches of humanity do go extinct. Only Christians might find that unacceptable. But we’ll all die if Christian thinking as interpreted by Bono, Angelina Jolie, the Pope and the evangelicals guides rational decisions.