After the Holocaust, Cambodia and Rwanda, how many "never again" moments can the globe experience without the phrase losing all meaning? We could be at that point.

The issue is Darfur, the genocide that has occurred and is continuing there and a world dawdling to a degree that borders on collusion.

The obstacle is Sudan, unwilling to allow a 22,000-strong United Nations force to land and replace about 7,000 ill-equipped African Union troops, which have proved largely ineffective in protecting civilians. The African Union troops will still be ineffective even if augmented by more African Union troops.

In any case, Sudan, totally at fault for launching and abetting the Arab militiamen known as janjaweed in their murderous onslaught against Darfur civilians, is reportedly against an open-ended extension of the African Union troops.

President Bush has said that the United Nations should act even without Sudanese approval of the U.N. troops. He's right.

The response should be international, but if the U.N. won't act, Bush should confer with NATO, the European Union and African Union states or whoever he can to muster a coalition of the willing to counter an onslaught that already has claimed more than 200,000 lives and displaced 2 million more.

One more obstacle is China, which gets a portion of its oil from Sudan. As about the only major power on quasi-friendly terms with Sudan, China should be pressured to press Sudan to allow the peacekeeping troops.

But the president is quite right. The world and the U.N. dawdle, and people die. More pressure on all fronts has to be brought to bear on Sudan. And put squarely on the table should be the threat of military action — with or without Sudanese approval.

Last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made the point that U.N. troops are no threat to Sudan sovereignty, that country's stated fear, but are needed to deal with the very real humanitarian crisis occurring in Darfur. But, on the same page as her boss, she reiterated the need for immediate action.

"The international community does have a responsibility to protect the most vulnerable," Rice said. "What is going on in Darfur now cannot be tolerated."

She's right. If the U.N. won't act over Sudan's objections, others, including the U.S., must.