jb2000

As a former crewmember of the Abe Lincoln, I was proud to see her responding to the crisis. The point is that nations should respond with what they can that will provide effective relief. For some that is primarily cash, for some expertise, and for the US, a variety of responses. One can't and shouldn't bother quantifying the exact cost of our response. Our ships are perfect for providing quick water treatment capacity where it is needed most, and its been a great contribution. Fact is they were at sea and would be cruising anyway, regardless of the tsunami, so the whole cost of the ships operations is not attributable to the relief effort. How much is, well I'm sure some bean-counter will find a way to measure it, but in the end it doesn't matter. The fact is that the United States was there and will continue to be there through the reconstruction effort.

As for the cash pledge, only a fraction has actually been directed to projects yet. It doesn't matter if we had pledged a billion dollars, it would have made no difference as of today. If we reach the end of the $350m at some point, then it will be an issue as to whether or not to extend more, but we will be at a much better position to make that judgement from.

America's contribution has frankly been huge, and should be considered nothing but. Whether others contribute more is not the issue. Only one nation can contribute the most, so does that mean only one nation can make a worthwhile contribution while all the rest are stingy bastards?

__________________
"Don't tell me we're so blind we cannot see that this is my land! I can't pretend that it's nothing to do with me.
And this is your land, you can't close your eyes to this hypocracy.
Yes this is my land, I won't pretend that it's nothing to do with me.
'Cause this is our land, we can't close our eyes to the things we don't wanna see."

- DTH