America sets an example
 

After all this petty nonesense and bickering over who has donated sufficient money to the tsunami disaster, and the misquotation or representation of Jan Egeland's comments, I'm absolutely delighted to see America set the world a shining example in how to respond to this disaster.

Well done America. Hopefully the world's other rich countries will follow suit. Can we stop all this cheap political point scoring and anti-UN rubbish now? At least for a while? :confused:

Imagine the difference if all countries increased their aid donations ten-fold?


Mr Mephisto

Now, given the opinion of the US to the rest of the world... I am waiting on it to be said the only reason the US coughed up the extra cash was because of the original 'stingy' comment.

Followed by..


SIGH


Some people just seem to want to be outraged. Even if they're dueling windmills...

Mr Mephisto

Canada went 10 fold the other day from 4 to 40 million. Seems right given the demographics. Canada is also matching each dollar for dollar donated by us Canadian folk.

Good on the US for taking the lead not only monetarily but by providing transportation, people on the ground etc, etc ,etc,...

People will whine about anything but when push comes to shove, the US does shows it's colors proud and true and rises to the occassion. Hats off.

People *are* whining about it already. "You only did it because the world asked you to give more. twice," is heard often. And then there's "The EU is giving 300 million, and that is better because (insert calculation)."

Nope, no matter what you do, it's already too late to change the initial perception. But of course, that initial perception, and the current one, are influenced by how these people saw the US before. If they "hated" the US before, the low starting bid is just fuel for their hatred. If they liked you before, the eventual money is important... People see what they want to see, after all.

Money isn't always the thing that helps most also. I'm sure technology wise and professional wise the US will supply more then 50% of the "Man power". You know what though, I don't give a damn of who gives more or less... There are people who need help and I really wish they can recover from this situation.

I bet the U.S. amount goes over a billion dollars before we are through. We should not be concerned with those who complain about our "stinginess". Just help those in need.

I think the current plan is to also send Warships (equipped with water refineries not missles ^^) and other Technologies (as I mentioned above) to stay there for the long term to rekindle life there. That's the aid I really think that's needed. That's what I'm proud of the United States for.

I can say without a doubt that because of this Event the lifestyle of those who survived their will be enhanced just because of 1st world involvement from the likes of the US, England, and the other countries (except France, they suck no matter what :)).

I bet that if we add the running costs of those military assets to the 300 million dollars, we end up with a waaaay higher amount. I don't know what it costs to keep a warship running, but it has to be a *lot* of money.

But then I feel that people should STFU about the amount of money being donated - after all, the US could have chosen not to give anything at all. It's not like the people hit by this disaster somehow "deserve" US aid. Those 350 million could have been used elsewhere, to help US taxpayers, but instead the US gives it to those most in need. It's given out of kindness, and any amount is better than none.

OK, I'm losing patience with some of this nonesense.

NO ONE accused America of being stingy.

The comment was made about "rich countries" in the context of the simple fact that we give less today than we did in the 80's. No one mentioned America. No one accused America. The only American aspect to this issue is the paranoia of the anti-UN cabals when they see insults in any comment whatsoever.

Mr Mephisto

Okay....Now I am losing patience
 

It is time to take a deep breath

Truly.....we are degrading the quality of this forum ....in this thread and others with personal attack and pointless argument. The time is quickly approaching for action by the staff.....

Look, the original statement wasn't aimed at the US per se, but things have moved on a bit... the things I mentioned were said only yesterday on a Dutch discussion board. A lot of people there did indeed accuse the US of being stingy.

I can only assume the same is being said by other people all over the world. Given the general anti-US sentiments world-wide, I doubt this is an isolated, Dutch-people-only thing.

I live in the US and I thought we were being stingy. If nothing else, the political gain from a swift, sure movement would have been very positive. Indonesia alone has the largest Muslim population in the world and it would make sense politically to have them hold us in higher regard. This is not buying their friendship, but showing that countries that support each other and are willing to work together will in the end benefit each other. I think Bush should have come out with $300 million right from the start.

As a matter of cordial debate. . .
I agree to an extent, but keep in mind that most of the early pledges by Western governments occurred when the projected death toll was around 15,000. That is a far cry from the 150,000 now feared dead.

But I agree with your sentiment. Even as a libertarian who doesn't believe that the government should be taxing and spending on the scale that it does already, I hoped the US would have led the way in terms of immediate and significant relief funds. It may have been more fiscally prudent to wait and see the scale of the disaster fleshed out before committing hundreds of millions of dollars, but I feel like the government may have missed a golden opportunity to really reflect the generosity and compassion of most Americans (which could have a positive impact in terms of curtailing terrorist recruiting).

But all that really matters in the end is that the Bush Admin. stepped up to the plate after the scope of the disaster became apparent.

Also. . .Cheers to Japan, who just pledged
$500 MILLION IN RELIEF FUNDS!!!!

Latest news: The USS Ronald Reagan, our newest and largest Carrier, has just been dispatched to Diego Garcia. From there it will be forward-deployed to the hardest hit areas. The Reagan carries an onboard water-refining system capable of cranking out 126,000 gallons of drinking water per day, and is also carrying huge quantities of midicines, emergency-response personnel, and a 345-bed onboard hospital.

I thought Egeland was referring to the U.S. as well as others in his UN speech. Sorry if I misunderstood.

From the following link: http://washingtontimes.com/national/...2330-7268r.htm

I don't know why but is an immensly satisfying feeling for me when warships and other military people and equipment are used in this way. There is something really positive about the idea that something created to keep the peace by force is being used for such a humanitarian mission. I hope the soldiers and sailors appreciate the opportunity to serve in this capacity as much as I appreciate our government sending them to do so. It's kind of fun to think about the USS Ronald Reagan, a behemoth by any standards, that would usually be an intimidating sight when parked off of a foreign coast being such a beacon of hope. Maybe I'm making more of this than I should...

:thumbsup: :icare:

I listened to the interview and the US was not mentioned. This is more disengenous reporting by the American media.

Mr Mephisto

Yay for US and in a fact all other countries too. I was profoundly surprised and delighted to notice that the international community can still cooperate and contribute so much to the countries and people who face this terrible catastrophe.

i have always thought it was strange that the only thing that really seems to bring the world together is death. it seems that that is the only universal thing that we all have. can't say its bad it is somthing that keeps the world what it is its just interesting.

/thinking

Does anyone track private donations? I would be interested in seeing how much private Americans, in fact citizens of all countries, are giving out of pocket. That $350 million is going to look pretty small, by comparison, I would bet.

Some rough estimates in wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanit...ean_earthquake

Caveat emptor on how you trust those figures.

What can I say but that I am glad a lot of countries have noticed the magnitude of the disaster and are donating money and manpower to help these people. I don't care who gives most (or who has the biggest) something needed (needs) to be done and fast.

I also felt awkward when I saw the first sums of money that where given (the American government was not the only one to act "slowly", mine as well (or in my opinion)). This rage has subsided now that I see how much is being done on a governmental and personal level.

Just remember it can take years not weeks before all of this is settled and healed.

It is nice to see the US "pay back" the world in generosity like this. This brings back memories of all that international aid that was being flown/shipped our way when Florida was devastated by all those hurricanes last year. Ohhhhh, the armadas of international aid and support coming to our side were a sight to see, weren't they? Uhhhh, yeah right.....

Good for the US for kicking in and helping. To hell with anyone who says it isn't enough.

To put things into perspective, and to ignore the sarcasm...

1) The US didn't ask for international aid
2) 13 people died in hurrican Charlie. THIRTEEN
3) Over 150,000 people appear to have died with the tsunami
4) Whole swathes of the planet have been affected
5) Hurrican Charlie affected 20 counties (that were eligible for Federal aid)
6) The death toll from the tsunami could possibly double, due to disase and lack of water/food


To compare hurricane Charlie with the tsunami is the height of stupidity.

That's like me comparing a grazed knee with a beheading.


Mr Mephisto

I do have a question that this is a great example for.

The US HAS ALWAYS PLEDGED MONEY TO HELP, yet where were the other countries monies, help and sympathies when Fla. had devastating hurricanes this year? We are supposed to ask for international aid? Our friends, those we have helped without hesitation, can't OFFER help on their own, like we do them?

Where are these so called compassionate countries that cream us every chance they get when OKC happened? Did they send money and aid to us?

Where were they when we had devestating floods along the Mississippi in the 90's? Did they send money or aid?

I am tired of sending money and aid to countries that end up slamming us for being cold hearted and when we have our natural disasters or terrorists they turn their backs and say nothing. These countries are so fast to ridicule us and take our aid but they refuse to even OFFER help when we need it. Some friends, some allies. FUCK THEM if 350 Million, plus physical aid, medicines, food, etc. isn't enough. Hell, our infrastructure is falling apart, our deficit is in record amounts and we barely can take care of our own, and yet we are EXPECTED to take care of the world?

We do, and we do so quite nicely.

Love the way people of foreign countries can make our disasters sound so little yet everyone else's so BIG.

I used to believe we needed to help the world, but FUCK them. They keep crying for more and more and more and say we never do enough, yet never even offer to help us. And take every available chance to tear us down, make our disasters seem trivial, and demean the aid we do give by complaining it is not enough.

I agree that the comparison is the height of stupidity. But you made the comparison, not me. Not that it makes a difference, but I never compared hurricane Charley with the tsunami. Nor did I compare hurricanes Jeanne, Frances, Ivan, etc. with the tsunami. Also, just for the record, there were over 70 deaths caused by the one-after-other series of hurricanes, which also caused over $40 billion in damage and left 42,000 homeless. Obviously, the numbers of these disasters pale when compared to the emormity of the tsunami. You missed my point, or perhaps I didn't make it clear enough.

My point was not a comparison of the disasters, but rather to point out the hypocrisy of those who are so quick to complain in the international community. Maybe we didnt ask for aid, but noone really offered either did they? That's the typical altruistic international community for ya!

The matching funds are part of the aid package -- they are already counted in there.

What the matching fund trick does is allocates government aid to aid agencies in a way that doesn't require large amounts of government bureaucracy to work out. Canadians pick charities they trust to spend the money with their own donations, and the government channels aid money to the same charities.

The planes, helicopters and supplies will be quite useful.

You are welcome for the aid you recieved during the large mississippi flooding problems and during your flood crisis.

As an aside, India is refusing any nation-based aid (ie, non-NGO/UN), as part of their 'non-aligned' political position.

Up to about 136$ million USD by now, counting what provinces have pledged, debt relief, and the federal governments recent doubling of their aid package. Plus a military disaster relief team of some kind (DART?).

Who is that now? The members of the US Congress who complained? The US media?

Oh, let me guess... the UN! That great big bogey man of the conservative classes...

There was no hypocracy. If the US needed aid, as the tsunami affected countries obviously do, then aid would be provided.

Erm... I didn't ask you to give me a thousand dollars. But you didn't offer either!!! That makes you a selfish bastard then, does it?

LOL


Mr Mephisto

Oh I see, as allies go they expect us to be there for them with an open wallet and not have to ask us. And, "Oh by the way, if we don't like the amount we'll call you stingy, and degrade you for being selfish, even if you do pledge more than any other country besides Japan."

Yet, when we have our tragedies, first you downplay the severity, use a "but ours is worse" cry, and then do nothing because you feel "the US should beg for help if they want it". Fucking hypocrits.

Call it like you see it, the WORLD demands and expects the US to help them on their terms at any time they so desire, but that same world refuses to show good faith and just offer help.

(Canada excluded, because whether our governments agree or not, the majorities of our nations are brethren and have immense love towards each other... and Canada is always there for us no matter what (and never wait for us to ask them) as we are for them.)

1979 Iran: Canadian Embassy officials help US EMBASSY escapees and bring them home, GOD BLESS CANADA FOR THEIR TRUE FRIENDSHIP AND LOVE...... IT SHALL NEVER BE FORGOTTEN.

Now how mad would some US folks get if other countries would promise to send some blankets, food and medicine to help those hurricane victims. I can imagine the "Grumble, grumble, like we couldn't take care of our own people here..."-comments.

:)

I'm not really sure how to respond to that rant pan6467.

I started this thread to commend the US for its actions and the aid it is offering the world.

However, the thread seems to have descended into a petty, resentful, tirade against the world and how it "expects" America to help.

SIGH

Somethings never change.


Mr Mephisto

I doubt we'd accept any help, however, I feel the majority would view it as a nice gesture. Far better than nothing except the constant "give us more" cry that we hear when we send aid.

i have little patience with americans who whine about the fact that the states is implicated in an international community and that, as an extravagantly wealthy nation, is called on to give back to that community from time to time, particularly in times of crisis. not to mention disaster.

i have even less patience with hearing repeated reports on the radio (npr and bbc both tonight) that the americans are looking to use their contributions to relief efforts to improve marketing chances for american business. such is the veil of words accompanying powell and that jeb bush (why jeb bush? on what possible basis?) to indonesia. and it is not understood as a problem, saying that kind of thing. o well, we'll give money and get better pr in return. no gesture without strings. not now, not ever.

maybe the amazing crassness with which the american contributions to helping the victims of an overwhelming disaster is being spun is understood as a sop to those who whine about having to do anything with reference to the rest of the world beyond exploit cheap labor on one end and sell stuff on the other.

i notice that lots of the folk who complain about the bush people giving money to countries impacted by this disaster are also those who complain that americans are often seen as being kinda miserable people in other places, and i find that ironic.

Point taken, Mr. Mephisto. Kudos to America, and the world for ante-ing up and kicking in to help our felllow citizens of this planet.

We do accept help, except that we compensate for it because we are in a posistion too.

It's not like we push away help, on the contrary I honestly think the people of the US would be happy if someone offerred assistence while also sharing what we have.

Our indentity is intergration. I think the wonderful cultures of all the worlds coming to the US is the best Help the world can give us. That's why I love this place so much.