International aid - arguments for and against stopping it
Discussion
I agree with the disaster funds being supplied, in fact it should be more and faster. This is to alleviate the suffering of people on the ground.
Just not so sure it is right to keep giving monetary support to the military If, big if I know, it were shown that the money were being partly used to sustain the insurgency next door.
Although cutting off this aid would probably be disasterous.
What was the situation prior to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq though, were the Pakistan military and all these insurgents getting along fine?
Just not so sure it is right to keep giving monetary support to the military If, big if I know, it were shown that the money were being partly used to sustain the insurgency next door.
Although cutting off this aid would probably be disasterous.
What was the situation prior to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq though, were the Pakistan military and all these insurgents getting along fine?
After being bailed out once, a country should be made to show that it is spending a sufficient amount of money on preventing a reoccurance, wherever possible.
Obviously Tsunami and Volcanoes are unavoidable but other " disasters" are repeated over and over while their Gov't spend money on military projects etc.
I just watched an advert on TV asking for £3 a month to sponser a child in India.
The advert repeats the question "What If?"
Well What If the indian Gov't spent some of its Billions on a decent Water, Drainage and education system rather than spending it on rockets to map the surface of the moon?
Obviously Tsunami and Volcanoes are unavoidable but other " disasters" are repeated over and over while their Gov't spend money on military projects etc.
I just watched an advert on TV asking for £3 a month to sponser a child in India.
The advert repeats the question "What If?"
Well What If the indian Gov't spent some of its Billions on a decent Water, Drainage and education system rather than spending it on rockets to map the surface of the moon?
stitched said:
I agree with the disaster funds being supplied, in fact it should be more and faster. This is to alleviate the suffering of people on the ground.
Just not so sure it is right to keep giving monetary support to the military If, big if I know, it were shown that the money were being partly used to sustain the insurgency next door.
Although cutting off this aid would probably be disasterous.
What was the situation prior to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq though, were the Pakistan military and all these insurgents getting along fine?
It is a difficult decision to make. If you give money to the Pakistan government or some African government chances are they will line their pockets. If this money is given to respectable charities, BRC, Christian Aid, Islamic Relief to name a few then there is more chance that the money you have donated will be put towards the cause rather than line some crackpot governments pockets. Just not so sure it is right to keep giving monetary support to the military If, big if I know, it were shown that the money were being partly used to sustain the insurgency next door.
Although cutting off this aid would probably be disasterous.
What was the situation prior to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq though, were the Pakistan military and all these insurgents getting along fine?
Pre wars, insurgents? Where? The only real issue was Kashmir (which will never end). There where not as many bombings, murders, etc as they are now.
odyssey2200 said:
After being bailed out once, a country should be made to show that it is spending a sufficient amount of money on preventing a reoccurance, wherever possible.
Obviously Tsunami and Volcanoes are unavoidable but other " disasters" are repeated over and over while their Gov't spend money on military projects etc.
I just watched an advert on TV asking for £3 a month to sponser a child in India.
The advert repeats the question "What If?"
Well What If the indian Gov't spent some of its Billions on a decent Water, Drainage and education system rather than spending it on rockets to map the surface of the moon?
Very true, i believe that the whole Pakistan flood issue could have been avoided if there was a dam. Apparently some plans were drawn up but nobody saw it fit to follow through. I have no evidence of this, simply hearsay from some of the elders.Obviously Tsunami and Volcanoes are unavoidable but other " disasters" are repeated over and over while their Gov't spend money on military projects etc.
I just watched an advert on TV asking for £3 a month to sponser a child in India.
The advert repeats the question "What If?"
Well What If the indian Gov't spent some of its Billions on a decent Water, Drainage and education system rather than spending it on rockets to map the surface of the moon?
Shaid GTB said:
stitched said:
I agree with the disaster funds being supplied, in fact it should be more and faster. This is to alleviate the suffering of people on the ground.
Just not so sure it is right to keep giving monetary support to the military If, big if I know, it were shown that the money were being partly used to sustain the insurgency next door.
Although cutting off this aid would probably be disasterous.
What was the situation prior to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq though, were the Pakistan military and all these insurgents getting along fine?
It is a difficult decision to make. If you give money to the Pakistan government or some African government chances are they will line their pockets. If this money is given to respectable charities, BRC, Christian Aid, Islamic Relief to name a few then there is more chance that the money you have donated will be put towards the cause rather than line some crackpot governments pockets. Just not so sure it is right to keep giving monetary support to the military If, big if I know, it were shown that the money were being partly used to sustain the insurgency next door.
Although cutting off this aid would probably be disasterous.
What was the situation prior to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq though, were the Pakistan military and all these insurgents getting along fine?
Pre wars, insurgents? Where? The only real issue was Kashmir (which will never end). There where not as many bombings, murders, etc as they are now.
What I meant was were things this unstable pre invasion? If not then was this because there was more sympathy with the Taliban?
If the internal issues were caused by the west then of course we have a moral responsibility to remain in partnership with Pakistan until the situation is settled.
However it is obvious from the mere fact that there is internal conflict that the views of the government are not the views of all, in fact a significant number of the indiginous population believe Pakistan jumped down on the wrong side of the fence.
So in effect by assisting the government we are doing exactly the same thing as when we supported Saddam against Iran and his own internal insurgents.
Which is what got us into this bloody mess.
Shaid GTB said:
odyssey2200 said:
After being bailed out once, a country should be made to show that it is spending a sufficient amount of money on preventing a reoccurance, wherever possible.
Obviously Tsunami and Volcanoes are unavoidable but other " disasters" are repeated over and over while their Gov't spend money on military projects etc.
I just watched an advert on TV asking for £3 a month to sponser a child in India.
The advert repeats the question "What If?"
Well What If the indian Gov't spent some of its Billions on a decent Water, Drainage and education system rather than spending it on rockets to map the surface of the moon?
Very true, i believe that the whole Pakistan flood issue could have been avoided if there was a dam. Apparently some plans were drawn up but nobody saw it fit to follow through. I have no evidence of this, simply hearsay from some of the elders.Obviously Tsunami and Volcanoes are unavoidable but other " disasters" are repeated over and over while their Gov't spend money on military projects etc.
I just watched an advert on TV asking for £3 a month to sponser a child in India.
The advert repeats the question "What If?"
Well What If the indian Gov't spent some of its Billions on a decent Water, Drainage and education system rather than spending it on rockets to map the surface of the moon?
Perhaps fewer insurgents would be created if we did such projects with the
Frankeh said:
Why do people insist on using a 'them and us' mentality.
How about we stop thinking of people as British, American, Iraqi, Iranian, French, Korena, Spanish, etc and start thinking of people as humans. A race of which we are all part of.
So my argument for international aid? It's helping our own.
How about we stop thinking of people as British, American, Iraqi, Iranian, French, Korena, Spanish, etc and start thinking of people as humans. A race of which we are all part of.
So my argument for international aid? It's helping our own.
razbox said:
Elroy Blue said:
Pakistan received somewhere in the region of £300m from the World Bank to be spent on flood defences along the Indus valley. Apparently, not a penny has been spent to date and all the money has vanished.
Source?A protest was planned in Birmingham. Shame i could not make it. I could have at least got his with a tomato or something. What a waste of tomato though.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10905468
The idiot cannot even sort out the ongoing Kashmir issue diplomatically with India.
However this is where i feel the international community should step in. A flood has occurred, big time! The current gov is useless, it would be good if the international community could do something to help out. Maybe not sending money but sending the things that are really needed. Food, shelter, machinery to clear the mess etc. At the moment the Jihadi groups are making more of an effort than the government is. What will the end result be once all this has cleared up? Most likely more support for the Jihadists.
Elroy Blue said:
Pakistan received somewhere in the region of £300m from the World Bank to be spent on flood defences along the Indus valley. Apparently, not a penny has been spent to date and all the money has vanished.
I'd really like to know if this is truth or mere rumour? Can anyone confirm deny?
If it's true, the Pakistani government should be fvcking ashamed of itself.
Atomic Gibbon said:
Take your business head off for a second.
Roughly 1 million children will die in Pakistan if aid is not given, because there was a massive flood, and now there is no food, clean water, or place to poo in without giving mateyboy next to you dissentry.
Good enough reason?
In a word, no.Roughly 1 million children will die in Pakistan if aid is not given, because there was a massive flood, and now there is no food, clean water, or place to poo in without giving mateyboy next to you dissentry.
Good enough reason?
It’s a good enough reason for international aid to be given, but not for Britain to give any where near the £90 million pledged (£60 million of which is state aid). If Pakistan has made so many enemies on the world stage that almost nobody else is willing to help it, then that is a matter for the Pakistani people to address when next they reach a ballot box.
The UK can no longer afford to put right all the ills of the world. Half the countries we give aid to have larger militaries and better space programs than we do!
Looked at another way…
What percentage of this million children you propose to save will grow up to hate the west and would happily bomb us back to the stone age given the chance? How many of us will they grow up to kill? The answer isn’t zero.
tybo said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
What percentage of this million children you propose to save will grow up to hate the west and would happily bomb us back to the stone age given the chance? How many of us will they grow up to kill? The answer isn’t zero.
You poor brainwashed fool.
You pseudo-intellectual useful idiot.
7thCircleAcolyte said:
tybo said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
What percentage of this million children you propose to save will grow up to hate the west and would happily bomb us back to the stone age given the chance? How many of us will they grow up to kill? The answer isn’t zero.
You poor brainwashed fool.You pseudo-intellectual useful idiot.
scenario8 said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
tybo said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
What percentage of this million children you propose to save will grow up to hate the west and would happily bomb us back to the stone age given the chance? How many of us will they grow up to kill? The answer isn’t zero.
You poor brainwashed fool.You pseudo-intellectual useful idiot.
Useful Idiots
odyssey2200 said:
loltolhurst said:
Mojocvh said:
Maybe they could freeze buying f16's and making nuclear bombs for a couple of months and SORT THEIR OWN COUNTRY OUT themselves?
quite thats what we're going to have to do so why shouldnt they?that said I think there should be a quick reaction disater force set up - always amazes me that it takes weeks to start to help out in natural disaters yet we can start a war in a day. Would comprise of docs, engineers etc based round the world.
maybe if this was set up instead of armies we might get somewhere
Edited by loltolhurst on Saturday 21st August 11:47
International Rescue!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff