US aid to the sunami victims

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Working Man, Jan 1, 2005.

  1. Working Man
    Offline

    Working Man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    627
    Thanks Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +47
    I've been listening to the reports about the amount of money that the US has pledged to the victims of the sunamis. It certainly is a trajic loss of life and property. I mean no disrespect to anyone closely affected.

    However, I do not agree that the US has to go further into debt in order to prove who can piss the farthest. The rhetoric being leveled at the US is clearly ill spirited. The US is spending way too much as it is on Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. The fate of the US dollar is looking dim as it is, while the same countries that point the finger at the United States as being "stingy" are actualy trying to put the pork to the US in the back door. :blah2:

    Take $350 million in cash donations, and add in sending troops and equipment to the region. What are the real costs to deliver the services to the US taxpayer??? A hell of a lot more than a billion bucks!!!!! See the blackhawks flying in med supplies today on TV?? Wonder how much it cost to crew, support, and fly just one of these choppers 350 nautical miles????
    The United Nutcases argument about the US being cheap is not only nonsense, but another reason why the whole notion about a UN is BS..And, not to say that the US hasn't used the UN to its own advantage when it could as well.. :(

    Screw it. China has more money than the US. Let them flip the tab to make things right in the damaged area. If I caught the chart correctly on CNN, China was dead last on the list of contributers to the relief effort. Yet, as I have said numerous times on this BBS,,, the majority of products sitting on US retailer's shelves are marked "made in China". :piss2:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    That would be the day! China at the top of the list of donors? If that should ever happen, a New Age truly would be dawning. One thing is for sure--China would never be cowed into upping their truly "stingy" contribution by what other nations thought of it.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,887
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    It's interesting that the most "socialist" behemoth among us appears to be the most stingy. Wonder what the libs have to say about that. Or are they too afraid to look at what is their obvious end result of their policies in the eye?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    The stingy comment ticked me off, and from the UN no less. How much more did the U.S. provide in financial support compared to what was given to the U.S. after being slammed with 4 hurricanes? All of it would be the answer.

    If the United States is going to be tagged as stingy, then we should be stingy. Instead of paying for almost 1/4 of the UN's operating costs, we should cut that back until we are only paying our fair share. Let's see how long they keep complaining then.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,568
    Thanks Received:
    8,170
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,199
    While i think we should deffinately cut UN funding i dont think we should stop being generous. If we stop being generous then they win and they are right we are what they accuse us of being. I dont want to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    Besides its the right thing to do. BTW i dont think we increased the ammount we are giving because we were accused of being stingy. I think we increased the ammount because the damage was worse than what we originally believed and it was appropriate.
     
  6. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    bottomline, get the F' outta the UN. I wonder if i'll ever see the day in my lifetime. I know the media would portray it as the worst day in american history but we'd know better.
     
  7. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    So what do you suggest? I'm curious .
     
  8. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    Funding for the tsunami victims and to help with that, fine. When it comes to funding the UN so they can bad mouth us and continue their operations of screwing us over with oil for food deals and saying we are stingy, then cut way the hell back. If we are doing nothing but paying what our fair share should be, then we have not become stingy.
     
  9. Working Man
    Offline

    Working Man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    627
    Thanks Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +47
    1) The US should be realistic in its eagerness to send aid. Our economy is on the skids. (((By the way,, when the folks in Sri Lanka are sewing up shirts and slacks for the American market, do you think they have the right to expect the laid off textile workers here in the US to be sympathetic and generous??)))

    2) $350 million in cash and DELIVERED AID is worth more, much more than $500 in just cash. Two-Three battlegroups of US ships delivering water, food and medical support is worth more than the cash itself.

    3) Where are the chinks in all this?? I have seen pictures of Austrailians and US troops delivering the packages of relief supplies, but no mention of China's forces delivering squat... I am not surprised either.
     
  10. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    The economy is not on the skids. You have a cold heart. Any questions?
     

Share This Page