Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tailgunner Joe

"The United States and other rich nations spent billions of dollars on arms but only a minute fraction of that on fighting poverty..."

Maybe so, maybe so.

But um, the US is free to spend its own $$ on whatever the f--k the US wants, and if we want to put it into weapons R&D and not spread it around Africa too bad.

Maybe Sachs can guess when Africans will take more interest in bettering themselves, instead of waiting for "rich nations" to do it for them?


14 posted on 07/06/2004 8:28:33 AM PDT by Gefreiter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Gefreiter; mpreston; TN4Liberty; lepton; tracer; Question_Assumptions; CarrotAndStick

Guess what all those African countries also spent all that money on? Arms. How do people think that those participants in all those inter-tribal and inter-religious conflicts in Africa are able to pay for the weapons used in their wars? They spend almost nothing on food or capital investment and spend most of it on war and socialist programs. South Africa is doing fairly well because they've operated under the rule of law and were actually denied aid because of aparthied. (Anyone noticed that the Brits left their charges generally more well off than those controlled by the Belgians, French and others?)

When the US and other countries gives troubled countries food, medicine, and other necessities, it only allows them to spend more money on weapons and waste it on corrupt activities. We should be teaching them to fish. Giving them just aid is like giving money to a drug addict at this point.


33 posted on 07/06/2004 10:46:03 AM PDT by pragmatic_asian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson