Posted on 12/27/2004 2:04:39 PM PST by ejdrapes
I was watching CNN's Inside Politics today (no transcript up yet) and they had a panel on - someone from the Washington Post, LA Times (Ron Brownstein) and Time magazine (Karen Tumulty). They were discussing our response to the disaster and the host of the program mentioned that the UN called our response "stingy". Then the panel went on to talk about how we "fumbled" this and were basically AWOL for one day. This just really made my blood boil. What have other countries done? The Brits say over 10,000 of their citizens were on holiday in that area. It's a large tourist area for Europeans. Where's the criticism of the EU and its member nations? And do we really have to play politics at a time like this?
Still....
He ought to check his facts there as well...when ice melts--it takes the same space as water.
Relative to Australia's immediate offer of $10 million, the United States offer of $20 million is disgraceful. Still $20 million is better than the first public offering of $100,000 to each of the three main countries effected.
I think you have your numbers wrong.
We provide the most support in the world in times of disaster, have extremely generous citizens that donate through a vast array of domestic and international charities (probably not being looked at by a lot of these yahoos), and we get our hand bit. Incredible, isn't it?
Well you're entitled to you opinion. That's just what I heard on the news.
I certainly didn't hear those figures on FOX News, then I wouldn't believe them either!
Huh?
Just a little dig, at FOX news that's all, don't take yourselves too seriously.
Last time I checked the news, the US pledged $20 million in aid, and actually Australia has just now pledged $35 million. Personally, I think that's disgraceful given the size of the US economy (20 times that of Australia), and worse still when considered next to the billions the US is willing to spend on its other little endeavours in parts of the world for what gain?
So the UN might consider the United States stingy. Let them call you stingy, who cares. Perceived or real, corruption problems with the UN have nothing to do with comments made by the UN in regards to the US level of financial aid, and certainly don't warrant some of the invidious and righteous forum posts, and the general 'UN bashing'. They are simply a seperate issue.
The basis for an effective UN must start with every country putting in its fair share. If by a measure of GDP the US pledge relative to other Western countries looks 'stingy', then whether you accept it or not, it doesn't change the fact that it may just be 'stingy'.
From an outsiders perspective. The US prides itself as being a mature democracy and a champion of free speech, yet judging by some of the comments I've seen in this forum, it seems like you can have free speech as long as it ain't 'Anti-American'.
If having a differing opinion means I'm not a civilized, educated and a good person, despite the fact that I'm male, middle-aged, caucasian, christian and post-graduate qualified, then so be it.
Be nice to your mother!
Enjoy.
You are dead wrong with your numbers.
The United States NEVER made an offer of only $100,000 to 3 countries.
In fact, the amount the United States is donating is more than twice what the other countries are donating COMBINED.
You are absolutely positively WRONG.
The U.S.' donation is 35 million and counting, NOT counting food, rescue, military, search and military.
The United States gives more money in humanitarian aid PER CAPITA than any country in the world. And I am not talking about private donations; I mean the government.
The basis for an effective UN must start with every country putting in its fair share.
And you're here to decide what's fair for us to pay? I think not.
We pay 25 percent of the UN budget now. How much more would you have us pay?
ICEHOLE does come to mind.. but thats a juvenile gambit that fools nobody..
I kind of like Bastich... too..
Relative to Australia's immediate offer of $10 million, the United States offer of $20 million is disgraceful. Still $20 million is better than the first public offering of $100,000 to each of the three main countries effected.
Yeah, I've never seen or heard those figures.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.