Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 15

• 0%

  HateKoolAid11 months ago

  The military junta in Burma has received the support of India which is our strongest ally in the Mideast so those monks can expect some serious foot dragging by the Bush administration in getting any meaningful support. That is unless they can convince Bush that a remarkable discovery has been made in that a huge oil reserve has been discovered in Burma. Bush will then give the junta a choice; sign a lucrative contract with his oil buddies or he will bring "democracy" to the monks like he did the Iraqis.

  Reply

  14 Replies

  • 0%

    crghss11 months ago

    Quick to hate the US. But where is the rest of the world. China, Japan, Germany you don't fault them. The U.N. what are they doing. Where is your Syria, Iran and Jordan what are they doing to help?

    "Burma has received the support of India which is our strongest ally in the Mideast "

    What about Pakistan and Israel? You need to get a map.

    Reply

    12 Replies

    • 0%

      HateKoolAid11 months ago

      Where is the rest of the world?? They are all busy along with the U.S bringing stability to Darfur. The Burmese monks should have learned from Darfur. The big powers don't want to get involved unless there is something in it for them. That's especially true of this administration. The only recent exception is Clinton and the Balkans and the right wingers are still miffed about that because they didn't see any 'return' on our involvement to stop that genocide.

      Reply

      8 Replies

      • 0%

        saintetienne11 months ago

        Excuse me, Un-Kool-Aid, but the U.S. has condemned this nasty government from day one (about 40 years ago) and has imposed sanctions in an effort to break their iron-fisted hold on its people.

        To do any more than that would have the Liberals (and the rest of the world) screaming "Another Vietnam! Why can't the U.S. stay out of everyone's affairs?!"

        Besides, what IS in it for us? Haven't we given the world enough money, food, medicine, technology, education, infrastructure and economic pardons? We're the first in line to help every third world stinkhole out whenever there's a famine, flood, fire, typhoon, earthquake or civil unrest, then we get nothing but smacked for it, proving the old adage, "no good deed goes unpunished".

        Can't these people for ONCE just get it together, and stop coming to the U.S. for all the answers? Sheesh. We've been a global success story for 240 years, you'd think they'd learn to follow our example by now.

        Reply

        7 Replies

        • 0%

          blowback11 months ago

          > According to the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the US gave between $6 and $15 billion in foreign aid in the period between 1995 and 1999. In absolute terms, Japan gives more than the US, between $9 and $15 billion in the same period. But the absolute figures are less significant than the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP, or national wealth) that a country devotes to foreign aid. On that league table, the US ranks twenty-second of the 22 most developed nations. As former President Jimmy Carter commented: 'We are the stingiest nation of all'.

          >>

          Reply

          5 Replies

          • 0%

            blowback11 months ago

            Denmark is top of the table, giving 1.01% of GDP, while the US manages just 0.1%. The United Nations has long established the target of 0.7% GDP for development assistance, although only four countries actually achieve this: Denmark, 1.01%; Norway, 0.91%; the Netherlands, 0.79%; Sweden, 0.7%. Apart from being the least generous nation, the US is highly selective in who receives its aid. Over 50% of its aid budget is spent on middle-income countries in the Middle East, with Israel being the recipient of the largest single share.

            > Not only that, but according to one source cited by Sarder & Davies, 80% of that aid itself actually goes to American companies in those foreign countries.

            http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/foreign_aid.html

            >>

            Reply

            4 Replies

            • 0%

              blowback11 months ago

              > Coverage of the Bush administration's pledges of aid to Asian nations battered by the tsunami failed to give context to the amounts mentioned, painting the U.S. in a charitable light. The day after the tsunami, the U.S. pledged $15 million in aid; a day later, the total was $35 million. After widespread criticism, the administration upped its pledge three days later to $350 million. The media almost always compared these numbers to the total aid pledges of other countries, not looking at how they ranked as a fraction of the nations' economies. The $350 million pledge, therefore, was the "largest contribution" at the time (CNN.com, 1/1/05).

              http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2676

              China's initial pledge was $60 million.

              Reply

              3 Replies

              • 0%

                saintetienne11 months ago

                blowhole,

                We don't have to give a dime.

                Every country who has received aid from us should consider themselves lucky. It's better than nothing at all.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  blowback11 months ago

                  You've missed my point.

                  You're previous post was crap.

                  You bragged about a lie.

                  That's the point.

                  Most US foreign aid goes to the

                  Middle East.

                  Most of that goes to Israel.

                  And most of THAT goes to US COMPANIES

                  AND INTERESTS.

                  Consider themselves lucky?

                  Tell that to Halliburton.

                  Reply
              • 0%

                Daylight11 months ago

                blowback

                Coverage of the Bush administration's pledges of aid to Asian nations battered by the tsunami failed to give context to the amounts mentioned, painting the U.S. in a charitable light.

                But actually almost all the countries in the world help the Tsunami victims. I can remember CofiAnnan branded US contribution as very stingy. Apart from that US has to give or else it will be a shame for the super power status, in case if somebody gives more.

                Reply
        • 0%

          Daylight11 months ago

          saintetienne

          Besides, what IS in it for us? Haven't we given the world enough money, food, medicine, technology, education, infrastructure and economic pardons? We're the first in line to help every third world stinkhole out whenever there's a famine, flood, fire, typhoon, earthquake or civil unrest, then we get nothing but smacked for it, proving the old adage, "no good deed goes unpunished".

          Remember nobody gives anything for nothing, and you don't give anything unless you can reap ten time over and also you were the first to exploit people's misery, wherever there is a problem the first one to exploit the situation is you. Can you tell the world what you gave something out of compassion to any country in the world, and that you have not benefited anything afterwards. Even to Israel you don't give anything free, if you feel you could not get their dirty service for you.

          Reply
    • 0%

      Daylight11 months ago

      crghss

      Quick to hate the US. But where is the rest of the world. China, Japan, Germany you don't fault them. The U.N. what are they doing. Where is your Syria, Iran and Jordan what are they doing to help?

      Well rest of the world do not impose their will on others. All the Western world will only fight Muslims, they are gutless cowards and the other point is that the counties in that region or ASIAN will not play stooge to America because they know that American pay only lip service to Democracy and freedom when they are not strategically important or not in their interest.

      What about Pakistan and Israel?

      Have their own problem, they wouldn't even dare to think of helping them out. Only player there in the region is China but they don't care about Western media report or so-call democracy. Their democracy is produce and export as much as they can.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        awongscreen11 months ago

        How can we expect China to intervene when that government did exactly the same thing to its people demanding democracy?

        Still remember the Tinanmen massacre in Beijing?

        Reply
    • 0%

      blowback11 months ago

      > What about Pakistan and Israel? You need to get a map.

      .

      Good point.

      Both renowned for human rights abuses and,

      in the case of the latter, in breach of more

      UN resolutions than any other nation.

      And has been consistently so since inception.

      Many other resolutions blocked by the veto

      power of one nation only - US.

      Both nations, Pakistan and Israel, are nuclear

      armed allies that haven't signed the Nuclear

      Non-Proliferation Treaty.

      Israel - The recipient of the majority of US

      foreign aid year after year. The most molly-

      coddled nation on earth.

      Reply
  • 0%

    Daylight11 months ago

    HateKoolAid

    Well said Koolaid, very unfortunate that the junta will stay put. If they have to fight and over throw the Junta then they shouldn't put their trust in any government that call them that they are a democracy. These pseudo-Democracies need some kind of oil or gas for them to intervene and that to will be done with any dictator who sign a contract with them as Koolaid believes.

    Reply