No Love for Africa

KTOG · **No Love for Africa -** 06-08-2005, 11:52 AM

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/ ... ex_np.html

[quote:50f9d]Broken promises
Bush declines to increase U.S. aid for Africa as a new U.N. report reveals the expected toll in child deaths from the failure to reduce global poverty.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
By Larry Elliott and Patrick Wintour

June 8, 2005 | WASHINGTON --

Three million children will die in the poorest countries of sub-Saharan Africa as a result of the failure of the global community to meet its promise of slashing the death rates of children under age 5 by 2015, the United Nations is to reveal Wednesday. With Tony Blair Tuesday struggling to persuade George W. Bush to back Britain's ambitious plans for Africa, the U.N. Development Program said the human cost to Africa in child deaths would be the equivalent of twice the combined under-5 population of New York, London and Tokyo.

A study by the UNDP -- timed to put pressure on G8 leaders ahead of their summit at Gleneagles, Scotland, next month -- showed that based on current trends, the global community will miss by a wide margin the targets it set for poverty, infant mortality and education in the millennium development goals agreed to by the U.N. in 2000.
[/quote:50f9d]

When will we learn that other countries won't hate us if we just helped others. Here, we have the opportunity to save 3 million childrens lives, but instead almighty Bush decides to spend it on the death of thousands of Iraqis. And we wonder why America doesn't get any respect...

Trunks · 06-08-2005, 12:55 PM

sigh, i dont know what to say really. I mean I could be harsh and say, American citizens come first, and when we are completely satisfied with their well being we could begin to help other less fortunate countries. Then again, these are only children, and they are dieing because we are not keeping our promises. Then again, is it really fair that most of the times(no offense to any citizens of other countries) that america has to pay most of the money? And fact is, other countries will still hate us. we stuck our nose in Mogadishu, and look what happened. We were only there to help. But two black hawks were destroyed, and 23(i believe) soldiers came home in body bags. Sometimes it is best to let other countries sort out their own problems. This is probably far fetched, but if the african countries formed a sort of african union, kinda like eu, im sure they could get a lot of things done. And after all this rambling, if I were put on the spot, im not sure what I would do. I suppose it would only be right if we helped to support blairs plan, since u cant put a price on a life. However, it is doubtful teh american public would care about lives in some far off country. They would think of themselves as being the priority, and if bush chose to help them he would be crtisized for that. And really, since when has politics been about doing wats right? sigh...

Zoner · 06-08-2005, 01:03 PM

Man, he couldn't have picked a worse time to do this (not like there ever IS a good time to cut aid to Africa...asshat). Every woman in America had their heart melted and panties moistened by Brad Pitt's PrimeTime Live interview last night, which showed him and Diane Sawyer in Africa helping impoverished kids.

gg Dubya rolleyes:

KTOG · 06-08-2005, 01:44 PM

Hah, i forgot all about that Zoner.

23 dead, apposed to thousands in Iraq? Whats the logic difference in this war and that battle? Nothing. Both were faught for tyranny and justifying genocide (not WMD as first argued). This is where i could say Iraq has oil, but I really hate that argument.

Think of all the good PR we would get with other nations if we pulled out of Iraq and became the country of goodwill? Start premoting peace and equal treatment of others. Help out in Africa, feed the hungry in India, bring oppurtunity and developement (with out bringing in Westernization). Also, remove bigotry and harrassment with in America. Then bring down corrupt corporate leaders sucking the world dry. What would people think of us then?

Are you worried now we will be unprepared from an suprise attack from a foreign country, while we are pussy footing around the country? Its not as if we won't have a military, we'll just be fighting defensive.

Coleman · 06-08-2005, 01:53 PM

fuck america

Pyro · 06-08-2005, 02:10 PM

What did ya expect...him to actually help out instead of kill?

Trunks · 06-08-2005, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KTOG

Hah, i forgot all about that Zoner.

23 dead, apposed to thousands in Iraq? Whats the logic difference in this war and that battle? Nothing. Both were faught for tyranny and justifying genocide (not WMD as first argued). This is where i could say Iraq has oil, but I really hate that argument.

Think of all the good PR we would get with other nations if we pulled out of Iraq and became the country of goodwill? Start premoting peace and equal treatment of others. Help out in Africa, feed the hungry in India, bring oppurtunity and developement (with out bringing in Westernization). Also, remove bigotry and harrassment with in America. Then bring down corrupt corporate leaders sucking the world dry. What would people think of us then?

Are you worried now we will be unprepared from an suprise attack from a foreign country, while we are pussy footing around the country? Its not as if we won't have a military, we'll just be fighting defensive.

First of all, I never said anything about agreeing with being In Iraq. And this is another perfect example of how helping out doesnt work out. Supposedly we are there to liberate the people(at least tahts what we are told), but all i can see is about a thousand US soldiers, dead, and the majority of teh people dont even want us there. Most of the countries of the world thought we acted far too rashly. Etc. I could go on, but this isnt what we are talking about so i wont digress. And I will say this. America, and all other countries as well, are all doing things not because they want to be nice, or help out, but because they have their own political, financial, and militaristic agenda's. No country will give billions of dollars of money to help the needy in some far off african country. They do it because they know the countries will be indebted to them, and to gain their trust, and cooperation. And I will say this. First off i doubt America's attitude will change. Second, if people really want to hate us, they will find a reason to hate us. There is always a reason. And a surprise attack is sorta outta question, since most of the countries that could pull off something like that are supposedly our allies. However, we have to be ready for anything.

KTOG · 06-09-2005, 06:49 AM

/agree

Jimbo@ · 06-11-2005, 01:08 PM

Bush is a compassionate conservative republican. Thats why.

Chappy · 06-12-2005, 07:12 AM

how about the fact that all the money and aid that we give goes to the corrupt warlords and political factions who are intentionally starving their enemies? somalia anyone? from what i've read, all bush wants is a little stability first before pouring money needlessly down the drain and it ends up in the backpocket of some corrupt gov't and would not go toward feeding the kids

ps we could give away all our money to every tom-dick-harry country who needs something and still they would hate the US...doesn't matter who is in office

Tripper · 06-12-2005, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chappy

ps we could give away all our money to every tom-dick-harry country who needs something and still they would hate the US...doesn't matter who is in office

That's not necessarily true. Alot of the international community are against american foreign policy at the moment because they haven't seen them do anything other than the Iraq war. A bit of money to the right cause would would demonstrate that it's not all just for self. Then again, the U.S might not give any money, it's totally up to them to decide how much they care about other nation's view of them - because essentially that's what the money thing is all about.....

rdeyes · 06-13-2005, 03:39 AM

why doesnt some other country come up and put a "little money" in the coffer before america makes a donation .... let brad pitt and angelina make a donation since they are so "down" with the cause.

how about 100% of their take from Mr & Mrs Smith?

KTOG · 06-13-2005, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdeyes

let brad pitt and angelina make a donation since they are so "down" with the cause.

how about 100% of their take from Mr & Mrs Smith?

hah!

Short Hand · 06-14-2005, 05:53 AM

I heard that they plan on droping dept to 20 nations threw out the world for past dept's. 14/20 country's are in Africa as well. onsidering that these countries are paying 13 dollers on every 1 doller lent to them is insane.

TGB! · 06-14-2005, 03:47 PM

Its not about being cold and passionless - its about their being accountability in each o fthese contries to have the structre in place to EFFECTIVELY address their domestic issues - not toss a quick buck to temporarily solve some problem. It's the same reason why this city has PUBLIC DONATION bins around town. . .they advocate you putting the money in their instead of giving it to a transient - the transient would blow it on a sammich or a COBRA, while the legit agency will put it to its most effective use.

As for comparing this to the war - different budgets -