Is america stingy?

[B.A.M.]

stingy (http://cnn.aimtoday.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20041229%2F1213951596.htm&sc=1152&photoid=20041229TXSW105)
Just wondering you thoughts on this. I think we aren't.

[wad04]

Bush: $35 million
in aid is ‘only
the beginning’

[lather]

Of course not, look how much money we are spending on Iraq..

[Crighton]

We give out more aid than any other nation in the world when you count food stuffs.

[xXHavokXx]

The UN "mandates" .7 percent of a nations GDP be given as aid per year as a general guidline. It's not required. With the exceptopn of the scandanavian countries no one else in Europe lives up to that. The US gives .13 percent, not including Iraq and Afghanistan and not including food in which we dominate the world at givign away.

[Destructo6]

Did you mean to say "1.3%"? Because .7 > .13.

At any rate, the initial relief checks will be followed by more, from the US and other nations. Add foreign rescue teams, international agencies, etc for a substantial relief effort. They're going to need every bit of it.

[Eagle]

Considering that the US foots the biggest chunk of the UNs budget, I wouldn't say we're stingy.

[Fred]

don't forget the World Bank, the International Monetary fund, etc...

If we cut our funding of a few of those big black holes of money we'd have the deficit licked faster than a Frenchman shrieks in terror whenever a German looks at them funny.

---Fred

[paintballrulzs]

I dont think we are at all. I think that if something similar had happened to us I think less aid would have been given than we are given out. We are by far the most hospitable country and are always giving aid. I think it was Colin Powell who said the aid more than likely will reach over 1 billion dollars. That is pretty substancial i think

[B.A.M.]

don't forget the World Bank, the International Monetary fund, etc...

If we cut our funding of a few of those big black holes of money we'd have the deficit licked faster than a Frenchman shrieks in terror whenever a German looks at them funny.

---Fred
I total agree that our deficit would be licked but it is still a very good cause to put our money to.

[Kevmaster]

it just depends on whether you're talking in raw numbers or percentages.

we give BILLIONS more than anyone else for aid. thats a fact.

we also give only a TINY part of our GDP. that too is a fact.

its just that our GDP is bigger than the other countries GDP.



could we help more? yes. are we obligated to help at all? no. Thus, I'd say we're doing alright.

[Fred]

I total agree that our deficit would be licked but it is still a very good cause to put our money to.

LOL!

Look into how the IMF actually works, its a farse, and doesn't. All that happens is countries that it gives money to get deeper into debt, and investors lean away from them because they are so economically unstable. Show me one situation where the IMF has actually improved something...

[SpecialBlend2786]

it just depends on whether you're talking in raw numbers or percentages.

we give BILLIONS more than anyone else for aid. thats a fact.

we also give only a TINY part of our GDP. that too is a fact.

its just that our GDP is bigger than the other countries GDP.



could we help more? yes. are we obligated to help at all? no. Thus, I'd say we're doing alright.

agreed. However i think everybody jumped on the "Stingy" remark, and i think efforts need to be focused elsware other than this issue of stingyness.

[Blazestorm]

I'm not a pokey thing :(

[HoppysMag]

i agree, we dont have to give crap. the speach by gordon sincleir sums it up best

"Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When distant cities are hit by earthquakes, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. "

"When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the American who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.

I can name you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. "

[SAW]

Whatever we do, however many millions of dollars we donate to these damaged nations, it will never be "enough" in most nations' eyes.
From the other thread...Man, I hate it when I'm right. :rolleyes:

[drg]

Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble?

When there was a little thing called, oh, 9/11? I know it's hard to remember, with how the world hates our guts now, but right after 9/11 the world (that includes France) was right there with us, doing what it could to help us. It wasn't that long ago.

How did things get so bad so fast? Rhetorical question, I know.

[SSMercury]

Measured another way, as a percentage of gross national product, the OECD's figures on development aid show that as of April, none of the world's richest countries donated even 1 percent of its gross national product. Norway was highest, at 0.92 percent; the United States was last, at 0.14 percent.

Again, yes, we give a lot of foreign aid, but the percentage of what we give is very small to what our country produces and consumes in a year.

[SSMercury]

How did things get so bad so fast? Rhetorical question, I know.

We elected Bush. :p

[SAW]

We elected Bush. :p
Hey, hey. Bush was in office BEFORE 9/11... ;)

[Albinonewt]

When there was a little thing called, oh, 9/11? I know it's hard to remember, with how the world hates our guts now, but right after 9/11 the world (that includes France) was right there with us, doing what it could to help us. It wasn't that long ago.

How did things get so bad so fast? Rhetorical question, I know.

And they did what exactly?

Besides feel bad for us and say they were with us?

[Albinonewt]

We elected Bush. :p


Yup, we sure did.

Which is a good thing too.

[wimag]

stingy !!!!???? talk about getting crapped on. you offer money they say it is not enough, fine take it all back and use some of it to get another teacher in my kids school so they are not packed in 30 per room.
even when you try to do good someone turns it on ya.

[HoppysMag]

When there was a little thing called, oh, 9/11? I know it's hard to remember, with how the world hates our guts now, but right after 9/11 the world (that includes France) was right there with us, doing what it could to help us. It wasn't that long ago.

How did things get so bad so fast? Rhetorical question, I know.
was written before 911. and condolences and "promises" to help and to fight terror isnt help.

[drg]

Well just because YOU don't know what was done, doesn't mean nothing was done. I'll give you a hint, condolences and promises were not all.

[Albinonewt]

Well just because YOU don't know what was done, doesn't mean nothing was done. I'll give you a hint, condolences and promises were not all.

I'll give you a hint.

People that can't cite examples, don't have any worth citing.

[GT]

I think our government gives more than any other country, however, look at OUR companies. I think pfizer just matched the 35mill bush did. Its our comapines and our people that give way more than all other nations combined.

[drg]

Story AP's, emphases mine:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/628777.asp

LONDON, [/B]Sept. 14 — As dust settled over the ruins of New York’s World Trade Center and U.S. airspace reopened, offers of help for the victims of America’s worst terrorist attacks poured in from around the globe. Although the United States has not publicly accepted any international assistance, foreign governments, aid agencies and corporations were eager to join the search and rescue effort, and to provide support for survivors and families of the victims.
SOME FLIGHTS into the United States resumed Thursday, clearing the way for help to arrive from overseas. For some, it was a chance to repay past American kindness.
Turkey’s civilian search and rescue group, AKUT, assembled a 12-member team to assist the relief efforts, its chairman Nasuh Mahruki said Thursday.
The United States donated millions of dollars to Turkey in 1999, after earthquakes killed at least 18,000 people. AKUT played a key role in efforts to rescue people from collapsed buildings.
The Dalai Lama donated $30,000 to the relief effort on behalf of the Tibetan people. The exiled Buddhist leader, who relies heavily on private U.S. support, said in a statement Thursday that the money was a “symbolic gesture of our solidarity with the people of New York City.”

EXPERT TEAMS ON STAND-BY
In the hours after Tuesday’s attacks, the European Commission - the head office of the European Union - offered help from its civil protection unit. A Belgian team, including burn specialists and experts in victim identification, was flown to Iceland to await instructions from the United States, the commission said in a statement.
Teams from France, Sweden, Ireland, Spain, Italy, Finland and the Netherlands also were ready to help.
“The European Union’s network of disaster experts is mobilized and ready to provide help to the United States and the victims on the ground, if they need it,” EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstroem said.
Britain, which fears hundreds of its citizens are buried in the rubble of the World Trade Center, said Friday it was sending a police team to help identify British victims. National branches of the Red Cross and Salvation Army were accepting donations for the relief effort.
Germany has offered medical evacuation planes. Other nations, including Norway and Japan, also have expressed a desire to help.
In the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat donated blood for U.S. victims joining a global effort to boost blood supplies. Red Cross branches in several countries have opened their supplies.

COMPANIES TO DONATE MILLIONS
Foreign corporations, particularly from Germany, have emerged as some of the strongest supporters of the relief effort. German-American automaker
DaimlerChrysler AG said it would donate $10 million for the children of World Trade Center victims and set up accounts in both countries for individual donations.
German insurance giant Allianz AG plans a $1 million relief fund. The company has predicted that it could face claims of up to $637 million in the disaster. Media giant Bertelsmann AG promised $2 million to families of New York firefighters and police officers killed in the attacks.
Canadian banks have also launched relief drives. Bank of Montreal launched a $1 million fund-raising campaign, which it seeded with a $500,000 donation. The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce has given $100,000 to the American Red Cross.
Some countries have offered economic assurances as many Americans, fearing the turmoil in New York City and Washington could spread, rushed to stock up on gasoline and emergency supplies.
As oil prices soared following the suicide strikes, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries quickly said it would do what it could to maintain stable oil prices.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who has had a rocky relationship with Washington, reiterated that OPEC member Venezuela would do “everything possible” to guarantee a supply of oil to the United States.


http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive_Index/Terrorist_Attack_in_America_Met_With_Outpouring_of _Overseas_Help.html


Washington -- The terrorist attacks on Washington and New York September 11, which may in the end result in thousands of deaths, have been met with an outpouring of concern and offers of aid from countries ranging from France to Turkey and from organizations like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU).

Millions worldwide witnessed over cable television the total destruction of the two World Trade Center towers in New York and the damaging attack on the Pentagon building in Arlington, Virginia, by passenger aircraft that had been hijacked and used as missiles.

In Washington, where fires were still raging in the Pentagon building 24 hours after the attack, the federal government organized a blood drive among its employees for the victims. Meanwhile, county rescue teams that specialize in pulling people from buildings collapsed in earthquakes were speeding to New York. Travel was difficult because all commercial air flights over U.S. skies were cancelled immediately after the attacks.

As the two towers that were the fourth tallest buildings in the world collapsed in Manhattan, trapping and killing hundreds of policemen and firemen and perhaps thousands of office workers, offers of aid began to pour in from countries around the world to counter what President Bush termed "acts of war."

France, America's oldest ally, offered its condolences for the numerous victims of the well-planned and well-orchestrated attacks, and President Jacques Chirac pledged his government's full support in hunting down the perpetrators.

Chirac said: "I want to reiterate to the American people the solidarity of all Frenchmen in this tragic test. Our thoughts go particularly to all the victims, their families and their loved ones."

France also offered a 60-person rescue team to search through the rubble of the World Trade towers, whose collapse, some observers said, created a rubble pile between 10 and 30 meters high.

The United Kingdom, through Prime Minister Tony Blair, offered any assistance needed to help survivors. Blair said: "The full horror of what has happened in the United States earlier today is now becoming clearer. We, therefore, here in Britain stand shoulder to shoulder with our American friends in this hour of tragedy, and we, like them, will not rest until this evil is driven from our world."

The German government pledged the use of a 24-member team of search and rescue (SAR) personnel consisting of rescue dogs, power saws, high-speed cutters, drilling equipment, and optical and acoustical devices to locate trapped people.

The North Atlantic Council (NAC), the executive body of the 19-nation NATO Alliance, which includes the United States, met the evening of the attack and issued a statement roundly condemning the attack, offering condolences for the victims and stating that "the mindless slaughter of so many innocent civilians is an unacceptable act of violence without precedent in the modern era."

The NATO statement went on to say: "All allies stand united in their determination to combat this [terrorist] scourge."

The European Union (EU) convened an emergency foreign ministers' meeting the day after the attack and offered assistance, including thermal cameras, blood supplies, and dog rescue teams.

Other nations that are familiar with the aftermath of earthquake damage have volunteered assistance, including Japan, which has offered to dispatch a 100-person emergency response team and 20 doctors. Greece offered to send two fire emergency teams, which helped in the 1999 Istanbul earthquake, to assist with rescue and relief operations. Turkey has placed two SAR battalions on alert that can be deployed to the United States immediately.

The attacks by aircraft filled with enough fuel to get them to California resulted in numerous burn victims, and Belgium has offered to send medical burn specialists to help deal with the casualties in the two cities affected.

The government of Switzerland announced that it can provide, on about 14 hours' notice, up to 100 rescue personnel, search dogs, and doctors, including psychiatric assistance for survivors of the attacks.

Israel offered rescue teams, field hospitals, and any other assistance needed, and its foreign minister said it could have the teams en route immediately upon request. Not expecting an immediate response, the government planned to preposition the teams in Mexico and Iceland.

Expressions of grief and concern by foreign leaders have poured in since the terrorist attacks, including a letter from the president of Benin and a phone call from the Embassy of Sudan indicating that its foreign minister, traveling in Saudi Arabia, had publicly denounced the attacks and reaffirmed his government's willingness to cooperate fully with the United States in bringing the terrorists to justice.

The Chinese government faxed a message of condolence for the victims of the attack to the State Department from President Jiang Zemin to President Bush.

President Carlo Ciampi of Italy summoned the charge d'affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Rome to express his solidarity with the United States and gave him a copy of a letter to President Bush and a statement he had made on Italian television calling for a "fight without quarter" against terrorism.

How quickly we forget! Now a lot of this aid was turned down by the US, but you can't say they weren't willing. 9/11 is a fleeting memory for most in the wake of Iraq, but try to remember history accurately if you're going to remember it at all. Please, quit with the Ugly American act. We may be the badass of the world, but show some humility.

[drg]

I'll give you a hint.

People that can't cite examples, don't have any worth citing.

I am not one of those people. I just don't like to do other peoples' homework.

[GT]

How quickly we forget! Now a lot of this aid was turned down by the US, but you can't say they weren't willing. 9/11 is a fleeting memory for most in the wake of Iraq, but try to remember history accurately if you're going to remember it at all. Please, quit with the Ugly American act. We may be the badass of the world, but show some humility.


Now in the intrest of being fair lets put some of those contrabutions in comparson to the hosts country's gdp, and you will see that thier efforts, althougth honorable, are little more than a geasture. America may deny aid but they would never say that someones efforts were "stingy." Bring up as much history as you like, americans have given way more aid to this world than any country, ever.

Lets not kid ourselves, the US runs the planet. I dont think it is because we are arrogant, rather, any and every econmic impact that is made effects our markets, also keep in mind that we are a country of immigrants and find it neccasary to help out at 'home.'

[drg]

America may deny aid but they would never say that someones efforts were "stingy."

Well basically, you just did. I think this all needs to be put into context. Things like this don't happen in a vacuum. The current world political climate has something to do with it, just as the current thread climate has something to do with your bringing it up. The US just might have a little something to do with the world political climate being what it is.

This US administration likes to crow about the money it doles out in foreign aid. Insomuch as that politicizes it, it becomes somewhat fair game for comment by others with a stake in world politics. I personally wouldn't make those comments, but then again I wouldn't brag about how much I donate to charity either.

[Albinonewt]

$30,000 donatations and a few teams of a dozen people from the rest of planet?

But when we offer only $30,000,000 the world calls us stingy.

I am not moved

[GT]

Well basically, you just did. I think this all needs to be put into context. Things like this don't happen in a vacuum. The current world political climate has something to do with it, just as the current thread climate has something to do with your bringing it up. The US just might have a little something to do with the world political climate being what it is.

So when the US does something in its own intrest that isnt popular, any and all ciritisms, no matter how far off base is justified?

Do you honestly think that the world would ever come the aid of the US if it were crippeled, like japan and germany after world conflict? Like you said, times have changed.....

[drg]

$30,000 donatations and a few teams of a dozen people from the rest of planet?

But when we offer only $30,000,000 the world calls us stingy.

I am not moved

You calling them stingy too? :p

By the way, this whole "us vs. the world" mentality is part and parcel of the Ugly American mindset. We aren't against the world, we are part of it. In the end, no one country can stand against the world, not even us. So continuing down that path is self-destructive.

[drg]

So when the US does something in its own intrest that isnt popular, any and all ciritisms, no matter how far off base is justified?

Do note that nowhere do I endorse what was said. Do not confuse my position with agreement with that. I just think that the uberpatriotic froth being whipped up here is based on bunk history.


Do you honestly think that the world would ever come the aid of the US if it were crippeled, like japan and germany after world conflict?

Absolutely. Too much resource here to let waste away.

[GT]

Do note that nowhere do I endorse what was said. Do not confuse my position with agreement with that. I just think that the uberpatriotic froth being whipped up here is based on bunk history.


Niether one of us are going to change each others mind, however, lets not pretend that any "aid" given to the US durring crisis is for little more than appearence.

[HoppysMag]

yes because thats exactly what we need. medivac planes from germany. because you know our military and national guard are so small and have no planes. / sarcasm

i apreciate the worlds help.but its ultimatly useless. its insignigicant to what we already have.

but we dont need it. maybe thats why they offer. because they know we would turn them down. maybe they offer just for publicity. maybe thats why they DONT offer. because they know we dont need it. but the facts remain. most of the world does hate us. and with few exceptions those others still dont like us but like our money. this isnt a US vs the world. this is the world vs the US. as much as the average american citizen would like to see t72's rolling through the streets of paris we would never let it happen. american blood would run before we let that happen. i wonder how many nations across the world would be indeferant to a mushroom cloud rising above an american city?

[drg]

Niether one of us are going to change each others mind, however, lets not pretend that any "aid" given to the US durring crisis is for little more than appearence.

I wholeheartedly disagree. The compassion shown by the world after 9/11 was genuine. Perhaps the devastation from wars started after 9/11 has numbed you to it, but I remember clearly that the attitude of the peoples of these nations was very much in our corner. These countries were not doing this against the will of their people, like many did in supporting the Iraq war. The people wanted to help us and their governments made the efforts. Yes, even the French. And let us not underestimate the value of political support. It is a lot more valuable than most of you realize. The world DID NOT HATE US as much as they do now. Ask yourselves why!

Back on topic, here's a small example of what I mean by context. Our pledged contribution to this relief effort is:

1. Less than 1/5 what we spend fighting the Iraq War PER DAY. Makes it seem like we spare no expense to kill people, but can't be bothered to save people.
2. Less than 1/2 what Britain pledged. A tiny island nation has shown us up.
3. Less than 1/6 what the World Bank is putting forth. A UN organization, derided by many in the US as useless, is showing us up sixfold.

Whether or not these impressions are true is immaterial, at least as immaterial as someone calling us stingy.

[HoppysMag]

3. Less than 1/6 what the World Bank is putting forth. A UN organization, derided by many in the US as useless, is showing us up sixfold.

\.
and how much of that is from the US?

[drg]

and how much of that is from the US?

It doesn't matter.

[HoppysMag]

It doesn't matter.
how so? its a matter of objectivity. how far you want to break it down. if we bankrole the UN, world bank and others. and our spending on that is a greater percent of our total value than anothers countrys aid then arnt we giving more?


i had 20$ in my waller
i put 15$ into the bill the other night ( my meal was only 9)
my friend wants to borrow 4$ to help cover his part of the bill, i only lend him 1 and some one else ( who rarely ever puts in tip might i add) gives him 3. all the sudden im the cheapskate?

[drg]

how so? its a matter of objectivity. how far you want to break it down. if we bankrole the UN, world bank and others. and our spending on that is a greater percent of our total value than anothers countrys aid then arnt we giving more?


i had 20$ in my waller
i put 15$ into the bill the other night ( my meal was only 9)
my friend wants to borrow 4$ to help cover his part of the bill, i only lend him 1 and some one else ( who rarely ever puts in tip might i add) gives him 3. all the sudden im the cheapskate?

See the thing is, it's not YOUR money. Once the money goes into the UN, whatever agency it may be, it ceases to be the US's money. To keep tabs on it after it passes into the common good is a very self-centered (and unfortunately very American) thing to do. It's kind of like giving to charity.

[GT]

1. Less than 1/5 what we spend fighting the Iraq War PER DAY. Makes it seem like we spare no expense to kill people, but can't be bothered to save people.

Is it cheaper to send our militiary to fight in Iraq or to just bomb the entire coutry? It is extremely expensive to sort out the innocent from the terrorist. If your statement held any validity and the US was concerned about how much the war cost and how many people we kill, the enitre country would be smouldering glass. Very cheap, highly effective, but instead the US wanted to preserve life and send the heros in to sort out the mess.


1. Less than 1/5 what we spend fighting the Iraq War PER DAY. Makes it seem like we spare no expense to kill people, but can't be bothered to save people.
2. Less than 1/2 what Britain pledged. A tiny island nation has shown us up.
3. Less than 1/6 what the World Bank is putting forth. A UN organization, derided by many in the US as useless, is showing us up sixfold.

Contrary to unpopular belief the current admin is not stupid enough to just hand over gobbs of money w/o knowing what is needed. Trust me, the US will spend billions over there rebuilding the tourism industry so our citizen can go back and spend billions every year durring holiday.

How much money did those orgs. put up for the four huricanes that has destroyed the same tourism industry in flourida?

[GT]

It's kind of like giving to charity.

I think my head just exploded. :mad: Taxes are NEVER charity. I go to jail if I dont pay my taxes....

[drg]

Is it cheaper to send our militiary to fight in Iraq or to just bomb the entire coutry? It is extremely expensive to sort out the innocent from the terrorist. If your statement held any validity and the US was concerned about how much the war cost and how many people we kill, the enitre country would be smouldering glass. Very cheap, highly effective, but instead the US wanted to preserve life and send the heros in to sort out the mess.

You're arguing against nothing. I never made that argument personally, however you know very well that this perception exists in the world, which is the point I am making. I pass no judgment on it in this thread.


How much money did those orgs. put up for the four huricanes that has destroyed the same tourism industry in flourida?

The World Bank is not intended for the support of developed countries.

[drg]

I think my head just exploded. :mad: Taxes are NEVER charity. I go to jail if I dont pay my taxes....

Whoa where did taxes come from? So eager to make a conservative case that you had to invoke the T word? This isn't about taxes, It's about world bank contributions. nobody is going to put the US in jail for not contributing.

[HoppysMag]

Whoa where did taxes come from? So eager to make a conservative case that you had to invoke the T word? This isn't about taxes, It's about world bank contributions. nobody is going to put the US in jail for not contributing.
nobut we will be accused of being stingy. no matter the circumstances. the world wants our money.

[GT]

Whoa where did taxes come from? So eager to make a conservative case that you had to invoke the T word?

Re-read your series of comments: Last time I checked the fed receieved most of its funds from its citizens of which it gives a health portion to other nations, therfore, my taxes.

Companies can give where they please, although, if those activites are not something I support I may not purchase thier product.


To keep tabs on it after it passes into the common good is a very self-centered (and unfortunately very American) thing to do. It's kind of like giving to charity.

so the org. I am giving to is not responsible to provide the services that I understood they would provide with my money? Intresting.....

[drg]

Of course not. Even taxes, once they pass out of your hands, may or may not do what you want them do. Heck I KNOW George Bush will use my tax money in a way I don't want them to be used, but I won't stop paying taxes. Even if I am paying three brackets above someone who supports what Bush does (for example).

[HoppysMag]

Of course not. Even taxes, once they pass out of your hands, may or may not do what you want them do. Heck I KNOW George Bush will use my tax money in a way I don't want them to be used, but I won't stop paying taxes. Even if I am paying three brackets above someone who supports what Bush does (for example).
yes because all bush supporters are poor. :rolleyes: you people cant even keep your steriotypes straight

[drg]

for example


:cool: Happy new year ...

[cphilip]

Well... the only thing we "declined" was personnel that we couldn't realy utilize efficiently. It would have been difficult to coordinate people with the language barriers and equipment differences and all that sort of thing. Was not much help to offer personnel. It would have created more problems than it was worth.

[Beemer]

i agree, we dont have to give crap. the speach by gordon sincleir sums it up best
No offense but if you Quote Gordan you gotta do it all.

31 years later and.........................



Mp3 version Here........ http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/gordonsinclair.htm

Although presented on his radio show in 1973, Mr. Sinclair's message most certainly touches the hearts and lives of many Americans and their allies today, after the senseless loss of innocent lives on Sept. 11, 2001...


* Gordan Sinclair, passed away in 1984.




This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there....I saw it!

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, war-mongering Americans.

I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplanes. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon?

You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times - and safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.

I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those....

=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Stand proud, America!
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

[Albinonewt]

You calling them stingy too? :p

By the way, this whole "us vs. the world" mentality is part and parcel of the Ugly American mindset. We aren't against the world, we are part of it. In the end, no one country can stand against the world, not even us. So continuing down that path is self-destructive.


It IS US against each individual nation. Thinking of the rest of the nations of earth as the collective world is not even remotely accurate. Each nation developes alliances with like minded nations with similiar goals.

Right now, our goal is to free nations from fundamentalists and fight terror. A large part of the world is with us, and a large part is against us (the Middle East and most of western Europe.)

[1stdeadeye]

If we cut our funding of a few of those big black holes of money we'd have the deficit licked faster than a Frenchman shrieks in terror whenever a German looks at them funny.

---Fred


That's funny!

As for the UN. Close it down and kick them out!

Why don't we get Kofi Annan's cronies and son to kick in the billions form the Food for oil kickbacks? :mad:

[drg]

Hey and Bush kicks up our share to $350 mil, which is the largest single country pledge. As long as he follows up on it and actually gives it (which is genuinely in question with this president), this thread becomes mostly moot.

[Albinonewt]

Hey and Bush kicks up our share to $350 mil, which is the largest single country pledge. As long as he follows up on it and actually gives it (which is genuinely in question with this president), this thread becomes mostly moot.


It's a question because you don't like him? Or because of some actual event where he didn't deliver aid?

I think the former.

[Bolter]

nobut we will be accused of being stingy. no matter the circumstances. the world wants our money.

We don't want your money, we want you to stop attacking things with weapons of mass destruction.

When their countries get levelled, the fleeing millions come to Europe. And we, the Euro taxpayer, has to feed, dress, house, educate the poor immigrants. :mad:

Sort your own country out before trying to sort others.

And just for the record, I have never heard anyone say that America is stingy. Your foreign policy is questioned across the globe, but no-one thinks your stingy.

[1stdeadeye]

We don't want your money, we want you to stop attacking things with weapons of mass destruction.

When their countries get levelled, the fleeing millions come to Europe. And we, the Euro taxpayer, has to feed, dress, house, educate the poor immigrants. :mad:



First, we have not used WMD since WWII! Not many people complained about that since it ended the war.

As for the millions coming to Europe, where are they coming from? Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon,.... We did not invade any of them. They are coming because of your rediculously liberal immigration policies.

[HoppysMag]

We don't want your money, we want you to stop attacking things with weapons of mass destruction.

When their countries get levelled, the fleeing millions come to Europe. And we, the Euro taxpayer, has to feed, dress, house, educate the poor immigrants. :mad:

Sort your own country out before trying to sort others.

And just for the record, I have never heard anyone say that America is stingy. Your foreign policy is questioned across the globe, but no-one thinks your stingy.

id like to just say that i see england as one of the few true allies we have.
we <3 england

[Albinonewt]

We don't want your money, we want you to stop attacking things with weapons of mass destruction.

You don't want our money?

So I suppose Europe will be cleaning up it's own mess in Bosnia now, without our help!

And what WMD exactly have we used? Since WWII it's been all conventional



When their countries get levelled, the fleeing millions come to Europe. And we, the Euro taxpayer, has to feed, dress, house, educate the poor immigrants. :mad:

Well, A) That's a lie, the vast bulk of Arab immigration into Europe is from countries other then Iraq and Afghanistan and B) happened well before the last two wars in the region not to mention C) maybe ya'll should think about closing the door


Sort your own country out before trying to sort others.

We'll remember that next time someone crosses the Rhine

[GT]

Hey and Bush kicks up our share to $350 mil, which is the largest single country pledge. As long as he follows up on it and actually gives it (which is genuinely in question with this president), this thread becomes mostly moot.


This is so stupid, inreality the president spends little money that is not appoprved by the congress first. I love how the pres is always the target.

As off today:
1. US 350 mil
2 Australia 60 mil
3 UK 45 mil (i think)

Inresting isnt it? The top three to respond the quickest are those who are also fighting in Iraq... The same nations that are constantly deamonized by the "left."

[Bolter]

First, we have not used WMD since WWII! Not many people complained about that since it ended the war.

As for the millions coming to Europe, where are they coming from? Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon,.... We did not invade any of them. They are coming because of your rediculously liberal immigration policies.

what would you call napalm then? And what about every war thats started, America comes out with a new huge massive bomb, brags about it, and then drops it anywhere, sometimes not even hitting what it should - causing MASS destruction. Quite often killing our soldiers aswell. Blue on blue. Do you ever hear about English soldiers messing up?

No-one complained about you guys using nukes? Jesus, open your eyes man, over 300,000 innocent civilians were killed and you wonder why Japans involvement ended!!!! Would you complain when a country is so willing to nuke you? If you do have an opinion, Bush claims you are a terrorist. Great. Im not saying Japan was right in involving themselves in the war, but nukes are a bit harsh. On civilian cities aswell.

Just for the record, I do not have a problem with Americans. Its your government and their foreign policies that are questionable. Your brave soldiers have one hell of a job to do, while Mr Bush sits in luxury smoking a fat one.

We have many many many Iraqi refugees in our country. Their country is in the worst state it has been since you last invaded.

[HoppysMag]

what would you call napalm then? And what about every war thats started, America comes out with a new huge massive bomb, brags about it, and then drops it anywhere, sometimes not even hitting what it should - causing MASS destruction. Quite often killing our soldiers aswell. Blue on blue. Do you ever hear about English soldiers messing up?

No-one complained about you guys using nukes? Jesus, open your eyes man, over 300,000 innocent civilians were killed and you wonder why Japans involvement ended!!!! Would you complain when a country is so willing to nuke you? If you do have an opinion, Bush claims you are a terrorist. Great. Im not saying Japan was right in involving themselves in the war, but nukes are a bit harsh. On civilian cities aswell.

.


when these "300,000 innocent civilians" are willing to take any weapon ( many had nothing more than pointed sticks) and try to kill our marines on the beaches should the invasion happen. because they would rather die than admit they got thier asses kicked. the japanese were not innocent. i think its time you open your eyes to things like the rape of nanking , the japanese diseas warfare against the chinese, the human experiments performed on POW's and the horrible treatment of pow's


added. japan was months away from making a dirty bomb to use against us.

[HoppysMag]

oh ya, englands elite military never makes mistakes http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/02/18/britain.marines/

spain, england.... close enough

[B.A.M.]

Man this is getting ugly.

[Jonneh]

Everything Bill Bailey says is correct! (http://www.digitalbrain.com/jonneh/bully.wmv)

[HoppysMag]

Everything Bill Bailey says is correct! (http://www.digitalbrain.com/jonneh/bully.wmv)
ha ha that is good

[B.A.M.]

Nothing wrong with that. He also forgot that france is the kid with the broken glasses.

[drg]

This is so stupid, inreality the president spends little money that is not appoprved by the congress first. I love how the pres is always the target.

As 1) the source of US foreign policy and 2) the leader of the a majority party in congress that is by and large willing to rubber-stamp his decisions, there's plenty of reason this reflects directly on the Bush administration. To deny that is to, well, deny reality.


As off today:
1. US 350 mil
2 Australia 60 mil
3 UK 45 mil (i think)

Inresting isnt it? The top three to respond the quickest are those who are also fighting in Iraq... The same nations that are constantly deamonized by the "left."

Japan has taken over the top spot at $500 million, not a participant in the fighting in Iraq and with a population very much against it. UN agencies have allocated upwards of $250 million, an organization consistently demonized by the "right" for being against Iraq and not sanctioning it. I think the point is that trying to link this to Iraq somehow is quite a partisan stretch at best.

[drg]

It's a question because you don't like him? Or because of some actual event where he didn't deliver aid?

I think the former.

Please, unless you've been under a red-painted rock the past few years, you should know that Bush's failure to fully fund in a timely manner some important foreign policy pledges is well-established, most notably in Afghanistan. With all the budgetary pressures, it's not hard to see why this could happen again.

Are you denying it because you like him? Or because you truly didn't know that?

I think both.

[Albinonewt]

Please, unless you've been under a red-painted rock the past few years, you should know that Bush's failure to fully fund in a timely manner some important foreign policy pledges is well-established, most notably in Afghanistan. With all the budgetary pressures, it's not hard to see why this could happen again.

Are you denying it because you like him? Or because you truly didn't know that?

I think both.

I wasn't aware that congress has adbicated it's control over the budgetary purse strings.

At least now I know who to blame for everything....


Of course, that everything still isn't defined, just vaguely as "promises"

[slateman]

I for one am proud of the money that we've pledged. If it means my taxes gotta be raised a little I'm ok with that.

And $350 million is only the begining. Just wait till all of the charity drives start going. There will probably be some big telethon and such. And America's "evil capitalist corporations" will probably double that in funds and goods (put that in your pipe and smoke it Mr. Moore :) )

[GT]

I think the point is that trying to link this to Iraq somehow is quite a partisan stretch at best.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4130599.stm


I am not going to draw a road map.....

[drg]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4130599.stm


I am not going to draw a road map.....

You're going to need one if you hope to explain how Sri Lanka refusing Israeli aid is related to who is fighting in Iraq. Where in the world are you going with this?

[GT]

Where in the world are you going with this?

How familar are you with Bin Laden et al's operations in somlia (I will get back to this at the end)? Its fare to say the UBL is a multi-national terrorst. We also know that each of the warring factions, for those who dont know sri lanka has been in a civil war since the 80's, has recieved external assistance from iseral and pallastien. The article I posted was intresting in the fact that sri lanka is only about 7% muslim, yet that small precentage has enough voice to turn away aid for the remaining 93%. A very vocal minority simliar to the problem in russia.

The Iraq war (it doesnt matter if you believe we are liberators, oil thiefs, or murders) has stirred up terror recruiment. Personally I think the war was icing on the cake for groups like al queda, there are a number of social-economic factors that lead to such groups of which little have anything to do with "foregin policy". We also know that terrorsts have chaged thier focus from attacking the US, physical place, to attacking US citizens abroad. Needless to say there still pissed off either because we are americans or foriegn policy whatever "theory" you subsribe to matters little as all they want to do is kill.

Over the next few months the US is going to spend a few billion in sri lanka as well as other affected countries. Do you think that all the US does it write a check? I am sure there will be thousands if not tens of thousands of american volenteers as well as state deparment folks figuring out where the money needs to go that the US pledges. These aid workers, surronded by very anti-semitic and anti-iseral groups, are going to be in signifgant danger. I am willing to bet that there will be more than a few attempts to kill americans durring the aid effort. Futhermore it wouldnt suprise me if there are US agents that have gone to sri lanka, prior to the aid effort, in order to determine excatly what risks thier are for aid workers.

This isnt the first time we get beat on for saving other countries butt; If you remeber the tail end of Bush sr.'s tenure, the US had decided to visit solmia, as a UN effort. Bush's intent was to show up, feed some peeps, and get out ASAP. All hell breaks loose and terrorism aganist americans, and all UN folks, goes through the roof. "civilians" are killing soldiers, running car bombs into blockades in an attempt to stop the aid effort. The last straw for the UN was the death of 24 pakistanie peackeepers. While it hits the fan in Somilia bush is in the middle of a relection campign, of which clinton wins, and everyone is more concerned with Bush looking at his watch durring one of those worthless debates, than what is happening on the otherside of the world.

Clinton as new pres and unknowingly to the US that was our first encouter with UBL whom was in direct command, i believe of a warlord named Aidid. The UN does its thing votes for a worthless regime change and some other goofy measures. Our intellegence guys figured out that most of the violence towards the US was coming from this war lord. Clinton, with a thumbs up from the UN, does the oppsite of the advice given to him by the generals on the ground and decides to send in the Rangers to take this guy out. Mission fails, lots of good guys killed for no reason, watch "Black hawk down"(One of our few "successes: over there). The big fubar was that Clinton didnt think a massive supressing force of troops would play well on tv.


Bill Gertz; THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Defense Secretary Les Aspin and his deputies rejected sending needed tanks and armored vehicles to Somalia because they feared a political backlash would undermine their pro-United Nations policy, says a Senate Armed Services Committee report.

My point,
not only will we be defending aganist a public health diseaster we will also be fighting minor skirmishes, or maybe not, however all of the terrorists motivitaions will be there durring the aid effort. Dont be suprised if there is some kind of military force, maybe from the UN, that shows up in the indian ocean. Last time I heard there was a carrier that was enroute to the middle east and is instead heading to "help out" the aid effort.

[drg]

Clinton didnt think a massive supressing force of troops would play well on tv.

And it wouldn't have. Let's not forget the political landscape here at home. Trying to pin it all on a pro-UN policy is just the kind of thing the Wash Times would do, that bastion of objective reporting.

None of this offsets the fact that your list is cherry-picked. These countries are giving a lot of money, true, but Iraq is not the prime moving force behind this, nor is it appropriate to take cheap shots at the "left" based on it. There are other countries and organizations responding significantly, as I've described.

[Bolter]

You don't want our money?

So I suppose Europe will be cleaning up it's own mess in Bosnia now, without our help!

And what WMD exactly have we used? Since WWII it's been all conventional




Well, A) That's a lie, the vast bulk of Arab immigration into Europe is from countries other then Iraq and Afghanistan and B) happened well before the last two wars in the region not to mention C) maybe ya'll should think about closing the door



We'll remember that next time someone crosses the Rhine

We were in Bosnia on a peace keeping mission. The UN did not start the war.

WMD? Please see previous post regarding napalm and bunker busters etc.

No its not a lie. Are you here? Do your taxes pay for these people?

The Rhine? Do you know who was in charge of the push through Europe? British commanders. You think you guys are the sole saviours of the world? Your soldiers are brave and need commending. They do a thankless task at the will of your greedy government. But with or without you, we would have defeated Germany. We are like that. Plus we had the Russians who met us in Berlin. The Russians split the Germans.

[GT]

But with or without you, we would have defeated Germany.

I am glad I saw that this morning, pretty funny stuff.




And it wouldn't have. Let's not forget the political landscape here at home. Trying to pin it all on a pro-UN policy is just the kind of thing the Wash Times would do, that bastion of objective reporting.

SO we should allow our soldiers to needlessly die simply because its more popular to do so? What does the washington times have to do with with that quote? Its a fact pure and simple, clinton allowed soldiers to die because it wouldnt play well on tv, that is 100% fact. He had Rangers, super soldiers (make no mistake these guys are killing machines), because to do otherwise wouldnt be considered "cool" by the UN.


None of this offsets the fact that your list is cherry-picked. These countries are giving a lot of money, true, but Iraq is not the prime moving force behind this,

Kinda disagree,
IF you do alittle terrorism research you'll find that the motivation factor for terrorism growth are social and economic. These coutries, whom are also in Iraq, understand why it is so important to help out as much as possible. Ask yourself why japan has just pledged 500mill? No offense to the japanese but there xenophobic nature precludes them from being the most giving nation towards thier asian brothers.


nor is it appropriate to take cheap shots at the "left" based on it.
I dont see any "cheap shots." I do see some of my opionon interjected with cold hard facts. Which states are the most giving; red or blue? Now that is a cheap shot;)

[Albinonewt]

We were in Bosnia on a peace keeping mission. The UN did not start the war.

Did you handle it yourselves, or did you cry out for help?


WMD? Please see previous post regarding napalm and bunker busters etc.

And the last time Napalm leveled a city was when?

And bunker busters are specifically designed to attack hardened underground targets. How many civillians hide in underground weapons chaches?


No its not a lie. Are you here? Do your taxes pay for these people?

France was 7% Arab BEFORE the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. We didn't do it. If Arabs keep coming there now maybe you should CLOSE THE DOOR. It isn't our fault Europeans have decided to destroy their nations in favor of some moronic policy inclusion. Although its nice to see that decades of European arrogance and igorance is now solely America's fault because of a war two years old.


The Rhine? Do you know who was in charge of the push through Europe? British commanders. You think you guys are the sole saviours of the world? Your soldiers are brave and need commending. They do a thankless task at the will of your greedy government. But with or without you, we would have defeated Germany. We are like that. Plus we had the Russians who met us in Berlin. The Russians split the Germans.

Are you completely insane?

Anyone that thinks the war would have been won when it was and how it was without American manpower and machines is loco. Britain was going to land was going to do what? Land it's forces in France and fight in Northern Africa? What magic was Britain going to use to make the tanks and recruit the troops for that? And Russia broke through because of our intervention to the west, because then Germany needed more forces to the west then previously thought.

[Kevmaster]

Jesus Christ....

I take a leave and all hell erupts!

Yes. The US is making a HUGE contribution. Not as big, per capita, as some other nations, but it is still the largest contribution or any nation. Could we give more? Probably. But there is no reason why we HAVE to give anything.

Why is it that no matter WHAT it is we do in terms of our foreign policy, someone always gets pissed? The world wouldn't be happy with any foreign policy decision we make. They want an isolationist America until they themselves are threatened. They want an agressive america when they are, but want to be able to control it. They want America to give money away and when we do they tell us its not enough. Anyone know how much money China and India combined have given? I bet it dwarfs in comparison to ours, especially in per capita terms. They havn't gotten any criticism...Go Figure.

Basically...The world likes to keep the US as its little punching bag until it needs it. At which point the US will selflessly disregard previous criticism and ultimatly bail the world out of trouble...again.
Watch...it will happen

[GT]

Anyone know how much money China and India combined have given? I bet it dwarfs in comparison to ours, especially in per capita terms. They havn't gotten any criticism...Go Figure.



HA!!! there is plenty of criticism to go around for those two; China + oil + sudan = true evil oil company.

[cphilip]

How did relief of Tsunami vicitms turn into world war II?


Closed.