Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Janos on January 01, 2005, 05:44:10 pm
-
NO FLAMING/TROLLING/SPAMMING HERE
This thread is for political discussion concerning the tsunami and aftermatch (thanks, Sandwich!). Don't be a jerk and be reasonanble.
All "US vs. UN, US suxx0r r0xx0r, ein Volk ja" etc. discussion goes here, with polite manners considered. Don't act as a jerk, give sources for your outrageous claims, be reasonable, don't troll, be prepared to actually give respectable sources for your claims, you know the drill. DO NOT TROLL-
Some articles about the political outcome about tsunami. I will not add any emphasis on the articles, so READ before you post, pissant!
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/3a3abc72-5ad1-11d9-aa6e-00000e2511c8.html
some info, whatever
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/31/us.aid/index.html
CNN is lieberal media ok
http://www.un.org/aboutun/chart.html
Read this before criticism against the IRC. Base your criticism on facts, not on stormfront.org talking points. This applies to democrats as well!
http://www.newshounds.us/2004/12/30/fox_news_misstates_un_skimpy_remark.php
LOL FAUXNEWS COM
OK let's see editorials and stuff. Recommended reading to EVERYONE. Stay neutral before comments; these sources might not be balanced and neutral, but use your reason before comments. Again, give neutral data if possible.
http://www.newkerala.com/news-daily/news/features.php?action=fullnews&id=53396 read this!
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1178376,001301540005.htm <- POP-UP ALERT
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/PO0501/S00007.htm
http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/reliefresources/110442677961.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/31/us.aid/index.html
Something about the aid.
Now, read this again, ****wads.
This thread is meant for political discussion. Said topic includes all REASONABLE CRITICS <- read and comperehend - with sources. Rumours and opinions are to be based on something, I don't want AMERIKKKA/LIEBERALS KKKLITON **** in this thread. This thread is approved by Sandwich, so normal HLP rules apply - I am not a mod! And overall:
Please - don't be a jerk, make some basic research before your posts, act reasonable.
Personally I wish to be able to grab some analysis about Indian/Ceyloanian relations, possible trade outcomes and so on. Post all articles you come up with and add some commentary. Keep your quotes intelligent. Link to your posts. DO NOT QUOTE 30+ PAGE LONG ARTICLES UNLESS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY!!!! Give a link and short pversight of important points if absolutely necessary. If a link requires registration, give us all required info.
Feel free to spam this thread with articles, but mention sources and, if you feel, possible referrals according neutrality/source of news/whatever. If commentary is needed, MENTION IT. DO NOT SPAM.
Go ahead and commit whatever you see fit. I included the topics mentioned above because I saw them to be fit to current conversation.
[spellcheck approved]
-
But the move, which amounts to an effective block on funding for the United Nations, is a vindictive decision, designed to punish the world body and, by its exclusion, the EU, for their stance over Iraq. It will be both costly - just wait for the duplication and waste, especially when military forces get involved - and shortsighted.
I hope that the 'core group', led and initiated by the US, doesn't end up like the quote above. If The US does start relief efforts without coordinating with the UN, the results could be quite repurcussive.
While I doubt that this will actually happen, i am puzzled as to why the US left out the UN - and thus the EU - in this effort. A combined effort, including the UN, would be far more effective rather then splitting everything up into two camps.
I seriously hope that they keep their word in 'supporting the UN instead of duplicating the efforts'.
-
For the record, the US has upped the amount of aid it's going to send over to something like $350 million, just so we all know that America isn't being quite so stingy. ;)
-
Not that we ever really are in the first place. :doubt:
-
must..resist..giving..janos...an..aneurism
[by making a patently partisan comment just to watch the fireworks]
-
Originally posted by Corsair
For the record, the US has upped the amount of aid it's going to send over to something like $350 million, just so we all know that America isn't being quite so stingy. ;)
Lose the 0.
It's 35 million.
Sweden is giving out 75 million.
STOCKHOLM, Dec 30 (AFP) - Sweden will give 500 million kronor (75 million dollars, 55 million euros) in emergency aid to the regions struck by the massive quake and tidal waves around the Indian Ocean, officials said Thursday.
"The extent of the catastrophe's devastation is not yet known and we must be prepared to help in any way we can," Development Aid Minister Carin Jaemtin said in a statement, calling the aid an "initial" installment.
The amount of the Swedish aid is large -- by comparison the United States has sent or promised 35 million dollars in aid.
The Swedish money will be channeled through the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, and will primarily go to the United Nations, the International Red Cross and other Swedish humanitarian and emergency aid organisations.
Sweden looked Thursday likely to be one of the Western countries hardest-hit by the massive earthquake and tidal waves, with between 1,000 and 4,500 Swedish holiday-makers still missing or unaccounted for, mostly in Thailand.
The confirmed overall death toll from Sunday's tragedy climbed to more than 118,000 on Thursday.
po/jfs
On the sidenote - just tonight the TV marathon took in 48 million dollars, and is going to continue on for two weeks.
The fact that we're pulling in more money than US is a ****ing joke.
-
The Us have raised their donation to $350m, it's been all over the news. Japan have also raised theirs', to $500m.
-
yep us raised to $350m, japan to $0.5B
-
Get your facts straight before you post BD.
-
Originally posted by BD
Lose the 0.
It's 35 million.
No, I'll keep the 0.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/02/international/worldspecial4/02quake.html?hp&ex=1104642000&en=92dbe740aaf891ca&ei=5094&partner=homepage
As the first trickle of supplies broke through, the global relief effort to save an estimated five million survivors of last weekend's undersea earthquake and tsunami was reinforced yesterday when Japan increased its pledge of aid from $30 million to $500 million, the largest contribution thus far. Combined with a $350 million pledge by the United States on Friday, this brought total contributions from more than 40 nations to $2 billion, according to the United Nations. [Page 9.]
-
True, my bad. My news were a touch out of date.
-
Am I the only one to whom this seems to be a popularity contest blown out of proportion? I mean giving money is good but with everybody screaming "You didn't give your last penny, AH!?!" it seems... ackward... :blah:
Also, I thought the US was having budget problems, isn't this going to... er... "enlarge" them?
-
Originally posted by Ghostavo
Am I the only one to whom this seems to be a popularity contest blown out of proportion? I mean giving money is good but with everybody screaming "You didn't give your last penny, AH!?!" it seems... ackward... :blah:
Also, I thought the US was having budget problems, isn't this going to... er... "enlarge" them?
Frankly, I don't give a ****. Way I see it, most governments can find ways to piss away vast sums of moneys anyways, at least this way they can actually help people. We should have more charity, in this country at least, so I'm not going to complain.
-
What amuses me is that while some countries have massive internal problems and not a penny is spent on fixing them - something like this gets everyones backing because it's a tremendous oppertunity to look good infront of the world.
Don't get me wrong - my sympathies go to those affected. It is a tragedy and a terrible loss of life.
However, there are other problems in the world that'll still be there when this mess is cleaned up.
-
The problem is, you can't fix internal problems by throwing money at them. Internal problems almost always mean there's some sort of error in the system itself, the very system that those who run it have vested interest in maintaining. By contrast, disaster relief is something you can help by throwing money at (assuming of course its managed properly).
-
Perhaps Shrike, but referring back to an example of my own - the UKs rail service - I'm fairly sure that the problem could be solved by throwing money at it.
At present - our rail service is abismal. I've heard tales of European countries with computer controlled trains that can run in excess of 150MPH from station to station - are never late and run frequently.
Compared to Englands on rail service which - despite recent upgrades - is already out of date and based upon a system that badly needs replacing. Enough money could solve that problem.
I think I digress though, I think I was searching for an example of something that could be improved within a country before money is handed out to others as a show of good will.
I'm sure the money is welcome in the areas struck of course - and that it will be put to good use there. I think what irks me is governments performing a media act to better their own positions - sweeping internal problems under the carpet in a show of "look how nice we are, we've given these poor people money. Sure we've problems of our own that could use that money as well - but look at these people we've given the money to, and aren't we fantastic?".
I hope you can see what I'm trying to say - of course aid should be given. But - at least in my own country - I think our own infrastructures should be improved to equal those of other first world countries - before we attempt to play the media game alongside the US and other nations.
-
Why do you care? I mean, I'm just saying: a big disaster happened. Sure, the world has other problems, but for once, everyone's banding together to do something nice.
What's the matter with that? Just look at what the various nations are doing, and not the reasons they did it. Good or bad, the end result is still good, correct?
-
No doubt there - as I already said - the aid is well deserved and desparately needed.
However - I look at my own country and I don't see it as a first world nation. I see poor scholastic, medical, transport and civil facilities. We're in no position to attempt to match donations of the size that America and Japan have.
Of course - our goverment will no doubt arrange to have this disaster covered for some time to come in an attempt to sweep our internal issues under the carpet for a while.
-
It's not just a question of throwing money, it's a question of throwing money accurately.
As for the current situation, I'm just sad that it's turned political in any way whatsoever, yes, what is being done is good, but from the impression I'm getting here, a lot of rich countries are stamping o each others fingers trying to prove how 'nice' they are.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
No doubt there - as I already said - the aid is well deserved and desparately needed.
However - I look at my own country and I don't see it as a first world nation. I see poor scholastic, medical, transport and civil facilities. We're in no position to attempt to match donations of the size that America and Japan have.
Of course - our goverment will no doubt arrange to have this disaster covered for some time to come in an attempt to sweep our internal issues under the carpet for a while.
Same thing over here. Also, having been bombed by the media in the past years about
this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3607933.stm), I find surprising that some countries (including mine), have donated as much as they have.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
It's not just a question of throwing money, it's a question of throwing money accurately.
As for the current situation, I'm just sad that it's turned political in any way whatsoever, yes, what is being done is good, but from the impression I'm getting here, a lot of rich countries are stamping o each others fingers trying to prove how 'nice' they are.
Gets the job done, though, right?
-
Yes, but 'getting the job done' is one thing, but when a disaster manages to increase friction between the countries that are helping, rather than unifying them to help with this tragedy, then you know things are ropey.
After all, chewing gum will 'Get the job done' on a leaky radiator, but it's only storing up more problems for later.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Perhaps Shrike, but referring back to an example of my own - the UKs rail service - I'm fairly sure that the problem could be solved by throwing money at it.
At present - our rail service is abismal. I've heard tales of European countries with computer controlled trains that can run in excess of 150MPH from station to station - are never late and run frequently.
I don't think the problem is one that would simply be cured by throwing money at it. The price of rail tickets is very high in the UK. They make enough money to repair the networks. Problem is they'd rather stick the money in shareholders pockets than spend it on the service they provide while all the time holding their hand out to the government and asking for subsidies.
The problem with the rail network is one of management. To see what I mean take a side step and look at the London Underground.
From before about 10 years ago I can't think of a single train related underground incident. A little while back they had a spate of derailments etc. The reason behind this was in preparation for privatisation London Underground was broken up into 4 companies. Now instead of the old attitude ("There's a problem with the track", "Okay. Lets fix it") there was now a new one ("There's a problem with the track", "Okay. Who's responsible for it? ") With that kind of attitude it's not hard to see why there were problems.
-
All problems can be fixed with enough money. Although the solutions may not be the ideal ones, and the sums ungodly huge.
If the US isn't funneling the aid through the UN, how is it being used and by what agencies, exactly?
-
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0101-08.htm
Clare Short's take on things. I tend to support her.
-
Originally posted by Janos
This thread is for political discussion concerning the tsunami and aftermatch.
Originally posted by Janos
[spellcheck approved]
w00t! :D
-
Originally posted by vyper
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0101-08.htm
Clare Short's take on things. I tend to support her.
Thats what i'm afraid of. That nations are going to put their own self-interest up front and the needs of the victims in the background. I find this initiative by the US looking a lot like shutting the UN/EU out in an attempt to make themselves look good.
Normally I would applaud relief efforts such as this, but the fact remains that it would be a ****load better if the cooperated alongside the UN instead of going about it themselves. Wether they support the UN or not, this is an inefficient way to do this.
I'm crossing my fingers that it'll all work out though. :blah:
-
The key thing has to be long term support; apparently a lot of the money promised to help rebuild Bam after the earthquake there has never reached it; there are still something like 1 million homeless as a result.
-
If we had enough land to build a high-speed rail network in the UK without the need to demolish the existing one first then there wouldn't be much of a problem (the existing rail infrastructure can't handle high speed trains and can't cater for all the trains running on it simultaneously). But that's why we have such congestion problems over here - claiming land to build road and rail networks is nigh on impossible.
-
Tiara, the UN has a history of being more beauracracy and less action(hence Iraq...hello? 14 resolutions?) and is corrupted to the core(Oil for Food (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=oil+for+food+scandal&btnG=Google+Search)...for starters). The people of the US(almost to a man) have grown sick of total ineptitude of the UN in doing anything else other than line their pockets and enjoy NYC's high life and many that I hear are calling for withdrawal from the UN and the formation of a new organization composed of countries that have proven their stances on Human Rights and other issues.
You don't put China and the Sudan on the Council for Human Rights and then put Sudan in charge.
Coffeecup Annan can't even bring himself to utter the word 'genocide' in relation to the happenings in Sudan because that would mean he would immeadiately have to send the Blue Helmets in.
The UN has failed to live up to it's charter or designed purpose.
-
It could be worse. Just remember, it could be like the League of Nations (read: Like what Liberator said, squared.)
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Tiara, the UN has a history of being more beauracracy and less action(hence Iraq...hello? 14 resolutions?) and is corrupted to the core(Oil for Food (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=oil+for+food+scandal&btnG=Google+Search)...for starters). The people of the US(almost to a man) have grown sick of total ineptitude of the UN in doing anything else other than line their pockets and enjoy NYC's high life and many that I hear are calling for withdrawal from the UN and the formation of a new organization composed of countries that have proven their stances on Human Rights and other issues.
[/b]
Yeah you know it's really easy to tell someone to live by your standards and follow your morality codes if you don't give them any power at all. Because UN was not built to solve issues diplomatically and be a forum or all nations of the world, ok?
And oh yeah, Oill for Food (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7195112) is the end of all things, right? And you know it was directed by security council, not by Annan?
Guess who is in breach of something like ~30 resolutions? That's right, Israel. Double standards do exist, no ****, but citing the amount of resolutions and blaming UN for not acting on US's really shady and outright wrong intelligence is pretty STINGY.
You don't put China and the Sudan on the Council for Human Rights and then put Sudan in charge.
Coffeecup Annan can't even bring himself to utter the word 'genocide' in relation to the happenings in Sudan because that would mean he would immeadiately have to send the Blue Helmets in.
Yep. Would you send the troops if needed?
The UN has failed to live up to it's charter or designed purpose. [/B]
You do know what the designed purpose is, don't you?
-
I know it not supposed to be a wannabe pseudo-world government full of self-important bozos.
As I understand it was supposed to be a forum where nations could come and have their disputes mediated by a neutral party(ies). It's not supposed to be a catch-all for international affairs.
-
Originally posted by Liberator
(hence Iraq...hello? 14 security councel resolutions?)
Originally posted by Janos
Guess who is in breach of something like ~30 general assembly resolutions that don't hold the weight of international law? That's right, Israel
-
"Yep. Would you send the troops if needed? "
and miss a chance to play "America: Saviour of the Universe", and getting to blow **** up while were at it too, are you realy asking that question? sure as hell we'd love to, but, would you mind waching Iraq for a few days while we do it?
-
Y'Know, funny thing is, everytime I hear a small minded, automatic 'anti-America' response from someone and think to myself 'Oh come on, give 'em a break', someone comes along and makes an equally anti-UN comment that sort of balances it all out :)
Edit : Newsflash, people are dying while we sit around playing 'Who's most corrupt' when the evidence we've all seen suggests that anyone who thinks either the US or the UN are immune to corruption at the most life-ignorant level is living in fairy lala land.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Edit : Newsflash, people are dying while we sit around playing 'Who's most corrupt' when the evidence we've all seen suggests that anyone who thinks either the US or the UN are immune to corruption at the most life-ignorant level is living in fairy lala land.
You are missing the point here. The fact is that this is not some political show that they can use to better their image. It's a disaster and thousands have died and even more bodies are found each minute. Nevertheless, the US and it's 'core group', seem to use it as such. Why exclude the UN from the relief efforts? It makes no sense whatsoever.
Also, Liberator, I'll have you know that most of the problems and issues you are blaming the UN for is because the US veto'd many good programs. Or to make it even worse, they DIDN'T veto something and afterwards the scream bloody murder and make the UN look all bad.
I'm not saying the UN is without it's flaws. Not by a VERY long shot. But it's a bit presumptious to blame it all on the UN. Both are at fault.
However, this is not really the time to bicker about this. Thats why I wonder why the US has gone off to do **** by itself. If they aren't supporting the UN, it's nothing more then another point in their political agenda. And i so hope I'm wrong about that.
-
Indeed, political agendas, be they American or UN are costing lives, that's the saddest fact. It just, quite frankly, pisses me off that there are people who think the political side of this is more important than the idea of saving lives.
I don't really care who those people are.
-
Originally posted by Liberator
You don't put China and the Sudan on the Council for Human Rights and then put Sudan in charge.
Looks at Guantanamo Bay. Nice glass house you lived in Lib. Pity you broke it with all those stones you kept throwing.
-
*hums starspangled banner while watching military helicopters drop supplies to out-of-reach hit villages*
-
Yep, that's exactly what they want you to do.
Feel free to carry on cheering the US when twice as many peope could have been helped if both groups had got involved.
We should be so so proud of ourselves shouldn't we?
You know, when people are proud that one group of people have pushed another group of people to one side just so that they can 'help' I really find myself wishing that Mega-Tsunami would hurry up. National pride is more important than life? And we call ourselves Homo-sapiens?
-
hey EU has militarys do it your self. However, I honestly get the feeling that this is less about helping people and more about resentment. What evidence do you have anyway that cooperation with the UN would have brought about any faster results or better. Some biased UN buerecrat?
As for team work, the door swings both ways. When you want others to work as a team you don't insult, belittle and demean them before hand.
As for a "Mega Tsunami," lol. A "mega Tsunami" would wash away that little speck of an island you live on as well. Oh, congradulations of taking this thread up a notch, or I should say down a notch. Kudos.
-
Just like you do to the UN you mean?
As for helping out, yes, that's right, you carry on your little snit against the UN, you've had it since the Iraq war, it doesn't matter if a few thousand people die so you can go 'Nur nur' does it?
-
"exclusion" of the UN, by virtu "excludes" the EU. Also I made an edit.
-
Red, for one, If my 'speck' of as island gets washed away big deal. So you just let people carry on dying so you can feel superior.
Do you think because America is 'big' it is good? I never reallised you worked on Phallic principles.
-
Just pointing out that you are wishing for your own damnation as well.
Hey, I never said that bigger is better, though
-
Maybe not, but by referring to an island as a 'speck of a country' you have actually explained a great deal about certain parts of America's view of other parts of the world, so Kudos to you too.
-
Calm down guys, lets try and keep the name calling out of it - even if it is fairly justified.
-
[q]
As for a "Mega Tsunami," lol. A "mega Tsunami" would wash away that little speck of an island you live on as well. Oh, congradulations of taking this thread up a notch, or I should say down a notch. Kudos.[/q]
Without that little island your country wouldn't exist son, and don't forget it.
Anyway, this is not why I came into this thread.
My attention was caught by HIG's post in the main tsunami thread in which he pointed out US casualty figures from Colin Powell with great over-drama.... even after they've been posted in Clave's tally one post previously.
Now, I'm understanding that one would be worried about the death toll of a certain nation, but it just gave me the impression he saw that as more of a loss than the other thousands who were actual natives of the region...
I may be over-analyzing.
-
Originally posted by vyper
Without that little island your country wouldn't exist son, and don't forget it.
:lol:
Achtung, Without our big country your little island would be part of the 3rd reich. And if not for your country we would speak French or Spanish. That is all. The only claim of influence, in any positive way, England can claim is the strides made via the Magna Carta.
But that is not what this thread is about...
-
I'll say it before Vyper does, it's Britain, not England, British tend to get a bit touchy about that, kinda like calling a Canadian an American ;)
-
ok....
-
Originally posted by redmenace
:lol:
Achtung, Without our big country your little island would be part of the 3rd reich. And if not for your country we would speak French or Spanish. That is all. The only claim of influence, in any positive way, England can claim is the strides made via the Magna Carta.
But that is not what this thread is about...
Okay now I'm pissed.
-
Well since none of you managed to act like adults and instead attempted to flaunt your egos infront of people you think actually care, this thread is now locked.
Congratulations.