UN official speaks truth, is slapped down

[opebo]

Interesting article - another good Scandinavian states the obvious and is quickly put in his place by the double-speaking Americans:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=4&u=/nm/20041228/ts_nm/quake_un_dc

So who says we don't run the U.N.?

[J. J.]

Probably the 130+ other members.

[Tory]

"food aid, where the United States is the world's largest donor".

The man said that the U.S. should raise taxes to pay for relief efforts elsewhere. If you agree with that Opebo, you could even cause John Kerry to shed a tear.

[David S]

Interesting article - another good Scandinavian states the obvious and is quickly put in his place by the double-speaking Americans:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=4&u=/nm/20041228/ts_nm/quake_un_dc

So who says we don't run the U.N.?

The U.S. doesn't have to send any money, so whatever we send is generous. Besides the government aid, many individuals sent their own money of their own free will. I sent money earlier today and I know Gabu did too. Did you?

[12th Doctor]

"food aid, where the United States is the world's largest donor".

The man said that the U.S. should raise taxes to pay for relief efforts elsewhere. If you agree with that Opebo, you could even cause John Kerry to shed a tear.

Opebo hates everybody.  It is just a question of who he hates more.  Right now, he hates America more than the rest of the world.  You would think that with all the tragedy going on in his part of the world, a man of his means would be able to go and lend some help. 

Instead, he chooses to jump on the United States who have given millions, while most European countries have given nothing.  Opebo's hatred of his fellow man has, of course, driven his hatred of religion and people of faith.  He sees that even with all of his money, he is more miserable than people who don't have anything.  I could go on, but I won't waste anymore time talking about this sad little man.  Go buy another hooker Opebo, it won't make you any happier.

[Lunar]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My impression was that France was actually one of the first countries on the scene in Sri Lanka (along with India and Pakistan) with actual rescue assistance.

[12th Doctor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My impression was that France was actually one of the first countries on the scene in Sri Lanka (along with India and Pakistan) with actual rescue assistance.

To my knowledge, the French have done nothing yet.  Australia and Japan were the first countries on the sceen.

I think that the Germans have donated a plane or something.

[Lunar]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/asia.quake/index.html
http://www.dawn.com/2004/12/28/top8.htm

Search the pages for "France."  I remember seing another article with just France and two other countries, these articles don't make it seem as big.  Differs from place to place I guess, shrug.

The CNN one also mentions Italy.

[12th Doctor]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/asia.quake/index.html
http://www.dawn.com/2004/12/28/top8.htm

Search the pages for "France."  I remember seing another article with just France and two other countries, these articles don't make it seem as big.  Differs from place to place I guess, shrug.

The CNN one also mentions Italy.

I admit, my info is a day or two old, but I do know that in terms of monitary aid, the United States, Japan and Australia have given more than the rest of the world combined.

[Platypus]

Basically, we're running the show in Phuket and have the largest mobilisation ready for Indonesia; the UN is running the aldives and much of India, the Japanese are spread all over, but especially in Sri Lanka and Thailand, and the Germans are also focussed on Thailand. I've heard very little about direct US invlvement, but that is primarily because it's harder to get americans into the region them aussie, i suppose.

[The Duke]

The US is hardly stingy.

We are the largest gross donor of aid even when only counting government programs, which is hardly stingy, and we have made the largest contribution to the tsunami relief effort.

The US is different than Europe.  They us governments to distribute social welfare, but don't donate much to charity.  We donate more to charity than anyone, but we have the least generous welfare state.  The same is true of our foreign aid.  My dad tried to donate money today and he couldn't because the site got flooded with too many people and the server went down.  We send more money to the Sally Stuthers feed the Somali children fund and whatnot, but we send less aid through the government.

The US also provides the bulk of the world's peacekeepers (See: Bosnia), is the largest deter-er of war (See: Korea), is the world's top enforcer of international law (See: Iraq), is the leading baby sitter of basket case nations (See: Haiti), and has among the most open markets to third world economies (See: WTO Cancun Round).  All of these things make the world safer and more prosperous, but none are measured by the chosen metric of the UN spokesman.

If you only measure aid through the government's develpement programs, we seem stingy.  But if you use a more wholistic measure, its not so stingy.

The UN should thank the US, Japan, Norway, Sweden, and Australia for their substantial contributions here and elsewhere, and spend its time shouting down the French, whose $136,000 pledge (No, that isn't a typo) is embarrassing.

[phk]

They don't deserve charity, bootstraps is the best way.

Let them die.

Less Third Worlders the better.

[12th Doctor]

They don't deserve charity, bootstraps is the best way.

Let them die.

Less Third Worlders the better.

Well, as we can see, another jackass has once again deminished the debate by grossly taking out of context conservative and Republican possitions on issues.

[Richard]

Why is the United States government involving itself, or donating aid??  It is running a bloody deficit!  It can't afford to give and give and give.

If you want to give, donate to the Red Cross or something.  It is a personal thing.  Donating stolen money (income taxes) is not charity.

[phk]

I wish the earthquake would have killed more people, the world needs far less.

[Michael Z]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My impression was that France was actually one of the first countries on the scene in Sri Lanka (along with India and Pakistan) with actual rescue assistance.

To my knowledge, the French have done nothing yet.  Australia and Japan were the first countries on the sceen.

I think that the Germans have donated a plane or something.

God, this Europe-bashing nonsense again. Now I remember why I left this stinking forum in the first place.

[12th Doctor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My impression was that France was actually one of the first countries on the scene in Sri Lanka (along with India and Pakistan) with actual rescue assistance.

To my knowledge, the French have done nothing yet.  Australia and Japan were the first countries on the sceen.

I think that the Germans have donated a plane or something.

God, this Europe-bashing nonsense again. Now I remember why I left this stinking forum in the first place.

I love Europe.  I just can't stand France and Germany.

Further more, when I visited France, I like the French people (or, at least, everyone outside of Paris and north of the Loire), so with them it is only their government that I cannot stand.

[MODU]

Interesting article - another good Scandinavian states the obvious and is quickly put in his place by the double-speaking Americans:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=4&u=/nm/20041228/ts_nm/quake_un_dc

So who says we don't run the U.N.?

I'm sorry, let's check the facts here.  The US has set aside $35Mill (which is all they can do at the moment since it taps it's international relief fund) to directly aid in support of those impacted by the earthquake and tsunami's.  France has set aside $140K!!!  Why don't you direct your attention across the Atlantic first.

Follow on top of that we are sending a carrier group over with provisions and equipment to help with the rescue process.  That's roughly $400Million right there.  Throw in another $150Million for the C-130's bringing in supplies from Japan and Guam.

The UN guy was "slapped" since he was using a figure based off of percentage of GDP, which is a poor measure when the US GDP is greater than anyone elses.  Another sign of the UN wanting to have the US carry the weight/costs of the world without saying THANKS. 

[opebo]

The UN guy was "slapped" since he was using a figure based off of percentage of GDP, which is a poor measure when the US GDP is greater than anyone elses.  

No, percentage of GDP is the most accurate and reasonable way to compare levels of giving.   If I give you $100 it means I'm a hell of a lot more generous than Bill Gates giving you a thousand.

[David S]

The UN guy was "slapped" since he was using a figure based off of percentage of GDP, which is a poor measure when the US GDP is greater than anyone elses.  

No, percentage of GDP is the most accurate and reasonable way to compare levels of giving.   If I give you $100 it means I'm a hell of a lot more generous than Bill Gates giving you a thousand.

Bill Gates has pledged $3 million. http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/30/news/fortune500/corporate_aid/index.htm?cnn=yes

[MODU]

The UN guy was "slapped" since he was using a figure based off of percentage of GDP, which is a poor measure when the US GDP is greater than anyone elses.  

No, percentage of GDP is the most accurate and reasonable way to compare levels of giving.   

Far from the truth.  What counts is the dollar amount, not percentage.  Otherwise, the Neatherlands could get away with donating $100K and say they are by far the more generous contributor than the US who has given $100Million. 

But, since you want to make the world dependent on US welfare, be prepared to have your taxes doubled.

[opebo]

The UN guy was "slapped" since he was using a figure based off of percentage of GDP, which is a poor measure when the US GDP is greater than anyone elses.  

No, percentage of GDP is the most accurate and reasonable way to compare levels of giving.   

Far from the truth.  What counts is the dollar amount, not percentage.  Otherwise, the Neatherlands could get away with donating $100K and say they are by far the more generous contributor than the US who has given $100Million. 

But, since you want to make the world dependent on US welfare, be prepared to have your taxes doubled.

By your calculation, no small country could be generous, even if its people were tithing.  Absurd.  Americans give a minute portion of their national income, which makes them the least generous of any 'developed' nation. (in fairness we're hardly as developed as Europe, but for arguments sake).

[WalterMitty]

opebo is now a fan of the un.  ive seen it all now.

[opebo]

opebo is now a fan of the un.  ive seen it all now.

I'm no big fan.  It is OK - and clearly serves US purposes. 

What interested me about this story was that the man spoke the obvious truth - the facts of the matter - and the US response was the most nonsensical doublespeak.  Why not say 'we don't want to give much'?  Just tell the truth, don't make up a lot of absurd statistical arguments that anyone can tell are disingenuous.  We gave more than Luxembourg!!

[WalterMitty]

who cares who gave more?

this is all one big contest.  the victims are being used as pawns in this 'we gave more than yall...blah blah blah' argument.

as for the un, it should be closed down, with a small staff left to help us fight whooping cough in the ivory coast.