Asia quake

[Nay]

I was going to post my thoughts on the thread "Asia quake you can help"  but my thoughts are a bit mad, so I didn't want to soil that thread.

This is a terrible thing, how can one not be moved emotionally while watching the tv coverage?  but like I've said before, these type of things have been happening since the earth formed.

With that said I have a few problems.  Other countries are constantly saying the US sucks, they truly hate Americans, but the minute something happens in these countries who do they yell at for help?  

Remember this.  Americans are going to spend tens of millions of dollars helping the victims of this tragedy and rebuilding their countries.  Then, as soon as we are through, these nations they'll be right back to resenting us and hating us for the very wealth that allowed us to help them in the first place.  Also .. many of the nations we'll be spending the money on are heavily or predominantly Muslim.  Remember ... no good deed goes unpunished.

Why are we always made out to be the bad guys when we constantly help other nations and not our own?  I say, charity starts at home.

I found this article in the New York Post, it reads....

December 29, 2004 -- An appropriately red-faced senior United Nations official beat a hasty retreat yesterday after accusing America and other well-off Western nations of a "stingy" response to the devastation in south Asia.  

Jan Egeland, a Norwegian who holds the lofty title of Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, now claims he was "misinterpreted" when he charged Monday that "there are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy.

"It is beyond me why we are so stingy, really," he told reporters.

Misinterpreted?

Baloney.

Egeland knew exactly what he was saying — and he meant every word of it.

Of course, it was about as truthful as the rest of the slime that oozes from that cesspool on First Avenue.

As Secretary of State Colin Powell noted, "The United States has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world."

Rather than simple defending America's record, however, Powell might have more effectively suggested that if Egeland is searching for some serious money, he should simply pass the hat among his fellow U.N. officials.

If all of those self-important diplomats simply anted up a small percentage of the money they raked in under the Oil for Food program — which was designed as humanitarian aid for starving Iraqis but instead became an under-the-table cash cow for top U.N. officials — Egeland might find himself with some serious cash.

For the record, the Bush administration has committed to being "a major contributor" to the tsunami-relief effort, which will run into billions of dollars.

Already, U.S. disaster specialists — joining those from other nations — have headed to the region. Navy P-3 surveillance planes from the Pacific Fleet flew to Thailand to aid in search-and rescue operations. And Air Force C-130 cargo planes are rushing in emergency medical supplies. Not to mention the international rescue and aid efforts already under way by private U.S.-based groups.

In short, America's initial response to this human tragedy is nothing for which this country need apologize — or have to answer for to small-minded, and bigmouthed, United Nations diplomats.

I wasn't quite satisfied after reading this article I knew there was more, so onward with my search and found this..

American and European politicians, Egeland complained, "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."

Egeland quickly backtracked when he realized his comments were only slightly less impolitic than slapping Colin Powell with a flounder. Still, his candor is revealing.

First, let's be fair. Egeland's right to be frustrated. His job is to help untold numbers of poor people in a terrible situation where no amount of aid or effort could ever make them whole. How much money does it take to compensate a father whose child was snatched away by an angry sea on a clear and sunny day?

But it is one thing to say the victims need more help, and another thing entirely to suggest that Sri Lankans and Indonesians are suffering from the stinginess of Americans or U.S. tax policy.

Let's review the obvious: The United Nations is an odious institution. Whenever I make this commonsense observation, I am invariably rebutted with questions like, "What about the starving people it feeds?" or "What about the peacekeeping?"

OK, what about them?

The United States supplies more than one-fifth of the United Nations' total budget (and 57 percent, 33 percent and 27 percent of the budgets for the World Food Program, the Refugee Agency, and Department of Peacekeeping Operations, respectively). We've been the United Nations' biggest donor every year since 1945. Taxpayers reluctantly agree to such largess because we're told of the good works the United Nations does. And yet, whenever there's a catastrophe, Uncle Sam is asked to dig deep into his pocket for more money.

Nobody objects when the United Nations helps victims of natural disasters, so U.N. defenders always use disaster relief and peacekeeping as their chief tool for fundraising. The problem is that the United Nations is not an impartial philanthropic organization. It is a political institution where a broad coalition of nations hope to curtail the power and influence of the United States. France uses the organization to leverage its relatively meager power by rallying African and Arab nations against us. Kofi Annan uses his megaphone to decry the moral and legal legitimacy of American foreign policy. Its Human Rights Committee is festooned with torture states, but it seems capable of issuing only condemnations inconvenient to the United States. And we foot the bill.

This is the Catch-22 of the United Nations. Politically, it's often reprehensible and inimical to American interests. But we're never asked to pay for that stuff. This comes out of the general budget. It's only when human beings are suffering in vast numbers that we're shamed for being "stingy" - because the United Nations understands how to exploit America's decency. If only we could be shaken down for more money to pay the light bill in the General Assembly when they play whack-a-mole with the United States.

The larger picture Mr. Egeland fails to appreciate is that America's wealth and prosperity - partly sustained by low taxes - is a greater bulwark against human suffering than the United Nations ever has been or likely will be. America guarantees global stability by keeping the sea lanes open, by preventing North Korea from invading South Korea and China from seizing Taiwan. We did it by preventing Saddam from keeping Kuwait. We ignored the United Nations and intervened to stop genocide in Yugoslavia, and we have 150,000 troops in Iraq working to create a democracy - while the United Nations is still too scared of terrorists, and too anti-American, to help.

Meanwhile, American citizens, partly thanks to those stingy low taxes, send some $34 billion in private aid around the world every year. That's 10 times the United Nations total budget. America's Christian ministries, private foundations and agencies all do far more in direct charity and aid than the United Nations. But bureaucrats - some who've grown fat on oil-for-food money - measure stinginess in terms of support to the bureaucracy, not to the constituency the bureaucracy was intended to help.

It is our prosperity that drives global development, our courage and goodwill that keeps the peace, and our example that shines the path to liberty, not "blue papers" from Turtle Bay.

Ok..now I'm done.

Nay

[Gandalf]

ok, but I have to add, most of the nations involved cannot be labled as those who 'take america's aid and then come back later banging on about how they hate the US'.

The countries involved, Sri lanka, Thailand, India, Indonesia do NOT take anti-US stances at all. Your main gripe is with a UN delegate (from Norway!). The countires listed have no major grumbles about the US at all, perhaps some militants in indonesia do but they are a minority of tossers, which you get in any country, including the US.

The above countries are not 'US haters' and gratefully work with the US and other countires on a regular basis.

Your gripe is with the UN, which is a different matter.

Douglas

[Tayesin]

One little thing that is usually unseen in these matters, is that there is more money to be made by industry who get the contracts to rebuild than the amount of money that actually goes in to the countries needing aid.  These organizations play a jobs for the boys scenario every time a country needs assistance.  They make mega-bucks out of their helping to rebuild.

Gandalf, you might be very surprised one day to find your statement about Indonesia not having much in the way of US haters come back and bite you.  Here in Australia many people are very aware of the incredible danger that is posed by Indonesia and it's massive military, of which the majority are Muslim, as is the population of Indonesia.  In fact, wise advisers have been telling our government for over 30 years that we need to be aware of what we are helping to create there.

The US has massive numbers of enemies in the world, and millions of them live in Indonesia.  They may be fundamental Muslim, with the concept of Jihad as their preffered means of dealing with what they see as (we westerners) Dogs deserving of death.

I have had a number of friends over the years who have been military people, some have been involved in clandestine actions throughout Indonesia for more than 20 years, in cahoots with the US.  What they have reported to me is mind-boggling.

You will find that there is much, much more than meets the eye, or is ever reported in the US newspapers, as we have seen here in Australia.  The top three world media giants are all Australian born and bred, yet their newpapers, radio and television reports completely different things in different countries, and in this respect it has become very obvious that they too are Players with the elite controllers.

When the Indonesian Parliament was openly discussing the facts of micro-nukes being used in the Bali bombings of a few years ago, and the fact that the the level and make-up of residual radiation pointed squarely to the only place making that particular fuel.... the US/Isreali Negev Desert enrichment facility... we here in Australia and the rest of the world for that matter were not given this important information.  I only happened upon a report of the scientific evidence through my position of president of a small and basically insignificant research group here.  But, the facts remained the same while we all were kept in complete dark about the whole thing.

Be wary of Indonesia, and all the other fundamental muslims around the globe who desperately hate the US for it's powermongering, fingers in every pie, controlling nature and abuse of most other countries it has ever had anything  to do with.

Just MHO.

[Gandalf]

I hear what your saying there Tayesin but is it not the case that we are talking about a group of muslim fanatics, NOT the government OR the people there generelly?

I think we have to be careful in not lumping whole countries into the same category just because it has groups of nutters in it... if that was the case the US would be strung up right away

The Indonesian government is not all that bad is it? or is it?

Douglas

[Nay]

Y'all are doing fine..carry on, I'll just watch from a safe distance.

And yes, it was a gripe and now I'm done..but let me own it at least.

Nay

[LordoftheBunnies]

These articles from this site about sum up my opinion of the matter.

www.counterpunch.org

Too Bush Killing Iraqis
A Shameful Response to Disaster
By DAVE LINDORFF

Word that the U.S. government is offering a paltry $10 million in aid to those countries whose coasts were devastated by tidal waves from the largest earthquake in 40 years should be a national embarrassment. That a nation which can talk casually about $400-$500 billion annual deficits, and about spending upwards of $100 billion a year in sowing destruction in Iraq can't come up with more than pocket change for disaster relief in an event that has displaced over a million people and rocked the earth in its orbit is mind-boggling.

But then, it's important to remember that there are disasters both natural and unnatural, and the American public and its chosen political system have markedly different responses to the two. There is also a different scale of concern for the deaths of Americans and the deaths of foreigners with brown skins.

There is national grief expressed for example, for the 15 Americans killed while serving themselves spaghetti in a military mess tent, while Iraqi men, women and children are being blown away, unremarked, at their dining tables on a daily basis by U.S. bombs and cannon fire.

There is untoward concern about 100 missing Americans in resorts like Phuket, but little anguish over the 45,000 locals swept away by the same sudden flood.

For that matter, such concern as has been expressed in America over the tragic loss of life around the rim of the Indian Ocean this past weekend as a result of a natural disaster stands in marked contrast to the complete lack of concern (much less guilt) expressed about the lost of more than twice that many lives at the hands of American troops in Iraq, where an estimated 100,000 civilians have thus far paid the ultimate price for their country's "liberation."

Surely the world's richest nation could spare a few thousand rescue troops and medical teams and a billion dollars or so to help prevent the inevitable epidemics and starvation that will follow this latest natural catastrophe in one of the world's poorest regions. But then, where would those troops and medics come from? They're busy killing Iraqis and patching up the American wounded in the latest U.S. imperial adventure, and can't be spared for humanitarian gestures.

And where would that $1 billion come from? Wealthy Americans would have to either forgo a few dollars in tax relief next year, or the military in Iraq would have to do without a couple of F-16 fighters.

And yet, if America really wanted to show that it cared about the Third World, and indeed the Muslim world, for that matter, here would be an excellent opportunity to prove it, by providing real , instead of just token assistance to the hard-hit Muslim communities in Bangladesh and Somalia, Indonesia and southern Thailand.

On Christmas Day, President Bush offered up a maudlin, sugar-coated "message of compassion" to the nation, urging the American public to consider the less fortunate. That same day, he offered up the national equivalent of a few surplus soup cans to the victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami.

His words would have seemed more sincere and heartfelt had he offered to apply even some of the tens of millions of dollars that corporations and the wealthy are offering in legal bribes to help pay for his inauguration festivities to relief efforts instead.

We should all be ashamed.


Heartless in Crawford
Bush and Tsunamis
By WALTER BRASCH

On Sunday, Dec. 26, an earthquake-triggered tsunami with an effect of 1,000 miles from its epicenter in the Indian Ocean near Sumatra devastated 12 countries. Within hours, numerous countries and private social service agencies had begun massive relief operations. President George W. Bush, vacationing on his ranch in Crawford, Texas, made no public statements. His press office, however, released a 121-word press expressing the President's "condolences," and that the Bush Administration would provide all "appropriate assistance" to the affected nations. The statement did not directly quote the President. In contrast, German chancellor Gerhard Schröder cut short his vacation to return to Berlin.

On Monday, Bush's deputy press secretary indicated that Bush "received a special briefing" about the tragedy," that the administration's "thoughts and prayers are with all those who are suffering," and that the U.S. "will be a leading partner" in relief operations.

On Tuesday, the President bicycled and continued to clear brush from his ranch. He said nothing to the American public, to the media, or to the international community. However, the deputy press secretary did say that the President was "saddened and has extended his condolences for this terrible tragedy." When challenged as to why the public silence, a White House official bluntly stated, "The President wanted to be fully briefed on our efforts. He didn't want to make a symbolic statement about, 'We feel your pain.'" It was an excuse for why the man who believes he is a "compassionate conservative" once again failed to speak out during yet another extended vacation. More important, it was a disgusting attack upon Bill Clinton who did speak out shortly after the devastation and, when president, was quick to let world leaders know that the United States would provide understanding, sympathy, and supplies for humanitarian relief-not unlike world leaders who were quick to express their outrage and assistance following 9/11, a year into Bush's first term.

That second day after the 9.0 underwater earthquake unleashed more than 30-foot waves of destruction, Jan Egeland, United Nations emergency relief coordinator, bluntly stated that the world's rich nations were normally "stingy" in their response to humanitarian aid. Of the world's 30 richest countries, the United States ranks near the bottom with contributions of 0.14 percent of its gross national product, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (Norway, with 0.92 percent, is the highest.)

"The United States is not stingy," pouted Colin Powell, the outgoing secretary of state. There was no mention that the Bush Administration a week earlier proposed cutting back its contribution to the World Food Bank. Nevertheless, following Egeland's challenge, the United States announced it would donate another $20 million in aid, for a total of $35 million.

By then, Canada, with a population of about 11 percent that of the U.S. and a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) about 6 percent that of the U.S., pledged $33 million. Spain, with a population of about one-seventh that of the U.S. and a GDP about 6 percent that of the U.S., quickly pledged more than $68 million in relief, twice that initially committed by the U.S. Australia, with a population about 7 percent and a GDP about 4 percent of that of the United States, pledged $20 million. Japan, with a population about two-fifths and a GDP about half that of the U.S., pledged at least $40 million; the United Kingdom, with a population of one-fifth and a GDP of about 13 percent of that of the U.S. also pledged at least $40 million. France, with a population about one-fifth that of the U.S. and a GDP about one-tenth that of the U.S., quickly pledged $27 million. Also responding quickly, with statements by their leaders coupled with financial and humanitarian assistance, were dozens of other countries. Israel contributed millions and pledged a 150-member medical team; other countries had already been shipping thousands of tons of relief supplies. International aid organizations believe more than $14 billion will be needed for humanitarian assistance, much of it donated by individuals and corporations.

On Wednesday, the third day after the earthquake and resulting tsunami, with the death toll approaching 70,000, and expected to rise to more than 100,000, with more than two million expected to be homeless, with substantial health and sanitation problems for those who lived, and with millions now questioning why America's president hadn't spoken out or committed more resources, George W. Bush finally held a news conference on his ranch.

"Laura and I, and the American people, are shocked and we are saddened," said the President at the beginning of a 327-word statement that took only about three minutes to deliver. He said that earlier that morning he spoke with the leaders of India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Indonesia, four of the countries hit hardest by the disaster. He then announced American disaster experts were in the affected areas, that he had ordered an aircraft carrier group to divert to the Indian Ocean, a hospital ship, seven water-producing ships, a Marine expeditionary unit and several aircraft to assist relief operations.

With more than 125,000 uniformed military personnel in Iraq, perhaps another 15,000 in Afghanistan, and the Reserves and National Guard stretched so thin that tours of duty in Iraq have been irrevocably extended, the possibility of a massive American presence in the affected countries by anyone other than civilians working for social service agencies is minimal. "We will prevail over this destruction," announced the commander-in-chief who believes he is a wartime president.

The previous year, the U.S. Agency for International Development provided about $2.4 billion for humanitarian relief, much of it for work in Afghanistan and Iraq, the largest contribution of any country in the world. President Bush believes the United States might provide as much as $ 1 billion in cash and in-kind donations (the cost of maintaining the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln in the Indian Ocean is figured into the totals) to assist the nations hit by the worst natural disaster in more than four decades. That $1 billion, if all of it is sent to the affected nations, would be about one-half of one percent of what is planned for the war in Iraq. It was what the President decided would be "appropriate."

Also this one:

Us, Stingy?
It's All Relative
By DAVE LINDORFF

Cost of one F-22 Raptor tactical fighter jet -- $225 million

Cost of the ongoing U.S. war in Iraq--$228 million/day

Amount spent by Kerry and Bush campaigns -- $400 million

U.S. aid to Yushenko camp in recent Ukrainian conflict -- $30+ million

Estimated cost of Bush's Second Inauguration and Ball -- $ 40+ million

Amount of U.S. tax cuts under Bush -- $1 trillion

Cost of the U.S. Iraq War in 2004 -- $147 billion

U.S. reconstruction aid budgeted for Iraq (though never spent!) -- $18 billion

Amount the U.S. initially in aid to Indian Ocean tsunami victims -- $ 10 million

Amount U.S. offered in tsunami aid after being chastised by UN official -- $35 million

[Gandalf]

hard-hit Muslim communities in Bangladesh and Somalia, Indonesia and southern Thailand.


Just though I'd point out that not all the above countries are muslim..

Actually with regards to the Asian disaster, out of the countries mainly affected, Thailand, Sri-lanka, India, Indonesia,  it is only indonesia which is muslim, and moderate muslims at that (small fanatical groups aside)... all the others are Buddhist or Hindu.

Just thought i would be nitpicky, just for the hell of it...
its important though as Bush is talking about how the US is 'helping the muslim world affected'.. but only one of the countries affected is actually an officially muslim country (aside from the african nations also effected to a lessor extent, eg Kenya)...

On a positive note.. the US is helping and so is everyone else.. which has to count for something!

Douglas

[Tayesin]

Hi Gandalf,
You are correct about not lumping whole countries into the same category.  While Indonesia does have various groups with their own allegiances, the population is massive, and so to are the numbers of hard-line Muslim who despise the US's way of doing things in other countries where other Muslim's live.  Because Australia is also involved with the US in some of these countries, we too are hated with a vengeance.

Indonesian media portrays Australians as hateful and extremely racist, even though we have given more financial aid there than we spend on our own country.  

The government of Indonesia is responsible for massive bouts of Genocide in the small countries that make up the whole of Indonesia, which is why Australian soldiers (as peacekeepers) are still in the provinces, years after our own government said we would bring the boys home.

While I don't have a problem with the average Indonesian citizen, I do have concerns for the military's sights on my country.  We spend billions training Indonesian commando's/soldiers in Australia, allow complete access to the workings of our own small military, and then our government goes and removes the Northern Watch that is the only thing we had to warn us of when they were about to invade.

Even worse, this puppet we have as our Prime Minister made a promise to the Australian people that he would speak with the Indonesian government about their intent to develop Nuclear weapons while also building 150 Nuclear Power Stations across the most unstable area on Earth.  He went there and made deals to sell them as much Uranium as we could dig out of the Jabiluka mine, and on his return we were told that another mine was to be started to keep the supply to Indonesia.

When asked if he had sought the information about what was to be done with the depleted Uranium from the reactors (which is usually enriched for weapons), he said, "The opportunity didn't arise."

We know as fact that the Indonesian government has long term goals of a Nuclear arsenal, so that they become the Pacific Super-Power.  It is just a small stretch from there to the idea of "Why should we buy the Uranium from the western dogs when we can easily overcome them and own it for ourselves?"  We already know for the past 20 or so years that the education system in Indonesia has been steadily indoctrinating kids with the conept of Australia being their future homeland.

Yes, the Indonesian government, run by the military and it's long term generals,etc, are a real problem in the years ahead.

And i have gone way off topic here, LOL.  Sorry folks.

[James S]

My wife and I gave money to the Red Cross that will go to help the people affected by this event.

We did not give money to help Muslims or Hindus, Thais, Indonesians or Sri-Lankans. We gave money to help PEOPLE - Fellow humans in dire need!

Mother Earth has just made all terrorist activities in recent times look like a bunch of kids running around with pop-guns. If this tragic and massive loss of lives is the Universe handing the human race a lesson in putting people before nations and politics, then the disturbing observations being made in this thread are showing me that our nations and politicians have learned absolutely nothing.

Let us NOT follow their self-absorbed examples. Nations should never be put before people.

Regards,
James.

[Gandalf]

Amen  to that, as they say... by the way Tayesin_

What is the deal with Indonesia anyway? its officially a muslim country but not an islamic state like the middle east is?

I was always told that it was a 'muslim democracy' (one of only 2 or 3)and is sometimes used to show that islam CAN be compatible with democracy..

The problem i have with that is that the other main country that is touted this way, Turkey, although on the surface a democracy, is actually run by the military... the governmet and parliament basically go along with what the army guys want...

I wonder if Indonesia is the same?

In which case with islamic countries you've got two extremes.. either fundamentalist islamic states rule through sharia law.... or pretend democracies run by a secular military... either extreme is bad..

What about Malaysia... is that muslim too? I'm sure they are a 3rd 'democratic muslim' nation but they are democratic for real..
correct me on any of these issues... im not sure and interested to know..

Cheers,
Douglas

[blackgen]

You know, as an outsider, I'll tell you.. the countries involved are not anti US as has been noted. however there are other reasons why US is hated by so much of the world.

The problem is that the US political administration (not the common people mind you.. they are some of the nicest people) thinks that it is its job to interfere in every event that takes place in the world. Invading Iraq was one of the most disgusting acts that the US could ever do (you might differ... but this is my opinion). The Vietnam war with blatant disregard for human rights.. these acts are etched in people's mind. Tacit support to Israel in the Palestine conflict.. I could go on.. but I guess you get the point.

However, I increasingly find that even common people in the US think that the US is fit to be the undisputed controller of the world. Taking democracy to a global level, if a country or a group of people want to have a dictatorship, it is upto them and none of the US's concern. Of course, power has always been misused and this has always caused antagonism from time immemorial. It is this kind of antagonism that ultimately leads to the dethroning of those in power completing the cycle of power.

[RT]

You know, as an outsider, I'll tell you.. the countries involved are not anti US as has been noted. however there are other reasons why US is hated by so much of the world.

The problem is that the US political administration (not the common people mind you.. they are some of the nicest people) thinks that it is its job to interfere in every event that takes place in the world. Invading Iraq was one of the most disgusting acts that the US could ever do (you might differ... but this is my opinion). The Vietnam war with blatant disregard for human rights.. these acts are etched in people's mind. Tacit support to Israel in the Palestine conflict.. I could go on.. but I guess you get the point.

However, I increasingly find that even common people in the US think that the US is fit to be the undisputed controller of the world. Taking democracy to a global level, if a country or a group of people want to have a dictatorship, it is upto them and none of the US's concern. Of course, power has always been misused and this has always caused antagonism from time immemorial. It is this kind of antagonism that ultimately leads to the dethroning of those in power completing the cycle of power.

We the people in the US are controlled by the Government, lobbyist's and corporations. People think that the US is a democracy but it is not we are more of a republic.  We do have one thing in the US and that is fairly good individual rights, but these seem to be eroding quickly too.  

Most people in the US don't have time to think about controlling the rest of the world they are hard at work trying to make ends meet or just to pay for bills, food, and high taxes that the government misuses anyhow.  Most people in the US are extremely frustrated at the state of our say in the government.  Almost all the decisions being made are by the Lobbyist's in Washington DC by bribing the politicians, thus leaving the common mans voice out.

Big corporations and the world cartel that control most of our plant are using countries, religions, races against each other to keep things in a chaotic state, this way they can control people that are scared, fearful, hungry or in debt.

The people in the US do not have the ultimate decision when it comes to voting or policy, so what do we do??

Got me.


RT

[blackgen]

chill RT... I got you and can kinda relate to it.  

[RT]

chill RT... I got you and can kinda relate to it.  

Sorry the Got me. Should have had a ?   Like "Got me?"    


RT

[kenshin]

the scary thing is though if indoneasia did indead declare war on australia, we would be on our own in the pacific. New zealand has pretty much dropped most of its military due to a theory that any country that wants to get them has to go through australia first (a good theory with the only flaw being if australia turned on them which is something they haven't though of and any time we run out of room in australia and desperatly need to expand similar to japan during ww2 it would be them we could easily target without much loss of our own life)

but john howard was also an idiot not to sign that agreement that all the asian countries signed not to long ago out of all the countries that were there, john howard who was representing australia refused to sign which ticked some of the asian coutnries off a bit, yet at the same time he is giving indonesia the ability to develop nuclear weapons. we are seriously screwed if such an event did happen

[Birm]

The problem i have with that is that the other main country that is touted this way, Turkey, although on the surface a democracy, is actually run by the military... the governmet and parliament basically go along with what the army guys want...

Hi there everyone,

As a Turkish Citizen i have to clarify one thing here. What Gandalf says here is totally wrong. Turkish Democracy is far better than even some of the European Countries...

Just a quick reminder:

The Turkish Army wanted to be a side in the Iraq war but the parliament rejected so that didn't happen. Remember that USA government was shocked after the decision. As Donald Rumsfeld said : "We respect the decision of the Turkish Parliament"

Regards from a Turkish Citizen,

[Gandalf]

Hey Birm_ Apologies if the info I posted was out of date.

Cheers,
Dougie

[kalratri]

well, since we're off topic ... I don't think most people seem to mind non-religious based governments, except when they start becoming two-faced...i.e. they will want religious freedom from other countries when their own countries don't allow a similar freedom...and most of the religious fundamentalism these days is being paid for by Saudi Arabia...

I'm not sure if it's just a rumor, but I did hear that non-Islamic religions are not allowed to be practiced in Saudi Arabia, and temples and churches are forbidden.  

Just recently the Pope allowed a mosque in his country, but Saudi Arabia didn't allow any catholic church in Saudi Arabia near it's holiest sites.

Why should other countries allow Islam to flourish in the relative freedom of democratic nations while Islamic nations, whose fundamentalists are paid for by Saudi Arabia, don't allow religious freedom to those of other religions in their own countries (with a few exceptions)?

[cristaphin]

I'm not trying to be snarky, but I'm wondering,  when the US has needed help, who has helped America out?  (I'm not talking about a war)

[coolbreeze]

My heart and prayers go out to all those affected by this disaster. I wish I could go help, but its just not possible at this point in time.

As for the US, our government is one of the most biased governments in the world, in my opinion. Lately it seems like they just do what they want.
Invading Iraq was deplorable and absolutely DISGUSTING! I understand that Hussein needed to go, but they didn't have UN approval. It seems like the USA just does what they want. I personally think the government is getting a little big for their britches. They say they give the most money for relief, but I believe it is only a small percent of what they could give...

The problem is that the US political administration (not the common people mind you.. they are some of the nicest people) thinks that it is its job to interfere in every event that takes place in the world. Invading Iraq was one of the most disgusting acts that the US could ever do (you might differ... but this is my opinion). The Vietnam war with blatant disregard for human rights.. these acts are etched in people's mind. Tacit support to Israel in the Palestine conflict.. I could go on.. but I guess you get the point.

I completely agree with this. It is NOT their job to butt into everything just because they happen to be one of the most powerful countries.