aSic
application specific
Premium
join:2001-05-17
Wakulla, FL
clubs:
| reply to navalpatel
Re: So?
It hasnt been our internet for many years now.
The issue now is if we (the US) keep doing stuff like this, it wouldnt surprise me in a few years that the rest of the world just up and "cuts us off" for something similar. :/
--
Teamwork is a lot of people doing what I say. | irc.removed.us #dslr | Starband SRS m360 GE4 C4/S69 | Win2003/DualNIC | 802.11b |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| said by aSic  :it wouldnt surprise me in a few years that the rest of the world just up and "cuts us off" for something similar. :/ Let them try, we'll see how well "the rest of the world" responds to the next major natural disaster.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
 ·LINGO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | said by pnh102 : said by aSic :it wouldnt surprise me in a few years that the rest of the world just up and "cuts us off" for something similar. :/ Let them try, we'll see how well "the rest of the world" responds to the next major natural disaster. "The rest of the world" responded quite generously to the most recent major natural disaster.
Australia: $764 million
Germany: $661 million
Japan: $500 million
Kinda dwarfs the US contribution, eh?
My guess is, "the rest of the world" would get along just fine without the US. |
|
noone1
join:2004-06-04
Nashua, NH
| said by JTRockville :"The rest of the world" responded quite generously to the most recent major natural disaster. Australia: $764 million Germany: $661 million Japan: $500 million Kinda dwarfs the US contribution, eh? My guess is, "the rest of the world" would get along just fine without the US. And how much did the US military spend in helping move aid and in rescue missions, etc? If you put a price tag on that, it alone would dwarf all of the formentioned contributions; let alone the dollars we gave out in government and private donations and no other country in the world has the ability to react as quickly as we did. Simple fact, more dollars flow out of the US for outside aid, education, housing, food, etc to outside countries (beyond disaster help) then the top 10 nations combine. Yet this might change, the US is turning isoltionistic, and the perceived (probably justifiably) thanklessness and near slander by many is not helping. The rest of the world would not get along just fine if the US closed up and became ultra isolationists. In fact, the world economy would collapse into utter ruin. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| You are 100% correct, without our troops again making the sacrifice to go and get all the other aid flowing many more people would be dying because of the disaster. You didn't see any other countries step up and actually put the men and women on the ground who could get the ball rolling. Again, we save the day.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
noone1
join:2004-06-04
Nashua, NH
| said by pnh102 :You are 100% correct, without our troops again making the sacrifice to go and get all the other aid flowing many more people would be dying because of the disaster. You didn't see any other countries step up and actually put the men and women on the ground who could get the ball rolling. Again, we save the day. Actualy, there were several county's militaries that did help out, just thier numbers were very small but usualy highly train specialists. Most militaries, as a whole, are not as professional as the US nor do they have the heavy lift capablities nor the dollar resources. |
|
claudeo
join:2000-02-23
Redmond, WA
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 : You didn't see any other countries step up and actually put the men and women on the ground who could get the ball rolling. If you did not see them it is because you were only watching US TV and only reading US newspapers. Duh. |
|
jsouth
Jsouth
join:2000-12-12
Wichita, KS
| reply to JTRockville
Seems to me you spoke too soon. The US is going to double their contributions up to around $650 million in aid.
»www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/0···dex.html
That plus the military contributions put any countries efforts to shame. |
|
claudeo
join:2000-02-23
Redmond, WA
1 edit | As far as I understand, the $650 million does include the military contributions. And probably some will be expended through contracts to the usual defense contractors.
Back to the main topic, historically freedom has been promoted by promoting the channels of free speech, not by shutting them down. This looks like a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
·LINGO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·surpasshosting
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 :You are 100% correct, without our troops again making the sacrifice to go and get all the other aid flowing many more people would be dying because of the disaster. You didn't see any other countries step up and actually put the men and women on the ground who could get the ball rolling. Again, we save the day. We weren't the only country to contributed people, equipment, and money.
Even with our recently updated total of $650 (military+dollars), we were third. If we compare our per capita contribution to that of other countries, I doubt we'd come out that high. I'm not trying to diminish our contribution, but we weren't the most generous.
I certainly wouldn't advocate that other countries "cut us off", but like aSic , it wouldn't surprise me. |
|
noone1
join:2004-06-04
Nashua, NH
| said by JTRockville :Even with our recently updated total of $650 (military+dollars), we were third. If we compare our per capita contribution to that of other countries, I doubt we'd come out that high. I'm not trying to diminish our contribution, but we weren't the most generous. How is it your are not diminishing our contributions? The whole per capita misinformation typical of the wealth redistributionists is completely about trying to -minimize- what our government and people have given in an attempt to say "They gave more then you."
You said prior...
said by JTRockville : ... Kinda dwarfs the US contribution, eh? My guess is, "the rest of the world" would get along just fine without the US. Again, you are trying to diminish our contributions by saying "the rest of the world would get along fine without the US." The $550 to $650 mill from the US gov and people does -not- include the millitary assistance of over 12,000 personnel, 21 ships, and multitude of cago planes and helicopters. Also, 20% or so of the cost the UN is facing with the effort is paid for by our country.
Also, lets add some perspective here. Simple fact, more dollars flow out of the US for outside aid, education, housing, food, etc to outside countries (beyond disaster help) then the top 10 nations combine. |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
·LINGO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·surpasshosting
·Verizon FIOS
| said by noone1 : said by JTRockville :Even with our recently updated total of $650 (military+dollars), we were third. If we compare our per capita contribution to that of other countries, I doubt we'd come out that high. I'm not trying to diminish our contribution, but we weren't the most generous. How is it your are not diminishing our contributions? The whole per capita misinformation typical of the wealth redistributionists is completely about trying to -minimize- what our government and people have given in an attempt to say "They gave more then you." Other countries did give more than us! So if we'd given nothing, the rest of the would would have compensated. Sure, we gave a lot. But we need to keep our generosity in perspective.
Just a hunch, but I don't think the rest of the world believes they're as indebted to us, as we'd like to think. Which is why I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the world "cut us off". |
|
noone1
join:2004-06-04
Nashua, NH
1 edit | said by JTRockville : Other countries did give more than us! So if we'd given nothing, the rest of the would would have compensated. Sure, we gave a lot. But we need to keep our generosity in perspective. Just a hunch, but I don't think the rest of the world believes they're as indebted to us, as we'd like to think. Which is why I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the world "cut us off". 1. In the first critical two weeks, it was the US military that shouldered the burden. Let me get this through to you, no other country in the world has the capacity to do what we did in the first two weeks. It required a sinlge, unified force that was already cohesive, not a small force from multiple countries with different training, languages, tactics, command chains, radio frequences, etc. There is/are no country(ies) that could have compensated.
2. I never said we were the most generous for this one event, I said we are, by the far, most generous overall.
3. The rest of the world has cut us off, they are either indifferent or like leaches to us.
"Nations do not have friends, they have interests." DeGaulle
There is nothing wrong with point three. You can please some of the people, some of the time, but you cant please all of the people, all of the time. |
|
