| Homestar Runner Wiki Forum http://forum.hrwiki.org/ |
|
| Tsunami Relief vs. Katrina Relief http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4810 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | IantheGecko [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Tsunami Relief vs. Katrina Relief |
My mom & I were discussing this over dinner tonight. Why did we send so much money & supplies to southeast Asia for tsunami relief, yet no foreign countries have given anything to the United States for relief from Hurricane Katrina? I'm convinced that we no longer live in a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" world; the US is practicing Agapē, unconditional, self-sacrificing, actional, volitional, thoughtful love. Why won't other nations do the same thing when we're in the aftermath of a natural disaster, the worst in United States history‽ |
|
| Author: | StrongRad [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Tsunami Relief vs. Katrina Relief |
JeanLeGekko wrote: My mom & I were discussing this over dinner tonight. Why did we send so much money & supplies to southeast Asia for tsunami relief, yet no foreign countries have given anything to the United States for relief from Hurricane Katrina? I'm convinced that we no longer live in a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" world; the US is practicing Agapē, unconditional, self-sacrificing, actional, volitional, thoughtful love. Why won't other nations do the same thing when we're in the aftermath of a natural disaster, the worst in United States history‽
We've always done that.. We help our allies, friends, neighbors, strangers, and even enemies.. It's not totally true that foreign nations haven't offered help.. Just that we haven't taken it, yet.. Right now, much of the criticism of the way this has been handled is due to the situation in New Orleans.. It's not that the aid isn't available, it just that the basic infrastructure (like highways, rails, etc) is GONE.. This is disater on an unprecidented scale, and it's just REALLY hard if not impossible to plan for this. In areas where aid can be gotten in, it's getting there. NASA's Stennis Space Flight Center in Mississippi is serving as a staging base for FEMA's relief effort. FEMA is buying and renting ships to use as temporary housing for both their people and for the homeless..Things, as bad as they are, are going almost as smoothly as possible. As for getting aid from other people, a lot of people, myself included, called Bill O'Reilly a nutjob when he said that American's shouldn't expect to see a penny of Tsunami relief reciprocated when America needed help.. Sadly, I have to give old Bill a point on this one... But then I take it away.. [StrongRad reverts to his redneck, southern boy self] You know, I was brought up to do nice things for people cus it was the right thing to do. Not because I was expecting something in return. If you get something in return, that's great, but it shouldn't be your motivation for giving to help those who are less fortunate than you[/revert] Wow.. I should do that more often. |
|
| Author: | Trev-MUN [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Er, actually ... Quote: Over 50 countries have pledged money or other assistance to recovery from the hurricane including inter alia Cuba and Venezuela despite differences with Washington; Sri Lanka which is still recovering from the Tsunami; Russia whose initial offer to send a relief plane and helicopter was declined by the U.S. State Department; and Dominica one of the smallest countries in the world by any measure.
From Wikipedia. Also, look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio ... ne_Katrina The U.S. government initially refused offers but now it looks like most are being accepted. Canada has the Heavy Urban Search and Rescue team aiding the National Guard and Navy, for example (thank you, Canada ;_; ). The Russian offer mentioned in that quote has since been accepted according to my link. I think as far as a disaster affecting a single nation goes, Hurricane Katrina is on the level with the Indian Ocean Tsunami--the amount of damage and lives lost in the U.S. is comparable to what many countries, excluding Indonesia (which lost 140,000 people ... so far our estimated dead is 10,000+) suffered from the tidal wave. |
|
| Author: | King Nintendoid [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 2:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hmm.. I didn't donate to that tsunami stuff because I KNEW the money wouldn't go anywhere, because you just can't control the flow of currency in a third world country. Even though some aspects of the nation suggest otherwise, the US is NOT a third world country, and so I see no problem in donating some wad. EDIT: The Dutch sent help even though we weren't actually asked to do so. So don't gimme the "The international community doesn't liiiiiiike us  " stuf.
|
|
| Author: | ramrod [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, although some countries our helping us out, others don't, by using this comparison: A person's house burns down in a fire, Bill Gates, being a charitable person, gives them money to help rebuild it. Sometime later Bill Gate's house too burns down. But Bill Gates is the richest person in the world, so people don't donate anything to him, because they believe that he has all the money that he needs to rebuild. To a point, they are right. We are the richest and most powerful country in the world. Sometimes we don't need aid, but in something like this, we need as much help as we can get. |
|
| Author: | IantheGecko [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
King Nintendoid wrote: Hmm.. I didn't donate to that tsunami stuff because I KNEW the money wouldn't go anywhere, because you just can't control the flow of currency in a third world country. Even though some aspects of the nation suggest otherwise, the US is NOT a third world country, and so I see no problem in donating some wad.
Have you SEEN the pictures of New Orleans & the surrounding area since? It looks like a Third World country to me. |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah, but KN's right. Third world countries very often have loose laws and poor channels through which such aid can go. In fact, in many third world countries, more of the relief funds go to pay bribes and "administrative costs" than to actual relief. Here in the US, we have pretty tight control over charity operations, and we just wouldn't stand for some backwater hick trying to cop bribes from people attempting to offer assistance to people in need. |
|
| Author: | Snailmail [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Didymus wrote: Yeah, but KN's right. Third world countries very often have loose laws and poor channels through which such aid can go. In fact, in many third world countries, more of the relief funds go to pay bribes and "administrative costs" than to actual relief. Here in the US, we have pretty tight control over charity operations, and we just wouldn't stand for some backwater hick trying to cop bribes from people attempting to offer assistance to people in need.
I agree, Don't you think I agree? I agree! Really. That's true more of the relief funds do go to pay bribes and "administrative costs" than to actual relief. |
|
| Author: | What's Her Face [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The EU governments say they will give aid. But as regards ordinary foreigners giving aid, the NGOs first need to set up public appeals. I've not seen any campaigns on this side of the Atlantic - and that would mean that the NGOs don't think public aid is needed in this case. And from what I heard on the news, and from people who work in relief and know what they're talking about, it doesn't seem to be foreign aid the victims need most, but rather a more appropriate and competent response from their authorities. There were plenty of resources for them, but they were not used properly. I hear that Alabama was short 6,000 of their 18,000 National Guardsmen, because they were all in Iraq fighting someone else's war. And evacutation began five days too late - no apparent reason. And the fact that the troops and police were ordered first to fire on people looting FOOD, rather than to give them supplies or evacutate them. It can be well argued that the governments of the tsunami-striken countries didn't respond appropriately either, but they had a lot less means and resources than the US. |
|
| Author: | What's Her Face [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
EDIT: sorry - double post |
|
| Author: | StrongRad [ Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
What's her face wrote: I hear that Alabama was short 6,000 of their 18,000 National Guardsmen, because they were all in Iraq fighting someone else's war. And evacutation began five days too late - no apparent reason. And the fact that the troops and police were ordered first to fire on people looting FOOD, rather than to give them supplies or evacutate them.
I don't know that any of that is true.. Especially the 5 days late thing.. On 26 August, 3 days before landfall, forecasts had this thing hitting everywhere from Texas to the Florida Panhandle.. Evacuating ALL of those people, even just those "at risk" (if you define an "at risk" category) would be a massive undertaking, and create a logistics nightmare (worse than the current situation, at least in terms of manpower and equipment). 5 days out is asking quite a lot, in terms of a forecast.. Even worse, is forecasting further out that that, which is what would have been required to start alabama evacs 5 days before they did.. I don't know that it's a fact that troops were given orders to kill looters.. I DO know that, if I was being shot at by looters, I would probably return fire, cus they're creating a dangerous situation for everyone else.. As for people taking food, well, most have no problem with that, I mean the food is gonna ruin anyway.. As for people taking guns, jewelry, tvs, electronics, ets, they're nothing more than common theives, but they also represent a minority of the looters (or at least I would like to think they do).. |
|
| Author: | What's Her Face [ Mon Sep 05, 2005 12:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here are some sources for my info: The news sources I saw that reported the shoot-to-kill policy were the the Daily Mail, AFP, and Bloomburg. Now, it's understandable to use force to control a dangerous mob, but the question does remain why these troops were not providing relief, as well as law and order. This question hasn't been answered satisfactorily yet. Regarding the five-day-late responce, I meant that the authorities were slow to react to the aftermath, not in the predicting of the damage before the hurricane arrived. AFP and Reuters reported that the first emergency relief and evacuation convoys arrived in New Orleans this Saturday, where 10,000 people were eventually evacuated and the superbowl stadium cleared. So that's five days after the actual hurricane ended. But I did make a mistake - it's the Louisana National Guard who are short 5000 in Iraq, says Daily Mail columnist. This cronology of events by the BBC is useful too - in that, it's seen that our friends with the shoot-to-kill-ask-questions-later mandate arrived before the aid did. I do see your point that the shoot-to-kill policy may have been prudent in some cases - but they did seem quicker to order this measure rather than to secure the actual relief efforts. These things take time no doubt - but five days? Why was it more of a priority to protect rich businesses from looting, that the police and troops were protecting them and not doing enough to give the people water and food while they were still stuck there? We don't know all the details yet, I know. And it's easy for me to wag my finger from thousands of miles away. But in a part of the US so prone to violent storms, their response just should have been more people-first. But I'll TOASTPAINT myself now. |
|
| Author: | Trev-MUN [ Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, one thing's for sure, compared to what happened during the Indian Ocean Tsunami, government response to Katrina's effects was sluggish. Indonesia's government, which was (is?) under political stress, knew what was going on and provided relief two days after the disaster. It took FEMA seven days to get the relief trucks to New Orleans. FEMA knew of the situation by September 1st. Therefore I don't think the problems relief efforts are having are due to lack of manpower over Iraq and Afghanistan, though for issues like the National Guard it is a factor. As far as the law enforcement situation ... I doubt, especially from what I've seen on the news and elsewhere, that the police would actually stop anyone looting for food. From what I also understand, during times of emergency, the police does have the power to take essential supplies from stores to aid relief efforts (I saw this happen on TV). They'd probably focus on anyone who took this breach to, say, loot jewlery or electronics. Especially sinced there are armed vagabonds in New Orleans. From what I heard (but I can't confirm this) the New Orleans prison facilities had to let go of the prisoners because they could no longer keep them under their control--what a disaster... |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The reports I have are that the looters themselves were armed and dangerous, and were actually attempting to hinder relief efforts by taking pot shots at helicopters and trucks. I say the punks deserve to be shot. |
|
| Author: | StrongRad [ Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Didymus wrote: The reports I have are that the looters themselves were armed and dangerous, and were actually attempting to hinder relief efforts by taking pot shots at helicopters and trucks. I say the punks deserve to be shot.
Heh Heh... Go get 'em Didy!.. Actually, I kinda thought the same thing when they had to suspend the evacuation cus of the shooters. I was thinking get some delta operators in blackhawks, have them take out anyone that was shooting... Seriously.. THAT is part of the reason it took so long to evac... That, and the fact that the roads in are pretty much gone.. It's not FEMA's fault things have moved so slowly.. People need to understand that. I mean, this was a disaster on an unprecidented scale. They were not prepared, but there is little that can be done to prepare for something this big. Gah! now that the people ARE gone, they're trying to fix stuff, and they're coming under fire.. People have gone mad! |
|
| Author: | What's Her Face [ Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The countries which have pledged aid to the States includes Sri Lanka. Even Cuba and Afghanistan are among those giving aid. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|