We win at charity!

[seinfeldrules]

Likewise, you can't use charity as political leverage or whatnot.

Then dont bitch when we dont give billions of dollars to every poor nation on earth.
Dont bitch that we dont invade Sudan.
Dont bitch that we spend money on our military.
Etc. Etc.

I think the US would be better off spending money to fix our own problems instead of spending it on others, based upon reaction to our donations. We give money, its not enough. We increase that, then its all because of some imagined contest. Its a no win with you people.

Theyre bitching about that you treat it like a contest...

Is it just me, or did the UN guy start all of this? The US was giving billions of dollars away even before he opened his mouth.

 

[Death.Trap]

Then dont bitch when we dont give billions of dollars to every poor nation on earth.
Dont bitch that we dont invade Sudan.
Dont bitch that we spend money on our military.
Etc. Etc.

I think the US would be better off spending money to fix our own problems instead of spending it on others, based upon reaction to our donations. We give money, its not enough. We increase that, then its all because of some imagined contest. Its a no win with you people.


Is it just me, or did the UN guy start all of this? The US was giving billions of dollars away even before he opened his mouth.

It's really pointless to argue about something like this. Because no matter what happens, or what the US does; some people are going to find some reason to bash us to hell. It's really amazing, near 150 THOUSAND people are dead. 150,000. And people are bashing us because we apparently don't give enough. By whose standards, might I ask? Is there an international law saying that we have to give anything at all?

Where is it written that a nations generosity is meassured by percent of GDP. If europe wants to meassure the amount they give that way, I'm all for it. But they have no right to bash us for not meassuring up to how they think we should be. How much money they think we should give. We'll give as much as we damn well please. As much as WE deem necessary to the relief effort.


Like I said earlier, it's impossible to please everybody. If your the US, it's damn near impossible to please anybody. 150 thousand dead, we give money, and get bashed for it. What the hell is wrong with the world?

 

[CptStern]

nowhere does he specifically mention the US ...some of you are blowing this way out of porportion. To those that say that the US is often the target of global scrutiny ...do you blame us? you illegaly invaded and systematically destroyed a country based on false pretenses! You have a long way to go to earn back global trust.

...but that's completely meaningless to the victems of the tsunami. The issue isnt about how much each country gives ..it's about helping people in need ..everything else is just needless lipservice and political posturing

 

[seinfeldrules]

nowhere does he specifically mention the US ...some of you are blowing this way out of porportion. To those that say that the US is often the target of global scrutiny ...do you blame us? you illegaly invaded and systematically destroyed a country based on false pretenses! You have a long way to go to earn back global trust.

And then we give 350$ million in less than 2 days and donate 15$ billion to AIDS. False pretenses? Sorry, but do you realize that the amount of people killed by this tsunami pales in comparision to the amount of people Saddam killed. Yes, I blame you. There will one day be a day when the US doesnt give back to the world, because people like you pushed us away. When that day comes, I dont expect for you to come clamoring for our help when a natural disaster hits your area.

 

[CptStern]

And then we give 350$ million in less than 2 days and donate 15$ billion to AIDS.

while the aids donation is indeed commendable it hasnt been approved yet so it's not set in stone ..as I said before: the US has a long way in making amends

False pretenses?

yes, unless that is you have some proof of saddam's WMD

Sorry, but do you realize that the amount of people killed by this tsunami pales in comparision to the amount of people Saddam killed.

the US had a hand in that ..they almost matched saddam's barbarity ...except the US' toll was mostly on the civilian populace, whereas a large percentage of saddam's victems were Iranian soldiers

There will one day be a day when the US doesnt give back to the world, because people like you pushed us away. When that day comes, I dont expect for you to come clamoring for our help when a natural disaster hits your area.

we dont want the kind of "help" you give

 

[seinfeldrules]

while the aids donation is indeed commendable it hasnt been approved yet so it's not set in stone ..as I said before: the US has a long way in making amends

To who? You? We need not make ammends for people such as yourself.

yes, unless that is you have some proof of saddam's WMD

It was a pretty obvious intel failure, but still, I dont see anyone hating the fact that Saddam is out of power, except maybe you.

the US had a hand in that ..they almost matched saddam's barbarity ...except the US' toll was mostly on the civilian populace, whereas a large percentage of saddam's victems were Iranian soldiers

More than 200,000 Iraqis vanished under Saddam's rule, and that is a conservative estimate.

we dont want the kind of "help" you give

Sure, lets withdraw the 350$million and 15$billion going to AIDS. I'm sure you Canadians will pick up the slack.... Mehhhh on second thought...

 

[CptStern]

To who? You? We need not make ammends for people such as yourself.

people such as myself are the majority outside of the US ..seriously I dont know of one person who thinks the US should be in iraq

It was a pretty obvious intel failure, but still, I dont see anyone hating the fact that Saddam is out of power, except maybe you.

nope, I wanted him gone way before this war ..in fact he would have been taken out a long time ago if not for US meddling

More than 200,000 Iraqis vanished under Saddam's rule, and that is a conservative estimate.

I for one never disputed that fact, saddam was a tyrant and a butcher but it was all fine and dandy when he was an ally to the west ..see the difference between you and I is that I dont wear my nationalism like a badge of honour like you do ..if my country screws up I'm usualy highly critical

Sure, lets withdraw the 350$million and 15$billion going to AIDS. I'm sure you Canadians will pick up the slack.... Mehhhh on second thought...

canada is/has donated to many worthy causes ...but that's besides the point ...a lifting of a ban on generic drugs sold to poor african countries would be a huge step to the already promised 15 billion ....my point is who cares what each country contributes? as long as they do ...politics have no place in this

 

[seinfeldrules]

canada is/has donated to many worthy causes ...but that's besides the point ...a lifting of a ban on generic drugs sold to poor african countries would be a huge step to the already promised 15 billion ....my point is who cares what each country contributes? as long as they do ...politics have no place in this

If you dont care, then no more bitching about how little or much we give. No more whining that we actually have a military to spend money on.

I is that I dont wear my nationalism like a badge of honour like you do ..if my country screws up I'm usualy highly critical

Sorry for loving the country I live in. I like Bush, but I love the US.

people such as myself are the majority outside of the US ..seriously I dont know of one person who thinks the US should be in iraq

Then again, how would those people respond to Saddam's butchery?

 

[Absinthe]

Then again, how would those people respond to Saddam's butchery?

You mean if they were in USA's shoes?

Who knows. Maybe they would have been up front about a humanitarian cause as opposed to dancing their way around issues such as WMD's, terrorist connections, and direct threats to their homelands. Maybe they wouldn't have.

I'm not going to judge them on hypotheticals.

 

[phantomdesign]

I had to laugh when I saw something like "UN raises 500 million in pledges." In world-money figures, that's shit change. How many billions are we spending in Iraq?

 

[CptStern]

I had to laugh when I saw something like "UN raises 500 million in pledges." In world-money figures, that's shit change. How many billions are we spending in Iraq?

as if anyone asked you to "help" ...you destroyed Iraq, you rebuild it ...simple as that

 

[KoreBolteR]

as if anyone asked you to "help" ...you destroyed Iraq, you rebuild it ...simple as that

saddam was a tyrant, and the country was being "raped" under his power. Something like this had to happen to free iraqis in years to come... otherwise saddams sons wud have carried on robbing the money.. and saddams sons children etc.
we have to make sacrifices to make the world better.. sadly

 

[CptStern]

saddam was a tyrant, and the country was being "raped" under his power. Something like this had to happen to free iraqis in years to come... otherwise saddams sons wud have carried on robbing the money.. and saddams sons children etc.
we have to make sacrifices to make the world better.. sadly

then why did you support him for decades? why did you turn a blind eye to his atrocities for over 20 years when he was an "ally" and only now call him a tyrant? because now it suits you? Why did you go out of your way to ensure that saddam wouldnt be charged with crimes against humanity when he was an ally? the further you dig the more you'll realise the US has never cared for the welfare of the iraqi people

let's try to stay on topic


it's really annoying that so many americans are taking offense from this perceived "insult" ...he was referring to the WEST, not america ..hey I'm canadian and I'm part of the "west" ...I dont feel even the slightest annoyed with the comment. It's just another jab at the UN

 

[KoreBolteR]

then why did you support him for decades? why did you turn a blind eye to his atrocities for over 20 years when he was an "ally" and only now call him a tyrant? because now it suits you? Why did you go out of your way to ensure that saddam wouldnt be charged with crimes against humanity when he was an ally? the further you dig the more you'll realise the US has never cared for the welfare of the iraqi people

let's try to stay on topic


it's really annoying that so many americans are taking offense from this perceived "insult" ...he was referring to the WEST, not america ..hey I'm canadian and I'm part of the "west" ...I dont feel even the slightest annoyed with the comment. It's just another jab at the UN

did i say i was annoyed? and im from the west...(UK)
but now saddam is taken out of power im happy, why are you not happy that "the Evil tyrant" is out of power, or jus enjoy america-bashing constantly.

 

[Kangy]

Because there are things worse thanthe Evil Tyrant created by getting him out in the first place.

 

[seinfeldrules]

then why did you support him for decades? why did you turn a blind eye to his atrocities for over 20 years when he was an "ally" and only now call him a tyrant?

We supported him for less than a decade, during the period of the Iran Iraq war. Other than that, we, unlike you, have opposed him. We proved this by liberating Kuwait, a war which you opposed for some reason.

it's really annoying that so many americans are taking offense from this perceived "insult"

Why shouldnt we be? We spend billions on charity and it still isnt enough? Come on now.

 

[CptStern]

We supported him for less than a decade, during the period of the Iran Iraq war. Other than that, we, unlike you, have opposed him. We proved this by liberating Kuwait, a war which you opposed for some reason.

check your facts saddam and cia go back as far as 1959

Why shouldnt we be? We spend billions on charity and it still isnt enough? Come on now.

I'm not insulted, why should you be? it wasnt solely directed at you but us all

 

[seinfeldrules]

check your facts saddam and cia go back as far as 1959

One, singular website proves nothing.

I'm not insulted, why should you be? it wasnt solely directed at you but us all

Dont blame the ones who need not take the blame.

 

[Absinthe]

but now saddam is taken out of power im happy, why are you not happy that "the Evil tyrant" is out of power, or jus enjoy america-bashing constantly.

I do not have a problem with a humanitarian cause. But I do have a problem with one when it's so horribly flawed and misguided. First they lied (or majorly screwed up) about the WMD's, then they lied (or majorly screwed up) when it came to terrorist connections, they scared the American people shitless with the idea that Iraq was a direct threat to the United States, they entered it without an up-to-date attack plan, they had no plan for post-war Iraq during the invasion, we needlessly killed Iraqi civilians, we wasted a lot of good US troops for a cause that turned out to be a sham, and turned the country into a terrorist playground. Never mind that we are so eager to just race along the process of rebuilding the country (undoubtedly in an effort to raise the homeland's opinion of the travesty), resulting in a flawed and confusing mess thanks to iron-fisted US-imposed deadlines that will never change regardless of the fact that Iraq is just not ****ing ready yet. We still have people dying over there on a daily basis, and yet we still feel the urge to play it up as an A-OK situation.

"There is no insurgency! I assure you that they are all dead! We have crushed them with the almighty power of Jesus!" </iraqiinfominister>

Then, of course, when both the WMD's and terrorist connections don't turn up... DOH! Well, all ain't so bad. Just repeat the word "Freedom" a couple of times, wave the American flag a bit, and then rip it off of its pole so you can whipe your ass of all the bullshit you subjected the world and your country to.

This is not just an insult to my intelligence. It's an insult to the American people, the troops, and the civilians over there.

I guess I could also go on about how the decision to go to war was one of the last thing's the United States needed during its time of economic weakness and the hunt for bin Laden. But whatever. Somebody always justifies it.

 

[seinfeldrules]

DOH! Well, all ain't so bad. Just repeat the word "Freedom" a couple of times, wave the American flag a bit, and then rip it off of its pole so you can whipe your ass of all the bullshit you subjected the world and your country to.

Put yourself in the life of an Iraqi citizen and say that.

 

[TheAmazingRando]

Iraq has oil

I need oil

We take that oil

I'm happy

 

[Edcrab]

nope, I wanted him gone way before this war ..in fact he would have been taken out a long time ago if not for US meddling

Just to fling a throwaway comment at that statement- the US may have greatly aided the mans original rise to power, but it still beggars belief that the UN and the other Arab states wanted the man left in control following the Gulf War. If only someone had told them what'd happen in the future, maybe the idiots would've dropped their over-concerned position, although who knows, maybe the US forces would've been slaughtered back then.

I still maintain that the war was stupidly pointless but at least it got Saddam deposed. Heh, guess it was pretty telling that they wanted Saddam left alone for stability reasons- look what happens when he's gone.

As for aid, it'll continue to rise. The actual amount required aside, at least the pseudo-competetive attitude encourages generosity. Pity the planet isn't so giving when it comes to sorting out longer standing issues.

 

[C-O-N-Spiracy]

We supported him for less than a decade, during the period of the Iran Iraq war. Other than that, we, unlike you, have opposed him. We proved this by liberating Kuwait, a war which you opposed for some reason.


Why shouldnt we be? We spend billions on charity and it still isnt enough? Come on now.

I'd like to improvise on this a bit..

It seems alot of you liberals have a big problem and blame us for some "hypocrisy" as we supported the rise and fall of saddam.. its because you dont think strategically at all..

Example: WW2. The U.S. and the Soviet Union were allies fighting the German faction back to Berlin. Just because The U.S. and the Soviets fought on the same side didnt mean we were friends. Obviously, look at what became of both the U.S. and the Soviets shortly after the war.. we were nearly on the brink of a nuclear holocaust. We fought together against Germany because we had a common enemy and because our own interests were at stake.
The same thing with Iraq-Iran war because Iran was a threat to us just as well as Iraq. If you have any ounce of strategic thinking, you would know that you should take out the greater threat first. In doing that, you need to seek an overwhelming advantage to have a great chance of defeating an enemy.. one advantage is of being in an alliance. What do you think happend after that war had subsided? Iraq invaded Kuwait and the US leveraged it's advantages, one being fighting alongside other NATO forces, and took action to remove them. Just because youre in an alliance at one time doesnt mean youre friends.. this isn't a friendly neigborhood kid comraderie were talkin about, These are independent states with their own interests in mind. It's strategy man, think about it.

 

[Absinthe]

Put yourself in the life of an Iraqi citizen and say that.

You mean like one of the many that currently hate you or are currently trying to kill our troops? Okay.

Doesn't change the fact that this war was a ball of crap and lies.

 

[seinfeldrules]

You mean like one of the many that currently hate you or are currently trying to kill our troops? Okay.

If it was one of the 'many' then all our troops would be dead right now.

Doesn't change the fact that this war was a ball of crap and lies.

And just because you dont support the war doesnt mean Iraq isnt better off without Saddam.

 

[Absinthe]

If it was one of the 'many' then all our troops would be dead right now.

Oh, right. I forgot. There is no insurgency.

And just because you dont support the war doesnt mean Iraq isnt better off without Saddam.

Time will tell on that one, my friend.

Again, I wouldn't have had such a problem with the removal of Saddam had some sense gone into it and if people weren't dying over the government's lies. But I wouldn't be surprised if post-war Iraq took the same road Germany did after World War One.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Oh, right. I forgot. There is no insurgency.

When Al Qaeda is involved, I call it terrorism. Nobody is claiming there arent attacks.

But I wouldn't be surprised if post-war Iraq took the same road Germany did after World War One.

And I wouldnt be suprised if it took the same track of Japan after WWII.