Why $350 million?

[Atman]

I personally don't believe Bush has any intention of ever actually fulfilling that pledge. Just yesterday, Colin Powell was on the radio almost pleading with the world to believe the president..."Bush really will release this money!" It was if he was saying "The check is in the mail."

But worse, it made me once again embarrassed for our country. Here the leader of the free world needs a front man to go forth and tell the world that he really, really isn't lying. Honest. Pinky swear...this time he's telling the truth!

Bullshit. Bush and Truth are like oil and water. Hmm...maybe not a good analogy...I think of the Exxon Valdez. But I digress. My point is, I think Bush pulled a wild figure out of his ass that his staff thought no other nation could touch. They'd been trumped for four days, and it wasn't going to be long before Estonia was pledging more than us. So what to do?

"OH YEAH? I'll give you ELEVENTY TRILLION! Top that, Estonia!" It assures BushCo that they won't be further embarrassed by every other nation on earth pledging more and more to make him look bad. And we all know this president. First and foremost, it is all about what Bush wants and not hurting his feelings. But he has no intention of actually releasing that much.

Remember the African Aids pledge? Governance by headlines.

[NMDemDist2]

1. "Governance by headlines."

i fear you have found the truth on that one

we'll have to see if any cash gets released

Iran is still waiting after their massive earthquake last year

[Grooner Five]

3. What has Iran done for us lately? n/t

[NMDemDist2]

4. We are only as good as our word

One of Bam's lessons is that pledges do not equal cash. Iranian officials have complained that of the $1.1 billion in aid promised by foreign countries and organizations, only $17.5 million has been sent. Most of the $415 million spent so far on reconstruction has come from government coffers.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/5162038.html

[Grooner Five]

6. Sounds like a good few countries are stiffing them

Good. I can't say I think much of Iran, and am happy to see them run in to financial trouble. Maybe that will foment some changes in their rotten system of oppressive theocracy.

Do you know that Iran has a policy of killing homosexuals? Nice folks. At least in America, we're debating marriage rights for gays, instead of stoning them.

Iran can fuck off, IMO.


http://www.holisticwisdom.com/gays-iran.htm

While we debate gay marriage here in the U.S., homosexuals in Iran just want to live another day. Even with all the changes in Iran, the punishment for acts of homosexuality is harsh and still quite active. For two men caught engaged in sodomy, the punishment is death. For women convicted of being lesbian, it is 100 lashes.

The Iranian government articulates it this way: “Homosexuality in Iran, treated according to the Islamic law, is a sin in the eyes of God and a crime for society.” In Islam, homosexuality is among the worst possible sins. For that reason, even the electric chair seems tame when compared to the methods used to put homosexuals to death in Iran.

A convicted homosexual could be stoned to death, drawn and quartered, beheaded, thrown off a cliff, burned alive or cut in two pieces with the remains burned. Against this chilling tradition and emotional threat, there are some groups focused on support for gay Iranians.

[salin]

7. hope that logic doesnt turn around and burn us

in the end... we haven't exactly been great world citizens as of late... the death and destruction brought straight to urban areas to the homes of many civilians in a war that most of the world can not (and much of our own country can no longer) justify - would rather seem to put us on the target end of the logic you are pushing.

[Grooner Five]

9. What logic is that?

Ignoring a country that grossly oppresses their citizens, to the point of stoning, burning, and tying gays between trucks so they can be ripped apart while alive?

Seems sound enough to me, but perhaps you'd like to aid a government like that? Explain the logic of that to me.

[salin]

15. ah - but we are giving aid to Egypt

even without times of crisis... and Saudi Arabia... and Uzbekistan (like your political opponent boiled in water or other substance?)

Aid in emergency - especially those directed through international NGOs - is to give direct aid to those hardest hit. It isn't political. The point of sneering at victims of disaster as if being concerned about aid is related to supporting a repressive government is a logic that rather blames the victims - choosing indeed to compound the victims and almost celebrating when tragedy happens (maybe it will bring down their govt) it is that last point of logic to which I refer.

[Grooner Five]

21. Everything's political, of course.

That's just a reality of foreign policy.

[salin]

22. so we were right to ignore the slaughter in Rwanda?

there were no foreign policy points to be gained.

Personally I thought our lack of reaction was shameful.

[NMDemDist2]

8. so charity is only for the "worthy" then?

the women and children who are starving and homeless should be punished because their government is repressive?

[salin]

11. I think the posters point is

human carnage along the way be damned - if it finally weakens the repressive government.

Really easy for Americans to take this very disassociated view of people who don't live next door to us.

[NMDemDist2]

12. hi salin

:hi: Happy New Year

ps I miss the broccoli :D

[salin]

16. never had brocolli that is "salinin"

I am but mere... salin.

[NMDemDist2]

24. ahhh never "merely"

:D

[salin]

26. thanks!

and :hi:

[Grooner Five]

13. If we were handing the money directly to their citizens...

...I'd be willing to hear the argument. But we'd be handing it to their government, which makes your argument moot, IMO. How do we know they'll even use it for humanitarian purposes, instead of trying to boost their nuclear ambitions?

Yes, that's the same government that cuts up gays and burns the pieces. Maybe your conscience can live with that, but I'd sure have a hard time doing it.

And anyway, maybe their citizens will get sick of the leadership making them an international pariah, and revolt. Subsidizing the scum in power over their isn't going to help anyone - that much is sure.

[NMDemDist2]

23. seem's the money is sent thru the Red Cross and Red Crescent,

the UN and other NGO's not to the Iranian Government, just as the Asian Relief is.

If I am mistaken, please show where the aid is going the Tehran


http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/disaster_assistance/countries/iran/nd_index.html

[Grooner Five]

18. What about the men?

You don't mention them.

[salin]

20. ah - aid would only go to females?

what a silly extrapolation.

[NMDemDist2]

25. my error

men also should be aid as needed, it just seems that women and children are more at risk in these situations

[w13rd0]

14. Many places in the world are oppressive...

...but natural disasters often exacerbate those conditions. You might recall that the reformers in Iran were making great strides pre-Iraq invasion and pre-earthquake, but the repercussions of those two events set them back. Relief work is also one way to get people on the ground alieviating the conditions that contribute to extremism. Poverty and unemployment can be just as important in terms of catalysts for hostility as anything else.

[XemaSab]

36. When the going gets tough

the tough crack down on human rights.

The only way we're going to see freedom in that part of the world is if the people are educated, well fed, and happy. If they're not they'll be more willing to tolerate psycho theocracies.

Look at Afghanistan. The Taliban was only able to come in after the place had been trashed from the Soviet war. Or Germany... the country was in physical and financial shambles after WWI, and Hitler was able to come to power. This is why we helped them rebuild after WWII, so that awful conditions wouldn't breed another fascist dictatorship.

I agree with you that their government is repressive, but letting the people starve will not make the government better.

[Chicago Democrat]

19. Gave us Chalabi, supplied false intelligence, played us for fools...

Made us invade their enemy (Saddam, that is).

[delphine]

2. I was thinking the same thing: I believe it's because

they are trying to erase the embarrassment of the $35 million - in a day or two (lizard brained sheeple forget so quickly . . . ) people will see articles about the $35 million and assume it's a typo and no one will remember what a cheap little turd bush was . . .

[Old and In the Way]

5. Another economic opportunity to be exploited.

Get the immediate PR benefits, then we'll watch as the money sinks into the unaccountable ether. Somewhere in America, this announcement signals the arrival of yet more newly minted Republican millionaires. Hope I'm wrong, but the cynic in me says I'm right.

[oneold1-4u]

10. What do we send to --

Saudi Arabia each day for OIL???
Have yet to see any or all the OPEC countries sending billions to help their brethren Muslims!
Perhaps we can go without OIL for a few days!

[unblock]

17. don't forget the $40MM he promised nyc after 9/11

and hrc and other ny folks had to BEG just to get HALF of that!

[bunny planet]

27. More like the check is in the Solar System.

Yes I remember 'compassionate conservative' promise too.
and pledging money for African Aids research and assistance.

He can't be trusted. How can we see to it that he keeps this promise when he's broken so many others and just lied about everything.

[Cheswick2.0]

28. I don't know, but I give them credit

for increasing the amount. I hope they do follow through. How much of this is in loans however?

[matt819]

30. No need to be so generous

They were waiting to see which way the wind was blowing before making the so-called commitment. Had other nations come through with more substantial funding, then the US would not have come up with that figure. The fact that * remained huddled in Crawford for a couple of days before surfacing is also shameful, just from a compassion perspective.

And, as my other post observes, the money will not be released in its entirety, and if it is the funds will go to Halliburton or some affiliate.

[matt819]

29. Two simple truths

One. No money will be released, or certainly only a small fraction.

Two. Most of that money will go to US contractors (do I hear Halliburton knocking?) for their services. The money will not be spent locally and will do nothing to support businesses or boost the economy there. So, while those in need may receive some form of assistance (food/shelter) -- and only then if point number one is proven false -- you can rest assured that the money will go only to *'s cronies.

[dogman]

31. What do you think the cost of sending the Fleet to do this is?

This gets money into the Rummy's hands. Who knows where it will end up.

[matt819]

32. And is this part of the 350 million?

If so, you just gotta believe that's a few million a day. And for what? Yet another sham perpetrated by this adminstration.

[dogman]

34. I don't know for sure, but given the track record it's highly likely.

I don't know how else it jumped tenfold that quickly.

[dogman]

35. Or maybe Jeb don't come cheap.

He'll have more status packing some real bling.

[sandnsea]

33. Sounds like "Top This, Ha!"

The whole thing is making me sick. It's as if all the countries are playing one-upsmanship games and these poor people are the pawns. If only Bush had just done the right thing for the right reasons in the first damned place.