Peter Franks wrote:
> John M. wrote:
>> On May 12, 2:33 am, Peter Franks <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> John M. wrote:
>>>> On May 11, 5:05 pm, Poetic Justice <@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Dog.com> wrote:
>>>>> James wrote:
>>>>>> <Chief_Bi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>
news:1e7016ba-9191-4bef-82ed-2971099a9b95@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 9, 3:15 pm, "James" <kingko...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>> <Chief_Bi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>> This is not the case in Myanmar (Burma) at all. These areas have
>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>> habitated by people
>>>>>>> since before Christ, and are not filled-in wetlands. Displacing
>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>> people for safety reasons
>>>>>>> would be like making Ethiopeans leave their country because of
>>>>>>> possible famine, or the Swiss
>>>>>>>> leave the Alps because of possible avalanches.
>>>>>>> What is upsetting to me, and probably not many others, is the
anger
>>>>>>> shown by other governments and people that we be allowed in to
help.
>>>>>>> They are an isolationist country and it's no ones business but
>>>>>>> theirs.
>>>>>>> And that's the way they want it. Now, I'm hearing some bad mouth
>>>>>>> from us
>>>>>>> and the U.N. on their leaders. It seems it doesn't matter what
they
>>>>>>> want, we know what is best for them.
>>>>>>> It shouldn't matter how their country is run but to most it
>>>>>>> seems, we
>>>>>>> would be justified going in there by force. For humanity reasons
>>>>>>> naturally. How arrogant and demanding we have become.
>>>>>> So you justify a totalitarian military government treating a large
>>>>>> ****tion of their population, who are injured,
>>>>>> starving, and dying, inhumanely simply because 'it's their own
>>>>>> business' ? You have no compulsion to
>>>>>> provide aid to prevent widespread death by malnutrition and
disease.
>>>>>> You would not have a problem
>>>>>> with Louisiana not providing relief to hurricane Katrina victims
>>>>>> simpy
>>>>>> because it is a State issue, which in fact it was and not a Federal
>>>>>> one.
>>>>>> What I am saying is that we should not force our wants on others.
The
>>>>>> aid is there if they want it. The help is there if they want it.
But
>>>>>> that doesn't seem to be enough for pricks who love forcing others
>>>>>> to see
>>>>>> it their way. When they don't, they will bad mouth them to the
>>>>>> rest of
>>>>>> the world. The government structure there is irrelevant.
>>>>>> New Orleans victims had much they could have done themselves but
>>>>>> chose
>>>>>> to sit there and let the nannies provide for them. The liberal way
>>>>>> is to
>>>>>> provide everything and those people said ok which proves that
>>>>>> government
>>>>>> is your enemy in these sorts of situations. Louisiana and other
>>>>>> states
>>>>>> get benefit of federal moneys no matter who provides the relief.
>>>>>> Your analogy of Louisiana to another country is stupid.
>>>>> The people of burma should have used the confusion of the aftermath
to
>>>>> attack and kill all the government officials. Then start over by
>>>>> forming a new constitutional government.
>>>> They live in a flooded river delta with no food and weapons. The
>>>> government lives in a purpose built, isolated city far from the
>>>> effects of the cyclone and aftermath. It has close on 500 000 well-
>>>> armed troops spread around the im****tant centres and hubs.
>>> So, how well is that working out for the people*?
>>>
>>> (*There is absolutely NO intent in making light of their current
>>> situation. What has happened in that area is very tragic and
>>> unfortunate. I hope the best for all of those affected, and likewise
>>> hope that my humanitarian contributions help in this situation, even
if
>>> just a little.)
>>
>> Your humanitarian contributions will, like those that went to Iraq
>> under SH, end up in the coffers of the ruling junta. I'm sure they
>> feel that every little helps in the drive to subjugate their people,
>> just as do political parties in our so-called democracies.
>
> I'm fairly confident that my humanitarian aid will NOT end as you
> outline, although I presume that, generally speaking, a lot of it will.
>
> So, hopefully we can agree here, the problem isn't due to climate
> change/warming but rather to those in power.
>
> I propose that we will solve a lot more of the worlds ills by through
> 'power control' than 'climate control'. Perhaps we should primarily
> focus our energies on that problem...
we will solve a lot more of the worlds ills through
*TAX CONTROL* than we will paying for a *WEATHER MACHINE*.
|
