Americas place in the world

Paul Watson

Ray Kinsella wrote: I love americans and their dillusion that there are giving away their riches to undeserving and ungrateful world. I understand the meaning of "A poor man who gives $10 is far better than a rich man who gives a $100" but in all fairness money is money and the US Dollar is a nice type of money indeed. Whether America gives 1% or 50% of their GDP away they are still giving vast sums of money out to people who are being very ungrateful and disrespectful. Are you saying that us ingrates are ungrateful of Americas aid because they could give so much more? God, I am glad they give us anything at all! They do not have to give us a penny, yet they gives us a good few billion pennies. Anyway, as I said somewhere else we don't need more aid, we need the aid to be directed to those who actually need it. And I wonder why we, Africa, are more respectful to the Europeans for their aid than the Americans for their aid? That is an interesting insight into the whole thing I think. p.s. Mr purple headed warrior is probably right now locking and loading and waiting for you to stick your head out again... :-D regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront

Chris Losinger

Vagif Abilov wrote: Perhaps, next time you'll think twice before dumping "lot of aid" to Bin Laden, as US did in 80's? wait, it's our fault that the ungrateful bastard turned on his benefactors? -c

Smaller Animals Software, Inc. You're the icing - on the cake - on the table - at my wake. Modest Mouse

Chris Maunder

There was talk after Sep 11 about Americans re-evaluating their way of aiding nations, and in fact, the way they provide aid in general. America is hugely generous but I was reading about many organisations and individuals going through a period of introspection where they were realising that giving cash doesn't necessarily mean giving aid. From an organisations point of view handing over large amounts of cash or food to another country may not actually be what they need - instead they may just need help getting people educated, or engineers to help drill wells etc. From an individuals point of view donating cash to charity in order to make your society a better place isn't the same as volunteering, or simply making the effort to help out a random stranger, or taking the time to meet and understand your neighbours. A lot of this was prompted by the US starting to question the effects of it's involvment in the Middle East, which seemed a great step forward. I've not heard anything more about this so it would definitely be interesting to see the question from both sides: How does America feel about the rest of the world and how are America's understanding about the rest of the world changing? cheers, Chris Maunder

realJSOP

Three percent of our GDP is much higher (in terms of dollar amount) than any other country's. And your precious EU is not a single country, but is rather a group of countries, so how is THAT an equal comparison? And what part of europe suddenly doesn't think we should have pulled their collective asses out from under Hitler's boot? If it wasn't for the U.S., the world would be eating sourkraut for dinner every night, and washing it down with a healthy helping of sake. Okay, so we've saved the world a couple of times, liberated Afghanistan (twice), out-lasted the communist threat in Europe, provided BILLIONS in un-repaid aid, and we're the fuckin bad guys? I don't know where you're from Ray, but I think you need to re-evaluate just how indebted the world is (as a whole) to the industrial, military, and philathropic strength. "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

Ray Kinsella

Mike Mullikin wrote: I wish I could find the link (I'll keep looking) but I saw recently a report that stated that the US gave more (money, food, goods & services) away per year than the rest of the world combined. A ficitous report perhaps, now the following statistics come from 'Source: Adapted from Jeff Madrick, "Economic Scene," The New York Times, November 1, 2001, p. C2. Table based on World Bank data. I am sure will respect the source as an American newspaper.

TABLE A GDP Devoted to Development Aid, 1999 Country / Aid in Billions of Dollars / Aid as Proportion of GDP Netherlands / 3.1/ 0.0079 France / 5.6/ 0.0039 Japan / 15.3/ 0.0035 Germany / 5.5/ 0.0026 Great Britain / 3.4 / 0.0023 United States/ 9.1 /0.0010

As you can see, percentages or no percentages the four EU member states France, Germany, Britain and Netherlans, with a combined population of about 200 million (160 million less than the US) give 17.7 billion dollars as against the US's 9.1 billion . Add the rest of the EU member states ... how much aid do you end up with. You also have to remember that over 50% of US aid in military aid (to keep their own Arms industry ticking over) how much aid do you end up with ??????? http://www.hbcollege.com/business\_stats/kohler/resources/stats/ch07\_1.html http://www.oneworld.org/ips2/jul98/23\_13\_097.html Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"

Ray Kinsella

Mike Mullikin wrote: I wish I could find the link (I'll keep looking) but I saw recently a report that stated that the US gave more (money, food, goods & services) away per year than the rest of the world combined. A ficitous report perhaps, now the following statistics come from 'Source: Adapted from Jeff Madrick, "Economic Scene," The New York Times, November 1, 2001, p. C2. Table based on World Bank data. I am sure will respect the source as an American newspaper.

TABLE A GDP Devoted to Development Aid, 1999 Country / Aid in Billions of Dollars / Aid as Proportion of GDP Netherlands / 3.1/ 0.0079 France / 5.6/ 0.0039 Japan / 15.3/ 0.0035 Germany / 5.5/ 0.0026 Great Britain / 3.4 / 0.0023 United States/ 9.1 /0.0010

As you can see, percentages or no percentages the four EU member states France, Germany, Britain and Netherlans, with a combined population of about 200 million (160 million less than the US) give 17.7 billion dollars as against the US's 9.1 billion . Add the rest of the EU member states ... how much aid do you end up with. You also have to remember that over 50% of US aid in military aid (to keep their own Arms industry ticking over) how much aid do you end up with ??????? http://www.hbcollege.com/business\_stats/kohler/resources/stats/ch07\_1.html http://www.oneworld.org/ips2/jul98/23\_13\_097.html Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"

Vagif Abilov

It's certainly fault to support ungrateful bastards. Vagif Abilov COM+/ATL/MFC Developer Oslo, Norway

Chris Losinger

the US, and Japan combined gave almost twice as much as GB, Germany France and the Netherlands, combined. -c

Smaller Animals Software, Inc. You're the icing - on the cake - on the table - at my wake. Modest Mouse

Chris Losinger

Chris Maunder wrote: How does America feel about the rest of the world and how are America's understanding about the rest of the world changing? America wishes the rest of the world would go away and leave us alone. :) Maybe the average citizen would like a change in US policy, but the govt ain't gonna do it. -c

Smaller Animals Software, Inc. You're the icing - on the cake - on the table - at my wake. Modest Mouse

Ray Kinsella

Yes, Japan gave 15 billion we should aspire to be that generous, amost twice as much as the us but still less than the European contribution. Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"

Ray Kinsella

Purple Warhead / outlaw programmer wrote: Three percent of our GDP is much higher (in terms of dollar amount) than any other country's. And your precious EU is not a single country, but is rather a group of countries, so how is THAT an equal comparison? Can I dispel you illusions with statistics to be found at the following URL http://www.hbcollege.com/business\_stats/kohler/resources/stats/ch07\_1.html . Purple Warhead / outlaw programmer wrote: And what part of europe suddenly doesn't think we should have pulled their collective asses out from under Hitler's boot? If it wasn't for the U.S., the world would be eating sourkraut for dinner every night, and washing it down with a healthy helping of sake. It always comes back to the fucking second world war with you? It was lonnngggg time ago, get over it, the rest the bloody world has, its past tense, even Russia who is the final anaylsis probabily won the damn things all by herself, and suffered 30 million casualties got over it. So you want a cookie for winning the war, well at this stage you have had the whole box. Purple Warhead / outlaw programmer wrote: I don't know where you're from Ray, but I think you need to re-evaluate just how indebted the world is (as a whole) to the industrial, military, and philathropic strength. The world I deal in is more simple, you think the world is indepted to you, the world owes you something, well it doesn't, other nations have been doing far more, for far longer to fill empty bellies and never complained. Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"

Christopher Duncan

If only such things could be easily evaluated as a boolean statement: this is good, this is bad. Unfortunately, the actions of any nation (including my own country, America) are based first on survival, and secondly on morality and culture. These actions and decisions are difficult and based on the horrendously complex and ever changing scenarios of world politics and interaction. The only reason that any country, mine or yours, is not overrun and conquered by aggressors is due to its inherent ability to defend itself through a combination of strength at arms, alliances and positioning. The latter two are complicated considerations indeed. Simply put, if the cost of conquest exceeds the potential benefits, predatory nations look elsewhere. That's how any nation maintains its freedom. Allies and world opinion are critical aspects of this deterence. The only reason that we were attacked September 11th by crashing passenger planes into buildings is because our attackers lacked the military strength to land on our shores, fight us (and our allies) and conquer our country, to then run as they think it should be run. If they had that power, America would no longer exist other than in memory. This is simply the nature of humanity, and it hasn't changed throughout all of human history. What does this have to do with America's policy of aid (and interference)? Everything, almost exclusively. America tries to be a good and honorable nation. But then, so does every other country, each within its own cultural context. However, morality does not act as the primary impulse for the actions of nations. Survival does. Aid brings allies. Meddling and positioning (for good or ill) is a preemptive aspect of self defense. It is no more possible to say that America is a good or bad country than it is to broadly characterize any group of people. People are individuals. Some will embrace noble ideas, and live by them. Others will talk the talk, but live only for their own selfish interests. We have both in America, just as there are both in every square mile of the world. Emotionally, I have little patience for those who take our help with one hand and flip us the finger with the other. Practically, however, I understand that life, and world politics, just ain't that simple. I take no joy in my government meddling in the affairs of others, but I prefer that to fighing someone else's tanks in rush hour traffic. Sound extreme? There are those who live in countries where that is a reality. I can assure you, if I looked out the wind

Lost User

Ray Kinsella wrote: It always comes back to the f***ing second world war with you? It was lonnngggg time ago, get over it, the rest the bloody world has, its past tense, even Russia who is the final anaylsis probabily won the damn things all by herself, and suffered 30 million casualties got over it. So you want a cookie for winning the war, well at this stage you have had the whole box. Really?! Tell the millions of surviving veterans world-wide that WWII is old news and needs to be forgotten. Tell the millions of people alive today who never met their fathers because they died in WWII to "get over it". That war ended 57 years ago. A very, VERY short time ago in the scope of world history. As for Russia having won it by herself? I don't think so! Russia's 30 million casualties. A huge portion can be attributed to Stalin himself. Is that the kind of super-power you would wish on the world? Ray Kinsella wrote: The world I deal in is more simple, you think the world is indepted to you, the world owes you something, well it doesn't, other nations have been doing far more, for far longer to fill empty bellies and never complained. Americans aren't looking for anything other than a little respect now and then. That and not being blamed for every problem in the world. You know, every once in a while, things aren't our fault.

Mike Mullikin "Programming is like sex. One mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life." - Michael Sinz

Stuart van Weele

That table looks skewed. I looked at both of the sites you mentioned, but neither one gave background into the figures or a proper definition of "aid". What really stands out is Japan. If Japan is giving away 15 billion dollars, where is it going? I've never heard of any great humanitarian efforts put forth by Japan. I wonder if Japan is counting low interest loans to developing nations as "aid". These statitistics remind me of transnational unemployment figures. Japan is in a terrible slump, but the official unemployment rate is only around 6%.

Stan Shannon

Paul Watson wrote: . Culturally I do not credit America with much Now, I have to take exception to that. Apparently when the rest of the world thinks of American culture they think of McDonalds and Hollywood. As an American I think of things like "constitutional rights" liberty and rugged individualism. *That* is the culture of America. And frankly, I think the world has benfited from it tremendously. The very freedom of speech exercised in this lounge is an example of American culture. Paul Watson wrote: If I was an American, I think I would be pretty damned pissed off with virtually every other country. I think we mostly shrug it all off. I think we have a responsibility to do what we can to help out around the world, and ingratitude does not concern me a bit. I generally just assume that countries that act that way do not know how to raise polite children. Not my problem. As far as interfering with other countries, I don't think it is a matter of choice. If it were, the vast bulk of Americans would opt to just stay at home and let beligerant countries alone. Our founders warned us about 'foriegn adventures'. The problem is that we are typically the only ones able to do anything about problems as they arise around the world. Could you imagine waiting for the Europeans to arrive at a concensus to take action? "There's a slew of slip 'twixt cup and lip"

Ray Kinsella

Stuart van Weele wrote: proper definition of "aid". Grants and no/low interest loans given to 2nd/3rd world countries. Stuart van Weele wrote: I've never heard of any great humanitarian efforts put forth by Japan. Post second world war japan has had a history of generousity, particularily in Afirca and the Far East, whereas European aid is usually more directed to Africa, Eastern Europe and South American. American Aid tends to go to Africa and South America. Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"

Chris Losinger

Stuart van Weele wrote: I wonder if Japan is counting low interest loans to developing nations as "aid". heh. given Japan's current banking conditions, a loan with any interest at all is a money making situation for the bank. -c

Smaller Animals Software, Inc. You're the icing - on the cake - on the table - at my wake. Modest Mouse

Stan Shannon

Ray Kinsella wrote: It always comes back to the f***ing second world war with you? It was lonnngggg time ago, get over it, the rest the bloody world has, its past tense, even Russia who is the final anaylsis probabily won the damn things all by herself, and suffered 30 million casualties got over it. So you want a cookie for winning the war, well at this stage you have had the whole box Without the U.S. propping the Soviets up militarily the German's would have crushed them like a tin can. Of course, the fact that the Soviets were every bit and grain as bad as the Nazi's, and that after defeating the Nazi's, we had to contain them for 40 years, and did so without it leading to a major world war, is all water under the bridge, I suppose. The entire history of the 20th century is about the U.S. saving Europe from its own incredible political imbicility. "There's a slew of slip 'twixt cup and lip"

Todd Harvey

hey Paul, check out www.LewRockwell.com sometime. You might like the guy from Zimbabwe who writes for them - he appears about every 2 weeks or so.

Brit

It's my understanding that Bin Laden hated the US in the 1980s, and didn't accept US aid. He certainly has inherited enough money that he would've never needed US money, anyway.