Are you agreeing with me or not? Because if you are not than learn to look at figures and know that your stats don't say it all. The US industrial capacity was one of the decisive factors in the WW2.
And that goes to show how little you know about those actions. Europe was involved in those very actions.
But once again, as I pointed out, both Europe and America tend to ignore the atrocoties. I don't think either is in any position to lecture anyone else on action or inaction rather.
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRel...hartsandGraphs
Code:Official Development Assistance (ODA) from 2000 to 2003 Select a linked column heading to change sort order ODA in U.S. Dollars (Millions) ODA as GNP Percentage Country 2000 2001 2002 2003 2000 2001 2002 2003 1. United States 9,581 10,884 12,900 15,791 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.14 2. United Kingdom 4,458 4,659 4,749 6,166 0.31 0.32 0.3 0.34 3. Switzerland 888 908 933 1,297 0.34 0.34 0.32 0.38 4. Sweden 1,813 1,576 1,754 2,100 0.81 0.76 0.74 0.7 5. Spain 1,321 1,748 1,608 2,030 0.24 0.3 0.25 0.25 6. Portugal 261 267 282 298 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.21 7. Norway 1,264 1,346 1,746 2,043 0.8 0.83 0.91 0.92 8. New Zealand 116 111 124 169 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.23 9. Netherlands 3,075 3,155 3,377 4,059 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.81 10. Luxembourg 116 142 143 189 0.7 0.8 0.78 0.8 11. Japan 13,062 9,678 9,220 8,911 0.27 0.23 0.23 0.2 12. Italy 1,368 1,493 2,313 2,393 0.13 0.14 0.2 0.16 13. Ireland 239 285 397 510 0.3 0.33 0.41 0.41 14. Greece 216 194 295 356 0.19 0.19 0.22 0.21 15. Germany 5,034 4,879 5,359 6,694 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 16. France 4,221 4,293 5,182 7,337 0.33 0.34 0.36 0.41 17. Finland 371 389 466 556 0.31 0.33 0.35 0.34 18. Denmark 1,664 1,599 1,632 1,747 1.06 1.01 0.96 0.84 19. Canada 1,722 1,572 2,013 2,209 0.25 0.23 0.28 0.26 20. Belgium 812 866 1,061 1,887 0.36 0.37 0.42 0.61 21. Austria 461 457 475 503 0.25 0.25 0.23 0.2 22. Australia 995 852 962 1,237 0.27 0.25 0.25 0.25 Source: OECD Web site
How was that pertinent to this discussion?
Um, it shows foreign aid from different countries and how they stack up against each other. Aid is a very important tool which countries can use in their foreign policy towards many of the examples of crisis you listed.
Um, not really.
That's like saying that because I am giving the largest amount of money to charity, I'm doing something to fight hunger. Yet if all the money I give doesn't go to the charities that deal with hunger, then what the am I doing?
How much aid do you think places in africa embroiled in civil war see?
Do you think giving aid to Mao's government helped stop him? Pol Pot?
I think you'd have to look at aid in a much more specific fashion to prove either side of the case.
I'll name you the 2 largest recivers of US aid however. Israel and Eygpt. Those aren't on that list, and I'd wager to say that most nations in need of aid don't crack the top 10. I'm not completely sure about that however.
france and russia voted against action in kosovo... britain helped in the attacks on serbia though...
nato finally took over in bosnia after the un just stood around and watched...
manny, have you ever been overseas in any capacity?
NATO IS EUROPE!!!
You do realize that the coalition is almost entirely European in nature don't you?
What does going overseas have to do with anything? I need to hop onto a different continent to understand that the United States is guilty of ignoring much of the world when it loves to claim the job of world's policeman?
I think the more pertinent question is have you ever been in an advance history course in any capacity?
the u.s. is part of nato as well... that is why it is powerful if it acts. that is the only reason nato got involved in bosnia... nato wouldn't get involved in kosovo though... the us and britain pretty much had to go it alone...
well, schoolboy, you always act like you know everything and you've been in school all your life... you're like the professors who teach courses in something they've never done before...
Ok, I see how it's how it's relevant now. Because I have never set foot in Europe, I can't possibly have looked at the situations I listed above and have seen there was no intervention in them.
I act as though people like you are stupid, because well, look at you, you are. There are plenty of people on this site who know what they are talking about, but you amaze me at your ability to constantly open your mouth in ignorance.
Yeah, when people ignore facts it annoys me. It's one thing to have different views on the same situation (see the difference Travis and I had in the thread over "evil") but it's a completely different situation when people like you say that "Europe wasn't involved in kosovo or bosnia".
did france not vote against action in kosovo?
MY BAD, I forgot. France is all of Europe.
BTW, this arguement only reinforces the statement I made earlier. If you look at a small portion of the atrocities worldwide, then YES, America is not for appeasement. But if you look at the entire picture, you find that Europe and the US have done little more than ignore them.
But continue to focus on Kosovo. I'm sure that the mass graves there, are much larger than the killing fields in Cambodia, and the ones in Rawanda, or the refugee camps in Somalia, Ethiopia, and Sudan.
so, do you think the u.s. should do more or less? you seem to flip flop on what the u.s. should be doing?
I think the US should stop it's false pretenses, should help through international efforts instead of hijacking atrocities in order pursue foreign policy agendas. IE, Don't tell me you invaded Iraq to help out the Iraqi's when that was mearly a byproduct of the orgional action.
I want honesty, but most importantly I want the people of this country to be aware of what this country actually does and doesn't do. Articles like this simply promote a cycle of ignorant ethnocentric thinking.
who cares why we do it as long as it gets done? and you know most of the large international bodies(especially the UN) aren't worth a fugg when it comes to action.
Does every nation on earth need to act and play like the USA?
Manny, sometimes you are full of . Foreign aid is one of the KEY diplomatic bargaining chips the US and other UN countries have. We don't give aid to countries that are doing things we don't like. That's how it's used primarily. We can also give aid to the enimies of our own enemies.
The reason I listed those aid figures was part of the statement made about how the US gave mostly supplies and aid in WW2 over troops.
"I act as though people like you are stupid, because well, look at you, you are." ..................................ANOTHER BRILLIANT STATEMENT FROM EINSTEIN HIMSELF!
Did you check the dates on the info you provided? Compare that to the WW2 dates, and then tell me how it is pertinent.
And as for the first thing you said, lets see how full of I am. Provide examples where United States foreign aid has stopped or even had a positive effect on situations such as the ones I mentioned.
Lets see just how full of I am.
Hmm, I'm guessing that the families of american solidiers who bear the brunt of the casualties in our splendid little wars care.
I also would imagine that American taxpayers care when huge amount of money are being spent in excess around the world because we go it alone.
you edited that and that was the result?
Translation?
You are going off on an exteme tangent with what I said. I did check those dates. And considering that it falls in the scope of this discussion it is relevant foreign aid is a MAJOR tool the US uses around the world. The most recent of which may be the Tsunami relief.
If you also would take notice. I posted the casualty info first and then the foreign aid numbers of recent years. They were not even directed at you. Manny maybe God but he's not the center of every thread.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
