Burma regime accused of hoarding cyclone aid

[Winter wind]

CTV.ca | Burma regime accused of hoarding cyclone aid

RANGOON, Burma -- The United Nations said Tuesday that only a tiny portion of international aid needed for Burma's cyclone victims is making it into the country, amid reports that the military regime is hoarding good-quality foreign aid for itself and doling out rotten food.

For those of you who have been under a rock the last couple of days, a typhoon hit Myanmar and absolutely devastated the people there. We're looking at a death toll in the hundreds of thousands (six digits). The government, after days of hesitation, has accepted aid, but isn't really giving it out.

Also, in a funny twist, they held elections right after the typhoon and used their military to guard ballet boxes rather then help their people.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a thread on this yet.

[Jack]

Perhaps people think there's not a debatable angle to the situation. But there has been a lot of talk about it in other venues, especially Friendfeed. Yesterday on Twitter they had a "Tweet for Myanmar" to raise awareness. There have been suggestions of an "aid assualt" on the country.

Which does raise debatable questions: is it the right and responsibility of the rest of the world to force relief aid on a sovereign nation? Does compassion trump politics? Is sending aid to other countries when our own country is having financial problems just another instance of the left-wing pandering to global opinion?

[Gods_Mercenary]

That's a debateable subject. First I think you need to think of it from others' standpoints, but this is difficult to do since we live mostly in countrys that are rich enough and generally compassionate enough to handle a situation before foreigners could do the same job. But, I think that frcing aid on anohter country is kind of a touchy situation. Was it O.K. in, say the early 90's when the U.N. invaded Soalia to stop the use of hunger as a tool of politics? I think it probably was, but Myanmar is a certainly more stable situation.

[Thanatos]

Quote by: Jack Perhaps people think there's not a debatable angle to the situation. But there has been a lot of talk about it in other venues, especially Friendfeed. Yesterday on Twitter they had a "Tweet for Myanmar" to raise awareness. There have been suggestions of an "aid assualt" on the country. Which does raise debatable questions: is it the right and responsibility of the rest of the world to force relief aid on a sovereign nation? Does compassion trump politics? Is sending aid to other countries when our own country is having financial problems just another instance of the left-wing pandering to global opinion?

There are worse things one can spend money on than popularity.

Some people have been talking about invading Burma to toss out the government. In principle this is a good idea, but the track record of bombing people for their own good is not so good. So, one asks why we're giving them aid if there's no way to ensure it makes it to those who need it.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: jack Which does raise debatable questions: is it the right and responsibility of the rest of the world to force relief aid on a sovereign nation? Does compassion trump politics? Is sending aid to other countries when our own country is having financial problems just another instance of the left-wing pandering to global opinion?

Well, im a left-winger, but it really comes down to how much the aid can help and what the aftermath of ignoring the politics will be. In this case, Burma doesn't really have much international pull, their people are going to hate them for ignoring their plight, and at the end of the day, these people need the aid. Little political backlash and being helpful...why not?

[grandpa]

Quote by: Winter wind Well, im a left-winger, but it really comes down to how much the aid can help and what the aftermath of ignoring the politics will be. In this case, Burma doesn't really have much international pull, their people are going to hate them for ignoring their plight, and at the end of the day, these people need the aid.

This shows why you don't just throw money at a problem. If the international community can, it should just go into Burma and help them. They are desperate for aid, not necessarily money. Obviously, there is a real and
pressing need. Of course, not everyone could travel to Burma right now.

Grandpa h.

[Gods_Mercenary]

The problem is I don't see the military government being intimidated by much more than actual military force.

[another day]

Quote by: grandpa This shows why you don't just throw money at a problem. If the international community can, it should just go into Burma and help them. They are desperate for aid, not necessarily money. Obviously, there is a real and pressing need. Of course, not everyone could travel to Burma right now. Grandpa h.

They wanted to give aid, but the burmese government wouldn't grant visas. They said send money/supplies but not people because they wanted to horde the supplies.

is it the right and responsibility of the rest of the world to force relief aid on a sovereign nation?

The problem is I can guarantee you the people in this "sovereign nation" definitly want the aid. It's the government that is stopping it. The government doesn't represent the people as it's not a democracy. Therefore, why is the government even included in the definition of "nation"... they are more like a captor holding the nation hostage.

If there was ever a candidate for the kind of nation building that was supposedly the goal in iraq, it's this one, but it shouldn't be done. We need to learn our lesson about those kinds of invasions and just stay out of whatever political mess is going on in another country. It sucks that they are being oppressed but hopefully in time they will manage to overcome it themselves.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I was about to point out that any nation could invade any other nation on the reasoning that the people really want it, but then you argued against the use of force, as I kind of thought you would, so it's kinda moot.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: god's mercenary The problem is I don't see the military government being intimidated by much more than actual military force.

They're going to be staring down the barrel of their people if they keep this up. Eventually this is going to bite them in the ass.

[grandpa]

Quote by: another day They wanted to give aid, but the burmese government wouldn't grant visas. They said send money/supplies but not people because they wanted to horde the supplies.

So people would have to sneak in to provide aid? That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard! What kind of incompetent government is this? I can see governments stealing money and supplies O(they always do that anyway), but not letting people travel to provide direct aid (presumably such as adequate food/drink supplies) -- that's just stupid.

Bush once denied visas to a Hugo Chavez delegation to the United States, but this obviously trumps that by far.

Well, looks like Burma needs some kind of revolution.

Grandpa h.

[thebuescherman]

It is utterly despicable that their government is completely incompetent to their wants and needs. I agree that Burma would have been a much better candidate for nation-rebuilding then Iraq. However, we can only offer to help them.

Militarily forcing aid via overthrowing the government is not a viable option. Perhaps if the US military wasn't already spread across the world, and focused in Iraq and Afghanistan, we might be able to do something. But we already have prior commitments to attend to, and diverting forces from those areas while the job is nowhere near being completed is not a good strategy. Neither can America afford another vast nation-building operation. We are already up to our heads in debt from Iraq and Afghanistan, and there are problems that need solving in our own country.

Now, I suppose it may come down to something along the lines of what the Allied forces did to East Berlin after WW2, with the planes flying overhead and dropping down emergency supplies for the masses to take as they will.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Winter wind They're going to be staring down the barrel of their people if they keep this up. Eventually this is going to bite them in the ass.

I don't think they've ever cared what the people think. Unless their support in the military fades, a successful revolution doesn't seem likely. And when the soldiers are getting the food, there's not much reason to be that angry.

[another day]

Quote by: grandpa So people would have to sneak in to provide aid? That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard! What kind of incompetent government is this? I can see governments stealing money and supplies O(they always do that anyway), but not letting people travel to provide direct aid (presumably such as adequate food/drink supplies) -- that's just stupid. Bush once denied visas to a Hugo Chavez delegation to the United States, but this obviously trumps that by far. Well, looks like Burma needs some kind of revolution. Grandpa h.

Incompetent government? Dude where have you been in regards to the whole Burma situation? This is not a government, it's a tyrannical regime... pure fascism. And revolution? Did you not hear about that? They tried it a few months ago, it was a huge deal. The government killed many people, many of them monks, to quell the uprising..they had squads of special police going around kidnapping people and imprisoning them. Some estimates suggest as many as 100,000 people were killed by the government.

Incompetent is the last word I would use for this organization. They are extremely competent, efficient, and good at what they are doing - which is enslaving a nation of people under their rule.

[grandpa]

Quote by: another day Incompetent government? Dude where have you been in regards to the whole Burma situation?

Well, I guess I'm a little old-fashioned. I assume death squads still constitute an incompetent government.

And, as I noted, refusing aid is simply stupid.

Grandpa h.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Incompentant means being unable to accomplish your aims, but the Junta has been extremely successful in its aims. Their refusing aid is a complicated gesture, but they aren;t really refusing it, they're keeping it for themselves and their soldiers, whose loyalty they depend on. It then makes perfect sense for the generals to keep soldiering for them an enviable occupation.

[another day]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Incompentant means being unable to accomplish your aims, but the Junta has been extremely successful in its aims. Their refusing aid is a complicated gesture, but they aren;t really refusing it, they're keeping it for themselves and their soldiers, whose loyalty they depend on. It then makes perfect sense for the generals to keep soldiering for them an enviable occupation.

Yes this is what I meant. They aren't trying to a benevolent, democratic and just government so you can't call them incompetent for not accomplishing something they aren't trying to do. Like I said, they are perfectly competent and are doing a great job at enslaving this nation of people under their rule.

[grandpa]

Quote by: another day Yes this is what I meant. They aren't trying to a benevolent, democratic and just government so you can't call them incompetent for not accomplishing something they aren't trying to do.

I understand what you meant. However, it is a form of incompetence when you consider other interests.
When it comes to sane agendas (such as disaster aid), this regime is indeed incompetent -- as has been the case regarding Bush and Katrina, or any other authority figure who doesn't care about people's interests.

That's my point.

Grandpa h.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: grandpa When it comes to sane agendas (such as disaster aid), this regime is indeed incompetent -- as has been the case regarding Bush and Katrina, or any other authority figure who doesn't care about people's interests.

An ironic comparison is the recent tragedy in China with the earthquakes.

The premier was on the spot for moral support in hours.

China is better at disaster relief then America, and Myanmar.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: grandpa I understand what you meant. However, it is a form of incompetence when you consider other interests. When it comes to sane agendas (such as disaster aid), this regime is indeed incompetent -- as has been the case regarding Bush and Katrina, or any other authority figure who doesn't care about people's interests. That's my point. Grandpa h.

But like I said, it makes perfect sense for the Generals to make the soldiers feel looked out for compared to the rest of the populace.