Chief Mogrifier
Posts: 8,796 
June 12th, 2007, 04:37 PM
Quoting tracy
I'm not saying we shouldn't help them, nor should we cut off aid. My feeling is that maybe we should be doing things a little differently. The first world countries have been pouring aid into Africa for almost thirty years and "starting to make progress" doesn't seem nearly good enough. I think we basically agree on most aspects of this topic. I'm just getting a little impatient and I wonder if there are better places for our money.
I've read all about the conflicts, just like you have. My point is why treat Tanzania or Mauritius like you would treat the Sudan or Somalia? That doesn't make sense. Some countries are pure hell holes no doubt. Others have started making progress.
Even some of those countries are no longer at war right now. Sierra Leone's conflict is basically over and they have a LOT of war injured. Rwanda is basically at peace as well and has made remarkable progress since the genocide. I think it's more important to help those countries now than ever.
Even some of those countries are no longer at war right now. Sierra Leone's conflict is basically over and they have a LOT of war injured. Rwanda is basically at peace as well and has made remarkable progress since the genocide. I think it's more important to help those countries now than ever.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,669
Location: California
Location: California
June 12th, 2007, 05:57 PM
I read somewhere that Africa had for years spent more money paying off debts to western countries than they received in aid from western countries. We may have been pouring money into that continent, but we were taking out even more which sort of defeated the purpose. It's no wonder they've made little progress.
It's also amazing how cheaply they've sold their natural resources. You could pay $20 for a rough diamond in Sierra Leone that will cost $1500 in Antwerp. The resources they have are not helping the people. The only people benefiting from them are those in power in the country and the western consumers of their goods.
Quoting #juan
I think we do. I agree that the "aid" we used to give was, like you said, just pouring money into bad countries. Often the money would be used to redecorate presidential palaces or to buy weapons (which really only supported the economy of the nations selling them). It lined the pockets of corrupt government officials who oppressed their own people, often quite violently. Then if they were finally overthrown, they got away with their money and left the debt to their country. That is simply unacceptable and things should and ARE being done differently today. We can and do tie aid money to humanitarian and economic conditions. I am completely in favor of that.
I'm not saying we shouldn't help them, nor should we cut off aid. My feeling is that maybe we should be doing things a little differently. The first world countries have been pouring aid into Africa for almost thirty years and "starting to make progress" doesn't seem nearly good enough. I think we basically agree on most aspects of this topic. I'm just getting a little impatient and I wonder if there are better places for our money.
I read somewhere that Africa had for years spent more money paying off debts to western countries than they received in aid from western countries. We may have been pouring money into that continent, but we were taking out even more which sort of defeated the purpose. It's no wonder they've made little progress.
It's also amazing how cheaply they've sold their natural resources. You could pay $20 for a rough diamond in Sierra Leone that will cost $1500 in Antwerp. The resources they have are not helping the people. The only people benefiting from them are those in power in the country and the western consumers of their goods.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,687
June 12th, 2007, 08:42 PM
I agree Tracey, but unless they are willing to cede sovereignty in the way Japan or Germany did we just can't help them.
The best solution I can think of is a complete forgiveness of African debt and a complete embargo on any nation loaning or giving money to Africa.
Let them fix themselves, they are fully capable adults the same as anyone else on the planet and are capable of fixing their own problems if we stop meddling in all aspects.
I agree Tracey, but unless they are willing to cede sovereignty in the way Japan or Germany did we just can't help them.
The best solution I can think of is a complete forgiveness of African debt and a complete embargo on any nation loaning or giving money to Africa.
Let them fix themselves, they are fully capable adults the same as anyone else on the planet and are capable of fixing their own problems if we stop meddling in all aspects.
A Mad Mulligan
Posts: 2,766
Videos: 3
Location: The Moonsine Cafe
Videos: 3
Location: The Moonsine Cafe
June 12th, 2007, 08:53 PM
How would you stabalize a government without being the brutal dictator that currently causes the constant over throwing of the last corupt dictator?
Quoting Zzarchov
I don't know if they are though. How do you reason with someone who is willing to shoot little kids if they don't pick up and gun and shoot those they are told to? How do they educate people who live among people who refuse to allow schools or instruction other than war?
I agree Tracey, but unless they are willing to cede sovereignty in the way Japan or Germany did we just can't help them.
The best solution I can think of is a complete forgiveness of African debt and a complete embargo on any nation loaning or giving money to Africa.
Let them fix themselves, they are fully capable adults the same as anyone else on the planet and are capable of fixing their own problems if we stop meddling in all aspects.
The best solution I can think of is a complete forgiveness of African debt and a complete embargo on any nation loaning or giving money to Africa.
Let them fix themselves, they are fully capable adults the same as anyone else on the planet and are capable of fixing their own problems if we stop meddling in all aspects.
How would you stabalize a government without being the brutal dictator that currently causes the constant over throwing of the last corupt dictator?
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,669
Location: California
Location: California
June 13th, 2007, 10:39 AM
Quoting Zzarchov
None of those countries were as poor or undevelopped as some of the African nations you'd have us ignore. None of them were facing AIDS. I don't know if they can be compared fairly.
How about the old USSR?
We got Spain, we got lots of South American examples...
We got Spain, we got lots of South American examples...
Chief Mogrifier
Posts: 8,796
June 13th, 2007, 02:32 PM
Quoting tracy
There are only about 45 Sub-Saharan countries in Africa and most of those have been at war at some point over the last twenty years. Hiv/Aids is rampant in most of them. Droughts and food shortages are the norm rather than the exception. Rather than throwing money, we have to go in and show them.
None of those countries were as poor or undevelopped as some of the African nations you'd have us ignore. None of them were facing AIDS. I don't know if they can be compared fairly.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,687
June 13th, 2007, 03:05 PM
Actually many of them were as poor or poorer than African countries (see Central Asia), many had their own Pandemics. All of the problems facing Africa these days are the result of the choices made by Africa's populace.
AIDS for instance, sad as it may be, is inevitabley gone as a major pandemic in a few years if people wouldn't keep spreading it. Yes it would be nice to find a cure, but failing that prevention is the most important aspect. Stop screwing around (literally).
You don't want to be poor? Stop shooting each other everytime someone starts to build something. These are not problems unique to Africa, much of the world has had to deal with these problems and have found their own way out.
Before AIDS it was even more serious outbreaks that whiped out larger portions of the population. AIDS is pretty tame in comparison, you can't get AIDS by being coughed on or touching a doorknob someone sneezed on. AIDS is not the first major pandemic to hit Africa, its not even the deadliest, its just the latest one.
Quoting tracy
None of those countries were as poor or undevelopped as some of the African nations you'd have us ignore. None of them were facing AIDS. I don't know if they can be compared fairly.
Actually many of them were as poor or poorer than African countries (see Central Asia), many had their own Pandemics. All of the problems facing Africa these days are the result of the choices made by Africa's populace.
AIDS for instance, sad as it may be, is inevitabley gone as a major pandemic in a few years if people wouldn't keep spreading it. Yes it would be nice to find a cure, but failing that prevention is the most important aspect. Stop screwing around (literally).
You don't want to be poor? Stop shooting each other everytime someone starts to build something. These are not problems unique to Africa, much of the world has had to deal with these problems and have found their own way out.
Before AIDS it was even more serious outbreaks that whiped out larger portions of the population. AIDS is pretty tame in comparison, you can't get AIDS by being coughed on or touching a doorknob someone sneezed on. AIDS is not the first major pandemic to hit Africa, its not even the deadliest, its just the latest one.
