Well it was first after 9/11 that the US started to pay off on its debt to the UNHavok wrote:
Who says that? Don't we already fund around 90% of UN expenses?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
isnt it funny how people never mention this when they talk about foreign aid. All you hear is " The US needs to give more to the UN"
Last edited by Magpie (2008-02-18 03:58:19)
1. usa: 22%Havok wrote:
Who says that? Don't we already fund around 90% of UN expenses?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
isnt it funny how people never mention this when they talk about foreign aid. All you hear is " The US needs to give more to the UN"
Not much is happening in Iraq at the minute so the media needs to go look for some stories, they were forced to find some good news for once.FEOS wrote:
Nope. He has been focused on helping Africa since he ran in 2000. It just doesn't make the news.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I would assume so, point is, this aspect of American foreign policy is always conveniently forgotten by detractors.Sup wrote:
Someone had to suggest this funding to Bush.
The same could be said for many world leaders. Why do you think they have speech writers?.Sup wrote:
Someone had to suggest this funding to Bush. I don't think he even knew that this country exists before it was suggested to him that he donates.
inside job.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/17/bush.africa/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Americans are assholes.wrote:
the U.S. is to provide a $698 million grant to Tanzania.
You can do that with drugs made in country or by regional suppliers, just make them distribute the drugs via the aid agency.IG-Calibre wrote:
by it being administered by independent aid agencies (preferably ones without a religious agenda)PureFodder wrote:
You're concerned that the government would manufacture the drugs using the money then sell them off instead of using them for their own populace? What's stopping them doing that with any imported drugs?IG-Calibre wrote:
Biggest problem with that is the pharmaceuticals manufactured are then returned here to the first world on the black market because of the "high" price of the drugs here, so they do not benefit at all - it's far from a win win situation i'm afraid.
As I said, the aid will go a long way to short term stimulation of the US economy, hence it's useful.mtb0minime wrote:
Why the fuck are we giving money we don't have to other countries when there are plenty of domestic problems here? That's one thing about foreign policy I'll never understand. Until our own country is in perfect working order, we have no right or obligation to help others. Selfish as it sounds, you can't help other people unless you yourself are fit to do so. (You don't see a guy with broken legs running into a burning building to carry people out do you?)