International Aid

[DeletedUser]

Don't know about Niger, but when I went to Zimbabwe it wasn't a fraction as bad as I'd thought it would be based on the news reports I'd heard. I mean sure, the exchange rates were crazy but the sort of totalitarian police state with people dying of starvation around the street corner ?

Did you also visit the rural areas? Areas outside the main tourist zones?

 

[DeletedUser]

Guys, there's no arguing with Pervie - he's typical of a particular breed of ignorant American. This breed will argue the toss despite knowing what the hell they're talking about. Usually they will recognise their mistake and eventually identify themselves as the lesser intelligent in the debate, but will fail to make that fact known to their components.

 

[DeletedUser]

To start with you need to get the idea out of your head that the UN solves anything. Never has, never will.

Don't know about Niger, but when I went to Zimbabwe it wasn't a fraction as bad as I'd thought it would be based on the news reports I'd heard. I mean sure, the exchange rates were crazy but the sort of totalitarian police state with people dying of starvation around the street corner ?

Wasn't the case.

News is always sensationalist. It will always highlight the very worst and ignore large tracts of what is good.

Which does beg the question ? Have you visited Congo yourself ? (I haven't)


Also its worth noting that most "aid" isn't actually aid, its loans that need to be repaid with interest.

Actually the United Nations does a very good job across the world when it's not being judged on old mistakes. The United Nation's is keeping Gaza from economic and social collapse and it's doing a good job in the Democratic Republic of Congo when it's managed to get several tribe and rebel groups to surrender to the government and actually take a more peaceful role in the politics of the nation. Only one main rebel group actually exists in the country so i'll call that a success.

Did you go outside the capital of Zimbabwe? I've seen the reports for Al Jazera. Civil servants who are quite well off compared to the averge Zimbabwean citizens in the amount they earn can't even afford to live a decent life and they get paid in dollars because the government has abandoned their own currency you can even find notes just lying around the street cause it's worthless.

Look at the human development index. Zimbabwe has the lowest in the world followed by the DRC and Niger.

 

[DeletedUser]

Of course it was bad for the Indian subcontinent. What rock did you live under ? Do you even have an education ? If you do, then what sort of trash and lies did they teach you in it ?

I'm from the Indian subcontinent, I understand and learn much more about British rule here than someone who is not from here can, simply due to being on site and knowing the local perspective.

British occupation was probably the biggest setback the subcontinent has ever had.

Seriously...? I actually cannot believe you said this - you must be the biggest imbecile I have ever seen. I'm glad I'm not related to you... honestly. :icon_eek:

 

[DeletedUser]

Guys, there's no arguing with Pervie - he's typical of a particular breed of ignorant American. This breed will argue the toss despite knowing what the hell they're talking about. Usually they will recognise their mistake and eventually identify themselves as the lesser intelligent in the debate, but will fail to make that fact known to their components.

I'm Bangladeshi, you ignoramus. But with that post you do betray a few things :

1) The level of assumptions you are willing to make. This erodes the credibility of the assumptions you make regarding the content of your "arguments" and I use that term loosely.

2) The extent to which you have no clue what you are talking about.

Seriously...? I actually cannot believe you said this - you must be the biggest imbecile I have ever seen. I'm glad I'm not related to you... honestly

.

This in the internet, you haven't actually "seen" me. Secondly, I'm also correct. You just do not know history. Or have been taught false history. Or do not have an education.
The assumption about you not having an education is supported by your parroting and repeating insults me and TheOne mention as though you just learned a new word and cannot wait to use it in the internet.

@ Heaven fox and Boxxy : Yes I did visit rural areas, you have to pass through them on the way to certain tourist hotspots (by road) and in someplace we stop to take a look around. Place is quite secure.

Boxxy allow me to collect some of my thoughts before responding to you. But my question remains, did you visit the Congo ? Or Gaza ? Yes or no will do (and nothing else please).

 

[DeletedUser]

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah???

Sorry, but I'm so baffled by your first statement I can't take anything you type seriously. I hope you weren't educated in Bangladesh too, my expectations of you are lowered enough.

 

[DeletedUser]

If I can't read, then it'd be hard for my write, .

Thank for proving my point. I rest my case.

@ Boxxy: Patience, I was metaphorically stepping on a fly, exhibiting shades of my old forum days. I'll get to you in a while.

Meanwhile, the question I pitched to you still stands:

But my question remains, did you visit the Congo ? Or Gaza ? Yes or no will do (and nothing else please).

Edit: to respond to :

Actually the United Nations does a very good job across the world when it's not being judged on old mistakes. The United Nation's is keeping Gaza from economic and social collapse and it's doing a good job in the Democratic Republic of Congo when it's managed to get several tribe and rebel groups to surrender to the government and actually take a more peaceful role in the politics of the nation. Only one main rebel group actually exists in the country so i'll call that a success.

Did you go outside the capital of Zimbabwe? I've seen the reports for Al Jazera. Civil servants who are quite well off compared to the averge Zimbabwean citizens in the amount they earn can't even afford to live a decent life and they get paid in dollars because the government has abandoned their own currency you can even find notes just lying around the street cause it's worthless.

Look at the human development index. Zimbabwe has the lowest in the world followed by the DRC and Niger.

I think you'll find that a large part of Gaza (and the Palestinian people's) fiscal imbalances and needs are met by aid pouring in from the rest of the Muslim world, particularly Arab states. UN aid is minuscule in comparison and nowhere near enough to meet the needs on its own.

Atop which the UN is primarily a forum for international settlement and co-operation not for dispensing aid. The UN's role (self appointed, I might add) is to resolve the situation and carve our a better permanent deal for the people in Gaza and in Palestine, not the provision of day to day necessities and amenities.

In this, its safe to say, it has failed spectacularly.

Regarding Congo, UN asked countries to provide peacekeeping forces, those countries did so. The role of the UN was simply that of making the request. But lets say the presence of peace keeping forces is the UN's credit.

However the disarmament of local militias came under the watch of heavy NATO troop presence, without which its almost impossible to claim the rebels would have stood down. This is because UN peacekeepers are just that, a peacekeeping force, they do not have credibility (and face it ability) to be an effective threat to an already established militancy. What the peacekeepers did do was ensure law and order, after the NATO spurred disarmament occurred, effectively glorified policing and rebuilding work (both of which are important but the point is they did not have a role in convincing the rebels to disarm in the first place).

NATO is not the UN. NATO was not there with the same agenda that UN was there with. The agenda of NATO nations are more tied to the mineral resources (especially diamonds) that Congo posses. The UN's agenda is tied to human wellfare.

I'm a big fan of the HDI but it doesn't tell the full story, statistics are never a full picture. There are nations such as India performing fairly well in the HDI but where conditions for the worst of the poor are more desperate than in African nations.

 

[DeletedUser]

Thank for proving my point for me. I rest my case.

@ Boxxy: Patience, I was metaphorically stepping on a fly, exhibiting shades of my old forum days. I'll get to you in a while.

Meanwhile, the question I pitched to you still stands:

Eh. I did not read your responses to Olly's stupid comments. I don't really mind and I can still claim victory :icon_rolleyes:. I've not visited Gaza or the Congo, however I don't gather my sources from the mainstream media as I know they are controlled by the corporations and they know that terrible news sells more then good news.

I've read the recent wikileaks documents on Gaza and that Israel has been purposely been keeping the Gaza strip on the utter brink of economic and social collapse and many buildings still remain destroyed since Operation Cast Lead in 2008.

 

[DeletedUser]

[th][irrelevant insults deleted][/th]


@ Boxxy : The response to you is up in an edit of an earlier post. And thank you for telling me you haven't visited the places you describe, that was the reply I sought.

I host a wikileaks mirror site. The UN has a mandate it took up after WWII to prevent exactly the sort of systematic actions that Israel is doing in Gaza "from ever happening again". It took up this mandate in 1952 when it adopted the UDHR. How well has it succeeded ?
It hasn't.

 

[DeletedUser]

Pretty much Olly just got pwnt.

I read your post and I agree with much that has been said. Botswana is quite a nice country and one that I would like to visit soon. As I said before Africa is a vast continent and many of the countries you visited are quite nice.

South Africa - My old science teacher used to come from South Africa, the current crime rate in South Africa is quite high although if you look after yourself and visit the tourist districts and friendly area's of the country it's a country with a rich culture and historic background.

Kenya - I recently did some research on Kenya and found out that Kenya is the success story of Eastern Africa, it's had it's issues in the past but most of it's current issues are with minor corruption. They even have a plan to reach the status of quite a developed country by 2030 and their even moving people out the horrible slums and constructing them affordable housing which shall be able to get them out of them poverty ladder and make cracking down on the few criminals in the area easier for the local police.

Egypt - Although it's in a period of instability with the recent anti-government protests the economy of Egypt has been quite stable and growing well over the past decades with steady growth and a good tourist district, all zones which are well under control. The current Egyptian state has also been quite Pro-Israeli and been a key mediator in the talks between the Israeli and Palestinian state.

I don't know much about Namibia although I heard it's having issues with a HIV/Aids epidemic. African politics can be quite simple or complicated to understand, it helps to understand the history of the Continent and country your referring to

e: From what I understand about the history of Bangladesh you managed to forge your independence from Pakistan during the Indian-Pakistsan war. I think Bangladesh was known as East Pakistan during that time, when Pakistan was completely decisvely defeated. I most congratulate your country on it's equality reforms and growing economy.

 

[DeletedUser]

:lol: I'll take the attempt at logical discourse as a yes.

Firstly I cannot be an idiot and a retard, as a retard is 70-80 iq and an idiot is 20-lower iq!:icon_redface:

See how dumb that statement looks. People speak figuratively, and with cognitive reasoning skills most people tend to figure this out with context clues. What I was pointing out was your ignorance, and plainly offensive statements. Read become educated. Or you will continue to look like someone who legitimately has a 70 iq. What great "civil" discourse England brought to India and other countries alike. Link. Hopefully you have heard of Orwell if you went through the 8th grade I would assume you have read this, though I suppose the meaning went to waste on you. England subjugated, enslaved, mistreated, and destroyed civilizations in the name of what they said was giving them "civilized discourse." But what in reality caused hatred, racism, murder, and the abolishing of peoples culture. England subjugated, mistreated, and enslaved entire peoples while raping their lands for natural resources and you think this was a good thing? Oh please do explain.

Don't even try and pull Orwell on me, I've read every single of his books, some of them more than once.

A little biology lesson for you all then....

Every developing country in history goes through the same stages. You can see many countries in Africa (at the moment, a lot still are in the extreme poverty stage though), and India not long ago going through their version of the Industrial revolution - which was what set us on the course we're on now. Japan and Italy have accelerated past our own stage at the moment. India's own Industrial revolution happened not long ago, and there is plenty of evidence to show that without the intervention of the British it would leave them in a worse state than many African countries at the moment, simply due to their population size.

England subjugated, enslaved, mistreated, and destroyed civilizations in the name of what they said was giving them "civilized discourse." But what in reality caused hatred, racism, murder, and the abolishing of peoples culture.

You are basing most of your argument here on Burmese days.

I think many of you have misunderstood me. I am not talking about what Britain did for India in the time they were there, but rather what happened as a result of them leaving, I hope it is obvious to you all that the actions after the British left lead to the civilization of most of the countries. Many of the countries used the British political systems to establish their own governments and used the examples set by the British to establish their own countries. It is also not a coincidence many countries chose to stay as part of the commonwealth. You are trying to portray us as tyrants and beasts who brought destruction to the people we visited, but you can see today that we did anything but destroy civilizations.

 

[DeletedUser]

Don't even try and pull Orwell on me, I've read every single of his books, some of them more than once.

A little biology lesson for you all then....

Every developing country in history goes through the same stages. You can see many countries in Africa (at the moment, a lot still are in the extreme poverty stage though), and India not long ago going through their version of the Industrial revolution - which was what set us on the course we're on now. Japan and Italy have accelerated past our own stage at the moment. India's own Industrial revolution happened not long ago, and there is plenty of evidence to show that without the intervention of the British it would leave them in a worse state than many African countries at the moment, simply due to their population size.



You are basing most of your argument here on Burmese days.

I think many of you have misunderstood me. I am not talking about what Britain did for India in the time they were there, but rather what happened as a result of them leaving, I hope it is obvious to you all that the actions after the British left lead to the civilization of most of the countries. Many of the countries used the British political systems to establish their own governments and used the examples set by the British to establish their own countries. It is also not a coincidence many countries chose to stay as part of the commonwealth. You are trying to portray us as tyrants and beasts who brought destruction to the people we visited, but you can see today that we did anything but destroy civilizations.

Again, sweeping statement. There are plenty of interventions where it has done a world of good, I will take the British empire as an example. Without us there would be a lot more uncivilized countries out there.

material progress =/= civilized
These places weren't uncivilized to start with.

 

[DeletedUser]

material progress =/= civilized

I'm not sure where you're going with this, but a certain excent Material progress does mean a faster rate of civilization. Material progress = a Larger economy = A larger GDP per head = Less poverty per family, more money to spend on necessities = Ability to pay tax = Generally better education, police, transports etc...

But this all depends on your definition of civilized, as many people have different ideas of a "civilized country"

 

[DeletedUser]

Don't even try and pull Orwell on me, I've read every single of his books, some of them more than once.

A little biology lesson for you all then....

Every developing country in history goes through the same stages. You can see many countries in Africa (at the moment, a lot still are in the extreme poverty stage though), and India not long ago going through their version of the Industrial revolution - which was what set us on the course we're on now. Japan and Italy have accelerated past our own stage at the moment. India's own Industrial revolution happened not long ago, and there is plenty of evidence to show that without the intervention of the British it would leave them in a worse state than many African countries at the moment, simply due to their population size.



You are basing most of your argument here on Burmese days.

I think many of you have misunderstood me. I am not talking about what Britain did for India in the time they were there, but rather what happened as a result of them leaving, I hope it is obvious to you all that the actions after the British left lead to the civilization of most of the countries. Many of the countries used the British political systems to establish their own governments and used the examples set by the British to establish their own countries. It is also not a coincidence many countries chose to stay as part of the commonwealth. You are trying to portray us as tyrants and beasts who brought destruction to the people we visited, but you can see today that we did anything but destroy civilizations.

You speak as though you know all outcomes, that you can coordinate, and create predictive models of what would have happened. Call me dumb, but I think China went through a more prosperous industrial revolution without the "help" of England. Actually quite a few countries have gone through renaissance and industrial revolutions without help of great old England. You have 0 clue what could have happened, perhaps someone that was killed by England would have gone to school in another country come back and cured cancer, invented cold fusion, entirely revolutionized their economy. I dont know what would have happened, and you dont either.

You are trying to portray us as tyrants and beasts who brought destruction to the people we visited

I am not doing that history does a nice job doing that for me. Real history, not what ever propaganda mill you read out of.

You bore me good bye

 

[DeletedUser]

material progress =/= civilized

I'm not sure where you're going with this, but a certain excent Material progress does mean a faster rate of civilization. Material progress = a Larger economy = A larger GDP per head = Less poverty per family, more money to spend on necessities = Ability to pay tax = Generally better education, police, transports etc...

But this all depends on your definition of civilized, as many people have different ideas of a "civilized country"

Germany in south Africa (the west part of it, hirerto (grrr, forgot their name) revolt
WW1 and WW2, slavery, King Leopold and Congo, among other things


Now if they were civilized these things wouldn't happen

Less poverty per family, more money to spend on necessities

actually luxuries not necessities


What do you consider necessities?

Water/food/house/clothes so u don't die freezing, that's about it

the rest is luxury

 

[DeletedUser]

And what of Yemen? Oh what great civilization they have there... You speak as though you know all outcomes, that you can coordinate, and create predictive models of what would have happened. Call me dumb, but I think China went through a more prosperous industrial revolution without the "help" of England. Actually quite a few countries have gone through renaissance and industrial revolutions without help of great old England. You have 0 clue what could have happened, perhaps someone that was killed by England would have gone to school in another country come back and cured cancer, invented cold fusion, entirely revolutionized their economy. I dont know what would have happened, and you dont either.



I am not doing that history does a nice job doing that for me. Real history, not what ever propaganda mill you read out of.

You bore me good bye

You're no fun if you present a rubbish argument then run off....

And what of Yemen? Oh what great civilization they have there...

Of course I'm not talking about every single country, we owned 1/4 of the world... But Yemen wasn't the example I used.

Call me dumb, but I think China went through a more prosperous industrial revolution without the "help" of England.

Do you think so? Pray tell, who do you think bought the produce of China for a very long while?

 

[DeletedUser]

Germany in South Africa (the west part of it, hirerto (grrr, forgot their name) revolt
WW1 and WW2, slavery, King Leopold and Congo, among other things


Now if they were civilized these things wouldn't happen


actually luxuries not necessities


What do you consider necessities?

Water/food/house/clothes so u don't die freezing, that's about it

the rest is luxury

Necessities - Anything needed to maintain a healthy and prosperous lifestyle. You could argue many people in civilized countries don't get enough for necessities in some cases.

Germany in South Africa (the west part of it, hirerto (grrr, forgot their name) revolt
WW1 and WW2, slavery, King Leopold and Congo, among other things

Quite the opposite with WW1 and WW2 - In fact, without WW1 and WW2 we wouldn't have the technology etc.. we have nowadays as the war meant each country had to develop and progress in order to beat the competition. This continued way after the war ended.

 

[DeletedUser]

Necessities - Anything needed to maintain a healthy and prosperous lifestyle.

Like? A car? A cell phone? A computer? Cable? Internet....?

Quite the opposite with WW1 and WW2 - In fact, without WW1 and WW2 we wouldn't have the technology etc.. we have nowadays as the war meant each country had to develop and progress in order to beat the competition. This continued way after the war ended.

We aren't on the same page here. What I'm saying is you could be an industrialized country but when you commit genocides how the hell are you civilized?

Example would be the 2 wars, slavery, colonial cruelties among other things

And you have old civilizations who are very little if not non-industrialized at all and they do not commit such atrocities then how the hell would you call the industrialized country civilized and the other one uncivilized? :icon_confused:


Because they aren't living the life you are living?

 

[DeletedUser]

Africa is a large continent. It has success stories and epic failures. Look at Zimbabwe. Hyperinflation combined with decreasing agricultural production and a failing healthcare system with only some hospitals operating in the country unable to cope with the massive cholera outbreak. All this while the political elite have access to millions of dollars.

Visit the Democratic Republic of the Congo. A corrupt government and police that demand set up illegal tolls around the mining districts to gather money from the poor mine workers. Also the current warcrimes and sex crimes continuing in the east of the country while the UN try and solve the crisis.

Niger is just awful and Mali is pretty poor in rural areas.

Zimbabwe was a pretty well of country before the Mugabe (The president/dictator) started medaling in the economy and taking over farm lands and industries away from the people, he restricted trade among the people and international trade. It was a result of bad governance. Hyperinflation happen because the government started printing money to settle its debts, (this is the reason for most inflation ) Zimbabwe was not always a failure. One would have to look at why it failed before trying to come up with solutions. Freeing up the economy once again,trade, and sound currency can change most of Zimbabwe problem. It worked for germany after ww2, when they removed most of the price controls enforced upon by the allies and made a new currency, (the Germans did it by themselves behind allied backs)

The solution to eliminating poverty is not through international aid, but by looking at what caused the problem and correcting it. Zimbabwe would be a good example as to what causes poverty.

@ Olis750

India was a civilized land way before the British ever arrived, Indian Subcontinent GDP was about 25% of the world, and china had the other 25%. India has over 5000 years of civilization... While Europe was living in the dark ages, India was among the most prosperous in the world. Britain did not introduce civilization to India, it merely enslaved its people for its own benefit.

 

[DeletedUser]

@ Olis750

India was a civilized land way before the British ever arrived, Indian Subcontinent GDP was about 25% of the world, and china had the other 25%. India has over 5000 years of civilization... While Europe was living in the dark ages, India was among the most prosperous in the world. Britain did not introduce civilization to India, it merely enslaved its people for its own benefit.

You've got to ask then how Britain managed to enslave the people of a supposedly much better country than itself? We didn't exactly have overwhelming numbers.

To Radarr: I actually don't have a clue what you're talking about, I never remember even arguing with you on the UK4 forums nevermind you winning, so you obviously didn't make much of an impression on me. Also if you're just looking for a flame fest go elsewhere. It seems you've made enough enemies on the UK4 forums now, feel good alienating yourself does it?