Wednesday, June 04, 2008

Myanamar jacks up aid

BBC: "US Navy ships are due to leave Burma's coastline because of the continued refusal of the government to allow them to help victims of Cyclone Nargis.

The navy said it would withdraw the four ships, carrying helicopters and landing craft, after 15 failed attempts to convince the regime to let them in.

French and British navy ships have also been withdrawn after being refused permission to operate.

Cyclone Nargis left more than 133,000 people dead or missing."

Such undeniable evil, and such a love for humanity.
This is why America is important to the world, we are willing to fight and bleed and die for nations and then when nations can't take care of themselves, we're ready to help them recover. Yet the arrogance and hubris of a junta has denied this.

Not much to be done, but keep the people in prayer.


FAICA Soldier said...

And we have brothers and sisters there who have, at risk to themselves, managed to find a way into the country to help people. Pray that their efforts bear much fruit. That these people would flock at the first sight of light in this pitch black nation. That local leaders will see that we bring love while their own government brings only death. said...

Should not it be the individual who decides whether or not he wants to give aid to another country or group etc.?

I have just as much a moral problem with a government forcing its members to be charitble as a government refusing to allow necessary aid in such a suitation as Myanamar.

FAICA Soldier said...

It is also difficult to separate aid from diplomacy. I assure you that I know we step way over that line. I think it would be pretty awesome if our diplomatic aid could be covered entirely by donations. I don't know that anyone has ever successfully tried to do such a thing at that level. The other concern is the administration. I don't have much more faith in non-profit organizations than I do in government. I agree with "shadowsoflove" that taxing charity is terrible. It is inefficient and rarely effective. It destroys God's charge of being a cheerful giver and it discourages many from giving at all. So the question is what works best and how do we make the better system work while we are still required to live with the broken system for the time being.

Solameanie said...

Here's another interesting thing to consider, and I hate to even say it because it makes me sound like a Bush basher. Yet, I do find it troubling.

We can invade Iraq for numerous reasons, including the oft-repeated line that he was a brutal dictator that butchered his own people. The UN gets urged all the time to authorize interventions, or to intervene itself in other situations.

Yet, when thousands upon thousands are butchered in Africa or Southeast Asia, the world does nothing about it other than cluck their tongues.

I guess if the Burmese had oil or some other globally-needed commodity, there would be more incentive to intervene and overthrow this evil junta.

Palm boy said...

FAICA, good point.

Shadows, I'm looking at this as good global diplomatic policy, and to the end that it helps deter wars with the US or hostility to it's citizens, I belive this is a good use of money.

Sola, south africa doesn't train 2000 lil' queda members every year. said...

Palm boy:

How can going against another sovereign country's wishes help to deter wars? You may argue that it is the government, not the country that resists aid, then let the people establish a new government, just as our country did. It is their choice, their responsibility. If you would like to go over their and use YOUR OWN person to try and help them, then by all means do so, but do not force me to help you. You mention good foreign relations as the morality behind these actions, be serious. Good foreign relations need nothing more then A. Establishing prosperous trade with that country; B. Staying out of their business; and C. Having a reasonable competent level of defense. America meets A and C without trouble.

Judging from everything I have seen, and correct me if I am wrong, I believe you have not had (and would benefit greatly from) substantial contact with a wide variety of ideas concerning the function and purpose of government, including its relation to morality. One single extremely short work, Frederic Bastiat's "THe Law", lays out a currently much neglected position which was, however, held to by the Founding Fathers.

If I may be so presumptuous, I ask you to read it (it should not take more then an hour or two) and tell me what you think when your done. Below I have attached a link to an online copy of the book.