London Attacked

[DCBuckFan]

I completely understand that, but since when do my hard worked for dollars need to go to support this? Why does this burden fall upon the US and UK? Becuase we are finiancially able to??

In my mind that is complete BS, it isn't like we don't have thousands of homeless people wondering around Baltimore (where I live)... why dont we take care of OUR people before sending money to other countries?

I want to help people as much as the next one out there, but my tax dollars are meant to help support this country... not others.

Sorry everyone, just a huge pet peeve of mine

 

[ScarletInMyVeins]

DC. Those people, okay most of them are homeless because they choose to be. There is plenty of aid here for them to take advantage of. Hell, all they have to do is get off their asses and help themselves. Clean themselves up and go to a temp agency and get a job. It's not like they have any bills so the money they make can all go towards housing and food. Am I not right? The people in other countries (ie. Africa) aren't able to help themselves. In my opinion it's one of those I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine situations, albeit they might not scratch ours any time soon.

 

[Golferdow01]

I have to agree with Scarlet. Although there are people here who genuinely are unable to get going in life, there are many who choose not to get going for various reasons and personally I would rather my money go to people who would be motivated to improve their lives if they were given the chance, and that's what we are doing with humanitarian aid overseas. Although they are unable to repay the generousity of the US right now, in a couple hundred years they could possibly be a strong ally and help us out in some way.

 

[DCBuckFan]

Fair enough, I think that it is obvious that many of us have drastically different views of how our tax dollars are spent, that is the great part about things... we can disagree :)

 

[jwinslow]

It also comes down to the fact that the money is going to help situations where hunger is taking lives by the thousands... or HIV or whatever. And to complicate things, thre are certain countries where the leaders will not even allow the aid to be delivered to the needy.

I do not mean to take away from those who have struggled with poverty in this country, however our relative definition of that word is far more luxurious than those in other countries. That's a large reason we send money elsewhere, people here often aren't actually that poor... it just seems that wa b/c they aren't able to be as wealthy/materialistic as the rest of us (that includes me).

This doesn't mean we couldn't do a lot of good by putting money into better schooling, or healthcare, etc... b/c there are plenty of things that need to be addressed, such as the absurdly expensive nature of prescription drugs (largely due to overdone advertising and extravagant catering to MDs to win their approval). I'm just tring to contrast some of the characteristics that seem to be equated with "poor" people in america.... vs. the famine, disease and so forth that can exist in africa.

While I can't speak for the political movements in the humanitarian process... I'd say most of the aid agencies aren't hoping for anything in return. It is merely a matter of helping those who are not as fortunate as you. Perhaps we are building alliances, but moreso we are helping a people group that in many ways can't help iself.

 

[ScarletInMyVeins]

Josh... you never did tell us your Rwanda story. When is that going to hit the shelves?

 

[gregorylee]

Personally I would mind it alot less (sending aid to Africa) if I thought it would actually get to the people who need it, and not fatten the bellies of corrupt federal and local governments and politicians.

JWinslow, maybe you should trade in that membership to the ACLU and get one to the NRA and you could start helping instead of just fucking stuff up.

 

[DEBuckeye]

For me the issue that matters the most is that these attacks will continue until the political leaders, the religious leaders and the people of the muslim community condemn them for the acts of murder they are. The silience speaks louder than anything else. Lip service will not be enough.

The political and religious leaders, along with the muslim community, already condemn these acts. It makes absolutely no difference to these bastards. You've heard the tapes on TV, and read the reports of what bin laden and his followers say. They are out of their minds, completely unreasonable, and convinced that they are right.

These terrorists will not respond to discussion. They don't want to listen to reason. The only thing they know is violence. Killing them, and wiping out their radical movements is the only way that we will be rid of them.

These terrorists must die. It's "kill or be killed" with them.

 

[jwinslow]

Personally I would mind it alot less (sending aid to Africa) if I thought it would actually get to the people who need it, and not fatten the bellies of corrupt federal and local governments and politicians.

JWinslow, maybe you should trade in that membership to the ACLU and get one to the NRA and you could start helping instead of just fucking stuff up.

I've ripped into the ACLU quite frequently. I've spent a good deal of time in africa as a missionary kid, so the box you're trying to put me in sure isn't working. That organization makes Bill O'Reilly, Michael Moore, Jesse Jackson and Howard Stern look like heirs to the papacy.

Sometimes it does get stolen by corrupt gov't... and sometimes it gets stolen by disgusting americans. No one should ever give money out of obligation (it's not biblical at all actually, tho those groups would like christians to think so)... that said I think aid should be sent though I'm no expert on how to do so in a way that ensures the money goes to the intended destination.

Josh... you never did tell us your Rwanda story. When is that going to hit the shelves?

Good qusetion, I should try and crank that out this summer before I get busy with work this fall...

 

[Oh8ch]

since when do my hard worked for dollars need to go to support this? Why does this burden fall upon the US and UK? Becuase we are finiancially able to??

Like most I have little intention of doing anything with my 'hard earned' lucre than spend it on me and mine. However, the idea that we all get what we deserve through good hard work is a complete myth. 99.99 percent of the people in Africa can bust their asses for 18 hours a day and not begin to approach the cutoff for the poverty level in our contry.

That said, I am by no means the left leaning bleeding heart that my posts in this thread may make me sound.

I am not saying the US should solve the problem in Africa - only that it can. (Although one might contemplate that the money one would save each month by driving a Corrola rather than a Navigator could save the very life of a five year old child - not that this matters since their death will be silent, out of our sight and outside of our national borders.)

Nor am I saying that in 10 years an African with a perceived grievance with the US should set off a dirty bomb in Manhattan - only that they may be able to do so.

Does the idea of an African setting off a bomb in Manhattan sound laughable? Did the idea of a Saudi doing the same thing seem any less laughable 20 years ago?

I am a strong proponent of aggressive action against Al Qaida. While it is true that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are innocent of any terrorist acts, it is also true that terrorists commonly hide in plain site among non-terrorist Muslims who do nothing to expose them. It is further true that the the voice of Islam decrying terrorism is weak at best. This needs to change and fear can motivate change.

But it is also true that the West has exploited the Middle East. It is true that our actions and policies have createad a breathing ground for terrorists. This is another part of the problem.

Islamic terrorism will begin to abate when Abdul looks at his children and decides their future will be brighter if Osama gives it a rest. We can move in that direction with both carrots and sticks.

The issues in Africa are very different where the opportunities for exploitation are much less and any threat is certainly well down the road. However, I also believe the money being talked about falls a bit short of what we are spending to wage war in Iraq.

 

[Bucktastic]

The question of it all is when are these NO BALLS Euros (discluding UK) going to join in the fight and help us out over there?

 

[sandgk]

Like most I have little intention of doing anything with my 'hard earned' lucre than spend it on me and mine. However, the idea that we all get what we deserve through good hard work is a complete myth. 99.99 percent of the people in Africa can bust their asses for 18 hours a day and not begin to approach the cutoff for the poverty level in our contry.

That said, I am by no means the left leaning bleeding heart that my posts in this thread may make me sound.

I am not saying the US should solve the problem in Africa - only that it can. (Although one might contemplate that the money one would save each month by driving a Corrola rather than a Navigator could save the very life of a five year old child - not that this matters since their death will be silent, out of our sight and outside of our national borders.)

Nor am I saying that in 10 years an African with a perceived grievance with the US should set off a dirty bomb in Manhattan - only that they may be able to do so.

Does the idea of an African setting off a bomb in Manhattan sound laughable? Did the idea of a Saudi doing the same thing seem any less laughable 20 years ago?

I am a strong proponent of aggressive action against Al Qaida. While it is true that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are innocent of any terrorist acts, it is also true that terrorists commonly hide in plain site among non-terrorist Muslims who do nothing to expose them. It is further true that the the voice of Islam decrying terrorism is weak at best. This needs to change and fear can motivate change.

But it is also true that the West has exploited the Middle East. It is true that our actions and policies have createad a breathing ground for terrorists. This is another part of the problem.

Islamic terrorism will begin to abate when Abdul looks at his children and decides their future will be brighter if Osama gives it a rest. We can move in that direction with both carrots and sticks.

The issues in Africa are very different where the opportunities for exploitation are much less and any threat is certainly well down the road. However, I also believe the money being talked about falls a bit short of what we are spending to wage war in Iraq.

With all deference to Steve19 who is now living over there, or Oh8ch above, the notion of an African acting on terrorist urges is something that seems far from unlikely to me. Both Steve and I are close to the same age, though with different heritage. Thus Steve may or may not recall such wonderful outfits as the Ton Ton Macoute. True, they did not unleash their form of terror beyond the borders of Africa, nonetheless I doubt their victims, mostly European settlers, would describe them as anything other than horrific, let alone terrorist.

One could easily add to the list of violent and disaffected groups in Africa. Short memories seem to preclude some remembering such stalwart institutionalized terrorists as Idi Amin in Uganda. Their are also the seemingly interminable and cyclical struggles which break out in the metals rich Congo. The list, sadly could go on and on.

All that stops such groups from becoming known as terrorists on a wider stage is that they are a) sometimes under-funded for international adventures, and b) more often than not are firmly focussed for now on their immediate problems -- such as offing the neighboring tribe, despot, or institutions of local power.

This need not however lead us to believe that the problem of disinherited Africans will end up any differently than that say of relatives to the Saudi Royal family who were not given their "fair" share of support. Once Osama's greatest complaint was quite local, it was clearly directed inwards at the Saudi Royal Family body politic. Only after they turned a blind eye to him did Osama's obsession twist the role of the Western World into the party responsible for all troubles in the Saudi kingdom.

So you ask would I have conceived 10 years ago, or 20 years ago of the potential for an Arab or an African to act in the manner of the twisted followers of Al-Qaeda? My answer is absolutely yes.

But perhaps that is because I tend to look at life through the lens of history.

 

[sandgk]

Curiouser and Curiouser

Seems now that the bombs on the Tube went of within second of each other.

That tags this as a remote or delayed detonation (I believe). The perpetrators are less likely to have been suicide bombers.

It also puts in in deeper contrast the single attack on surface transportation -- which happened a full hour later.


Could there have been some kind of screw up by the terrorists?

Tube bombs 'almost simultaneous'

The three bombs on London underground trains "exploded almost simultaneously", say police.

Scotland Yard said the attacks took place within 50 seconds of each other despite previously saying they had taken place over a longer time period.

British Transport Police have also warned that the recovery of victims could continue through the night.

Meanwhile, the government is to announce a two minute silence for 1200 BST on Thursday.

Technical data from London Underground disproved the earlier wider range of timings between explosions, Scotland Yard Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick said at a press conference on Saturday.

And there was still no certainty about the number of people whose bodies remain trapped in wrecked train carriages below King's Cross, it was announced.

This would be a "slow, methodical, meticulous process" in very difficult circumstances, said Deputy Chief Constable Andy Trotter.

 

[Steve19]

Sand and I agree on a lot of things. And we agree on a lot of what he has written today.

I would add that Africa has as much variation as North America. There's a lot of difference between Egypt, Morrocco, Tanzania, South Africa, and Ivory Coast. As much as between Canada, the US, and Mexico. There have been instances of local terrorism across Africa, Asia and all regions where low-income countries are prevalent.

However, I don't think there is as much chance of terrorism in South Africa as there is in the West. South Africa is a truly non-aligned state that abhors terrorism. Don't forget, this is the only country to have nuclear weapons and to destroy these.

As for European settlers, they did good and bad in Africa. Those who did bad raped the land, plundered its wealth and people (in slavery), and deprived a people of their cultural identity.

The regional wars of the 1970s still characterize Africa for many people. But what many don't understand is that those wars resulted in part from the indiscriminant border setting by European colonists, who simply carved out territories without reference to existing boundaries. Let people from Canada take over much of Ohio and see if Ohioans would not fight to regain their land.

Africa is undergoing great change. Tribalism and ethnicism are much less important aspects of African identity today. There is a good website www.afrobarometer.org that has lots of research on this and on topics of government, democracy and the like (co-hosted by Michigan State). Some problems remain in central Africa and with business ethics in many countries, but in the main Africa has begun to move toward good governance, rule of law, and economic maturity.

I have lived through a revolution and I lost good friends to combatants from both sides of the South African war to unseat Apartheid. I know sub-Saharan Africans well. In my experience, they are people with great human dignity who prefer cooperation to conflict. We can learn a lot from them, and they from us.

Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.org/) is a core African cultural value that refers to the fact that a person is a person only through other people. African culture recognizes a person as an individual and as a member of a group. Although Nelson Mandela gets the credit for the peaceful transition in South Africa and he is a very wise and exemplary person, he would be the first to tell you that he was only acting on ubuntu principles.

So, although I think there are regions in Africa where international terrorism could well be fomented, I don't think the South African government is likely to be harbor terrorists or its people approve of their actions.

 

[scarletandgrey]

Well it looks like the terrorists wre up to it again. they let off three more bombs today on London subways luckily only one injury was reported. Apparently the attacks were alomst identical to the july 7th attacks.