After a devastating cyclone, there could be as many as one million dead in Myanmar/Burma. There's no good way to know.
A massive earthquake in China with as many as 10 thousand dead.
As a superpower, the United States almost, and I use almost as the operative phrase, has an obligation to send aid to these countries, and has both offered and sent aid.
Myanmar refused all but one plane load of supplies. China, I've not heard about just yet.
My question is, should we help them considering how much they hate us? Why do people want to label American as greedy, hate-filled, war mongers, accusing us of being selfish while all too happily taking money and aid we offer? Is that not called biting the hand that feeds you?
The United States is far more generous than any other country out there. Yet we're labelled the bad guys.
For Example: Who said the US is stingy? We're always reading how much everyone hates the United States and we're constantly told by the UN that we just don't do enough. Well, this report should put to rest any notion we don't contribute enough of our largess to help the needy. This year, the U.S. had contributed $362.7 million to WFP just through May 4, according to the website. That figure does not include another $250 million above the planned yearly contribution that was promised by President George W. Bush in the wake of WFP's April warning that a "silent tsunami" of rising food costs would add dramatically to the world population living in hunger. Nor does it include another $770 million in food aid that President Bush has asked Congress to provide as soon as possible. Here's the list of donors. (Via Jammie Wearing Fool)
I'd like to hear your thoughts.
Should we help other countries even if they hate us?
Even if they continually turn us away?
No matter what the rest of the world thinks?