Americans have reached deep into their wallets to make private donations to aid the victims of the tsunami disaster in Asia. However the American government offerred very little initially. The initial amount offerred was $7 million dollars. Bush waited three full days to make a public comment. (He was on vacation at his ranch in Texas.) A high ranking U.N. official said that he was tired of wealthy nations being so "stingy" with their help to needy nations.
Many have said this is our opportunity to win back a lot of good will in the world. Opinions of the U.S. Government around the world are quite low these days, and we know have an opportunity to show that America cares about the rest of the world and the well-being of people in need. However, our government's response (unlike individuals who have been donating in record numbers) has been slow at best.
The amount of aid our government pledged was increased to $35 million, but a lot of criticism remained. (See the Chritian Science Monitor for a sampling of opinions.) Ralph Nader wrote a scathing review of our inaction and the New York Times opinion page came down hard on the Bush administration.
On Friday, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced that our government was increasing our share to $350 million, but this came after days of public criticism.
So, here is my question. Has Bush embarassed America again? Has his response reinforced the stereotype of us as materialistic, greedy, and uncaring? Or do you think this is much ado about nothing?
Since we are the world's wealthiest and most powerful nation; since we consume 25% of the world's energy resources; since we enjoy cheap consumer goods thanks to cheap labor in other nations; do we have an obligation to help more than other nations?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I don't think its an issue of embarrasment or not..
..but yes, I do think that as an economic "powerhouse", we are morally obligated to help out in situations like this one. But... I think that there are a lot of things that we, as a nation, are morally obligated to do that seem outrageous to many people.
Believe it or not, a day might come when we are earthquaked, or nuked, or hurricaned (oh wait, that just happened)... where we might need assistance from other countries. If we, as Americans, want to develop a sense of comradery and fellowship Internationally, then this IS an obligation of ours..
Yes, the government is playing politics.. $7 million.. $35 million.. $350 million.. but, isn't "politics" their job? I am surprised after reading these articles.. because I would assume that many anti-bushers would say "we're already in X amount of debt because of this guy.. why is he spending MORE of our money elsewhere".. But I'm not complaining, I'm glad that Americans are actually uniting for something beyond their personal security. But I think it was wise for the Bush Administration to be cautious about the numbers they threw out. The fact that the administration went forward with larger numbers after the citizens of the United States showed support is not an embarrasment, but rather a (sorta kinda) example of democracy.
Look at that.. what we think actually makes a difference. Tight!
That was kind of long winded, and I'm not EXACTLY sure what I said.. but maybe that was of use to someone.. especially the gradebook.. right next to my name?
Kelly
I do not think that this completely makees the US look greedy, but i think that it is a prime example of showing the pressure that we fell into from the other worldwide countries. 7 million dollars to start out with?? that sounds pretty pathetic to me to start with, but now it is up to atleast $350 million. i know where the money comes from, but i guess that i also dont really understand how easily we can just give that much away when we cant supply our other needs here in our own country. now if that is being greedy, let it be that way but either way teh money will be easily spent.
Adrienne
Post a Comment