It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Arms Industry
From 1998 to 2001, the USA, the UK, and France earned more income from arms sales to developing countries than they gave in aid.
The arms industry is unlike any other. It operates without regulation. It suffers from widespread corruption and bribes. And it makes its profits on the back of machines designed to kill and maim human beings.
"We can’t have it both ways. We can’t be both the world’s leading champion of peace and the world’s leading supplier of arms."
Former US President Jimmy Carter, presidential campaign, 1976
World Policy Institute
- The United States transferred weaponry to 18 of the 25 countries involved in active conflicts
- More than half of the top 25 recipients of U.S. arms transfers in the developing world (13) were defined as undemocratic by the State Department
- When countries designated by the State Department’s Human Rights Report to have poor human rights records or serious patterns of abuse are factored in, 20 of the top 25 U.S. arms clients in the developing world in 2003—a full 80%—were either undemocratic regimes or governments with records of major human rights abuses.
A Ban on Private Ownership of Military Weapons Including Assault Rifles and Grenade Launchers? Bush Administration Just Says NO!
John Bolton, the U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control, bluntly told the delegates that “The United States will not join consensus on a final document that contains measures contrary to our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.” He also said the United States, the largest supplier of arms worldwide, would not support moves to outlaw any arming of rebel groups, nor would it help fund a campaign by human rights groups to raise awareness of the trade. He also said the U.S. would not support a ban on private ownership of military weapons, including assault rifles and grenade launchers.
UN Conference on Small Arms
The Conference, held July 9-20, 2001, began on a rather sour tone with the statement of U.S. Under Secretary of State John Bolton, who expressed the U.S. position on the issue of small arms and the Conference in no uncertain terms. Bolton stressed that the Conference should address only the illicit transfer of military style weapons, excluding firearms and non-military rifles (the weapons responsible for terrible carnage and destruction around the world every year).
Bolton bluntly stated the position of the United States in front of the ministerial-level portion of the meeting, describing the U.S. “redlines,” items unacceptable for inclusion in the Conference plan. Bolton stated that the United States could not support a final Conference document that included:
- restrictions on the legal trade and manufacture of small arms and light weapons;
- promotion of international advocacy by NGOs and international organizations;
- restrictions on the sale of small arms and light weapons to entities other than governments;
- a mandatory review conference; and
- a commitment to begin discussions on legally binding agreements.
Meeting the Challenge of Poverty Reduction
Some Northern governments have stressed that “trade not aid” should be the dominant theme at the [March 2002 Monterrey] conference [on Financing for Development]. That approach is disingenuous on two counts. First, rich countries have failed to open their markets to poor countries. Second, increased aid is vital for the world’s poorest countries if they are to grasp the opportunities provided through trade.
Net ODA in 2004 as US dollar amounts
Monterrey : US Will 'Seek Advice On Spending Aid
"Commenting on the latest US pledge [of $10 billion], Julian Borger and Charlotte Denny of the Guardian (UK) say Washington is desperate to deflect attention in Monterrey from the size of its aid budget. But for more generous donors, says the story, Washington’s conversion to the cause of effective aid spending is hard to swallow. Among the big donors, the US has the worst record for spending its aid budget on itself—70 percent of its aid is spent on US goods and services. And more than half is spent in middle income countries in the Middle East. Only $3bn a year goes to South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa."
Myth: More US aid will help the hungry
- First, US economic assistance is highly concentrated on a few governments. Its focus has nothing to do with poverty
- Second, aid is used as a lever to impose structural adjustment packages on the third world. Since the 1980s US foreign assistance worldwide has been conditioned on the adoption of structural adjustment packages designed by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund
- Third, food aid often does not target the hungry. When they hear about foreign aid, many people automatically think of ships loaded with food, but such aid constitutes only a fraction of total U.S. bilateral foreign aid, hovering around 9 percent during the 1990s
- Fourth, food aid can actually forestall agricultural development that could otherwise alleviate hunger. The inflow of food aid-even in many emergency cases-has proved time and again to be detrimental to local farm economies. Cheap, subsidized, or free U.S. grains undercut the prices of locally produced food, driving local farmers out of business and into cities
- Fifth, through military aid, the United States contributes directly to armed conflicts around the world-which are a major cause of hunger and famine. Since the end of the Cold War, U.S. military aid has declined, yet in 1998 it still totaled $6 billion, outweighing development assistance by a six-to-one ratio
- Sixth, “good” aid projects serve a public relations, “window dressing” or “fig leaf” function that obscures an uglier reality. Focusing on the best projects funded by USAID can be misleading as to the overall impact of foreign aid
- Finally, even most “development assistance” fails to help the poor and hungry. Only 18 percent of U.S. bilateral aid is even called development assistance
After years of studying our foreign aid program, we have learned that foreign aid is only as good as the recipient government. Foreign aid only reinforces the status quo. It cannot transform an antidemocratic process working against the majority into a participatory government shaped in its interests.
12 Myths About Hunger
Puppets of Purse Strings
Thus, status quo in world relations is maintained. Rich countries like the US continue to have a financial lever to dictate what good governance means and to pry open markets of developing countries for multinational corporations. Developing countries have no such handle for Northern markets, even in sectors like agriculture and textiles, where they have an advantage but continue to face trade barriers and subsidies. The estimated annual cost of Northern trade barriers to Southern economies is over US $100 billion, much more than what developing countries receive in aid.
Poverty Facts and Stats
- Half the world — nearly three billion people — live on less than two dollars a day
- The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of the poorest 48 nations (i.e. a quarter of the world’s countries) is less than the wealth of the world’s three richest people combined
- Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their names
- Less than one per cent of what the world spent every year on weapons was needed to put every child into school by the year 2000 and yet it didn't happen
- 51 percent of the world’s 100 hundred wealthiest bodies are corporations
- The wealthiest nation on Earth has the widest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation
- The poorer the country, the more likely it is that debt repayments are being extracted directly from people who neither contracted the loans nor received any of the money
- 20% of the population in the developed nations, consume 86% of the world’s goods
- The top fifth of the world’s people in the richest countries enjoy 82% of the expanding export trade and 68% of foreign direct investment — the bottom fifth, barely more than 1%
- In 1960, the 20% of the world’s people in the richest countries had 30 times the income of the poorest 20% — in 1997, 74 times as much
- The lives of 1.7 million children will be needlessly lost this year [2000] because world governments have failed to reduce poverty levels
- The developing world now spends $13 on debt repayment for every $1 it receives in grants
- A few hundred millionaires now own as much wealth as the world’s poorest 2.5 billion people
- The 48 poorest countries account for less than 0.4 per cent of global exports
- The combined wealth of the world’s 200 richest people hit $1 trillion in 1999; the combined incomes of the 582 million people living in the 43 least developed countries is $146 billion
- Today, across the world, 1.3 billion people live on less than one dollar a day; 3 billion live on under two dollars a day; 1.3 billion have no access to clean water; 3 billion have no access to sanitation; 2 billion have no access to electricity.
- The richest 50 million people in Europe and North America have the same income as 2.7 billion poor people. The slice of the cake taken by 1% is the same size as that handed to the poorest 57%.
- The world’s 497 billionaires in 2001 registered a combined wealth of $1.54 trillion, well over the combined gross national products of all the nations of sub-Saharan Africa ($929.3 billion) or those of the oil-rich regions of the Middle East and North Africa ($1.34 trillion). It is also greater than the combined incomes of the poorest half of humanity
- A mere 12 percent of the world’s population uses 85 percent of its water, and these 12 percent do not live in the Third World
Do Not Give the Needy Money: Build Them Industries Instead
With the record of corruption within impoverished countries, people will question giving them money. That can be handled by giving them the industry directly, not the money. To build a balanced economy, provide consumer buying power, and develop arteries of commerce that will absorb the production of these industries, contractors and labor in those countries should be used. Legitimacy and security of contracts is the basis of any sound economy. Engineers know what those costs should be and, if cost overruns start coming in, the contractor who has proven incapable should be replaced—just as any good contract would require…. When provided the industry, as opposed to the money to build industry, those people will have physical capital. The only profits to be made then are in production; there is no development money to intercept and send to a Swiss bank account.
...imagine how 4 centuries of enslavement might have seized the entire social and cultural ethos of an undeveloped continent."
Bob Geldof
ROOTS OF AFRICAN CONFLICTS
* The Legacy of European Colonialism
European colonialism had a devastating impact on Africa; the artificial boundaries created by colonial rulers as they ruled and finally left Africa had the effect of bringing together many different ethnic people within a nation that did not reflect, nor have (in such a short period of time) the ability to accommodate or provide for, the cultural and ethnic diversity. The freedom from imperial powers was, and is still, not a smooth transition.
* The natural struggle to rebuild is proving difficult
The natural struggle to rebuild is proving difficult and the transit from colonialism to a so-called modern society is not an easy, short one and it can not be overcome in just few years.
"We must remember that the European agreements that had carved up Africa into states paid little attention to cultural and ethnic boundaries and ethnic groups had little opportunity or need to form political alliances or accommodations under repressive colonial rule."
Richard H. Robbins, Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism
Originally posted by AceOfBase
ROOTS OF AFRICAN CONFLICTS
* The Legacy of European Colonialism
European colonialism had a devastating impact on Africa; the artificial boundaries created by colonial rulers as they ruled and finally left Africa had the effect of bringing together many different ethnic people within a nation that did not reflect, nor have (in such a short period of time) the ability to accommodate or provide for, the cultural and ethnic diversity. The freedom from imperial powers was, and is still, not a smooth transition.
* The natural struggle to rebuild is proving difficult
The natural struggle to rebuild is proving difficult and the transit from colonialism to a so-called modern society is not an easy, short one and it can not be overcome in just few years.
"We must remember that the European agreements that had carved up Africa into states paid little attention to cultural and ethnic boundaries and ethnic groups had little opportunity or need to form political alliances or accommodations under repressive colonial rule."
Richard H. Robbins, Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism
It sounds like he's an opponent of multiculturalism and beleives that people of different races and religions can not live together in peace.
I wonder how he feels about multiple ethnicities living together in Europe and America.
Originally posted by Souljah
Why are there so Many Conflicts in Africa?
Why are there so Many Dead every Year?
Why do People Starve every Year?
Why do they Die of completly Curable Diseases?
Why is this Human Tragedy in Africa SO Ignored?
Why don't the People Talk about it?
If it Happened in Heart of Europe (like for example the Yugoslav Civil-War did) people would call it World War 3, and I am sure that the International Community would actually DO SOMETHING about the Problem, to Solve it. But Instead, the Ongoing African Suffering, seems to have no end at all.
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
No oil, no aid I guess.
Originally posted by Flinx
I'm not sure where in there he said that multicultralism is bad. He's saying that European powers arbitrarily lumped together people of many different cultures that traditionally have had problems with each other. It's not just Africa where this happened. Look at the artifical construct of Iraq. Created by the British in the early 20th century, it pushed together 3 cultures (Shia, Sunni, Kurd) that are fighting with each other.
Originally posted by Hamburglar
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
No oil, no aid I guess.
Well that notion would tend to discount the idea of "racism and ignorance" being the primary factors for lack of aid. Which is it?
Originally posted by Souljah
Why are there so Many Conflicts in Africa?
Why are there so Many Dead every Year?
Why do People Starve every Year?
Why do they Die of completly Curable Diseases?
Why is this Human Tragedy in Africa SO Ignored?
Why don't the People Talk about it?
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I think part of the point here is if you saw images on TV of Irish or Italian (insert your own heritage here) kids that are 4 feet tall and weigh 20 lbs, with flies buzzing their mouths, you might be singing a different tune ?
maybe ?
maybe you wouldn't say, essentially, they are too stupid and lazy, with no morals or science, to help themselves , so why should we bother ?
Originally posted by IAF101
Because they have too many guns and not enough jobs.
Because the people who fight dont care about innocent lives. Plus massacres serve as morale boosters for the militias .
Because they dont know how to farm. They dont have enough equipment and resources like fertilizer etc to farm. Another point is that since the world has been financing their poverty they find it more comfortable to live off the worlds aid than do any work themselves. Or in otherwords they dont want to grow food. No initiative to do so.
Because they dont know it is curable, they dont maintain hygeine and dont take care of them selves enought. And those who make it to hospitals are left neglected due to the shortage of staff and resources.
Becasue the world is tired of listening to the continious misery campaign by the UN and other agencies and no matter how much they world does their seems to be no improvement in the region.
People are sick about this too. You cant expect somebody to keep donating if their is no progress at all. The fact is a nation cannot be built by others money, the people need to stop dwelling on their misery and get going and turning their lives around. The whole area needs an overhaul, for Ex if they need education and there are no schools, to build schools there are no materials and to transport material there are no trucks and to fuel the trucks they dont have a gas stations, there are no roads and so on. So you see the problems are endless. If you start in one place and you will need to rebuild the whole continent. And while you do this you see the African people stare at you withthe best face of misery they can present. No help, they just watch.
Because there is something to gain for the world if there is a stable Europe. The situation can also be helped because the basic attitude of the people is different and there is some sense of order.
Originally posted by AceOfBase
...imagine how 4 centuries of enslavement might have seized the entire social and cultural ethos of an undeveloped continent."
Bob Geldof
There were more than four centuries of enslavement but he prefers to just start counting from the time the Europeans entered the picture so he can blame it all on them.
Originally posted by AceOfBase
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I think part of the point here is if you saw images on TV of Irish or Italian (insert your own heritage here) kids that are 4 feet tall and weigh 20 lbs, with flies buzzing their mouths, you might be singing a different tune ?
maybe ?
maybe you wouldn't say, essentially, they are too stupid and lazy, with no morals or science, to help themselves , so why should we bother ?
So are you in favor of further colonialism in Africa and other places?
It sounds like it.
It sounds like you want to take up The White Man's Burden because they are not able to take care of themselves.
Originally posted by Attero Auctorita
Originally posted by AceOfBase
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I think part of the point here is if you saw images on TV of Irish or Italian (insert your own heritage here) kids that are 4 feet tall and weigh 20 lbs, with flies buzzing their mouths, you might be singing a different tune ?
maybe ?
maybe you wouldn't say, essentially, they are too stupid and lazy, with no morals or science, to help themselves , so why should we bother ?
So are you in favor of further colonialism in Africa and other places?
It sounds like it.
It sounds like you want to take up The White Man's Burden because they are not able to take care of themselves.
Agreed. Why should we have to step in and fix everything for them? As Americans our forefathers gathered behind great leaders to revolt versus what they perceived as injust rule. Can those who live on the continent of Africa not do the same? And if they cannot, why do they deserve its rewards? If people cannot throw down petty differences to join and create for themselves a better government then they do not deserve to reap its rewards. Africa will continue to have it's current problems until they decide as humans that they should band together to create a better society. And this is only something that Africans can do themselves.
- Attero
Originally posted by AceOfBase
People starve because they are being born at a rate higher that the land can prvide for them and they don't have the abilites to provide for them as the Americans, Europeans and others provide for themselves.
Causes of Hunger are related to Poverty
- Over 9 million people die worldwide each year because of hunger and malnutrition. 5 million are children
- Meanwhile Food wastage is HIGH:
* In the United Kingdom, "a shocking 30-40% of all food is NEVER eaten"
* Overall, £20 billion (approximately $38 billion US dollars) worth of food is THROWN AWAY, every year
* In the US 40-50% of all food ready for harvest NEVER gets eaten
- The Effect impacts of this waste is not just financial - Environmentally this leads to:
* Wasteful use of chemicals such as fertilizers and pesticides;
* More fuel used for transportation;
* More rotting food, creating more methane — one of the most harmful greenhouse gases that contributes to climate change
They die of diseases because they have not developed the Vaccines and other medicines that the European, Americans and others have developed.
They also haven't developed ways of purifying the water like the Europeans, Americans and have have done. Dirty water is one of the reasons people die.
The White Man's Burden
The White Man's Burden may be read as supporting the U.S. colonization of the Philippines and other former Spanish colonies in his poem or, alternatively, as a warning to the United States of the cost of imperial adventure. Although Kipling's poem mixed exhortation to empire with sober warnings of the costs involved, imperialists within the United States latched onto the phrase "white man's burden" as a euphemism for imperialism that seemed to justify the policy as a noble enterprise.
Originally posted by Souljah
Why not PROVIDE them with Jobs instead of Provide them GUNS?
And lets not Forget, that the Private Compaines who SELL Those Weapons always like to get their Hands on some Prime Afraican Diamonds or African Gold, to seel them even MORE Guns.
They do not know how to farm?
You really are Something mister IAF. Tell me, would YOU know how to farm without any Water? Would you know how to farm in the Extreme Conditions that are in Africa?
Their Lives are not any MORE Comfortable, due to the Help they receive - it would be much, MUCH better if the so-called CIVILIZED west would help and Bulild basic Agrocultural infrastructure.
Tell me - would there be HOTELS and GOLF COURTS in the Middle of the Desert in Dubai, if they did not have Oil - like most African Nations don't?
What an IGNORANT Answer. How can they Take care of Themselves when their BASIC Needs for Fresh Water are not Met?
Well, as long as the world is NOT tired of Listening and Saving the People of Middle East......
And the World can always Abuse this Continent some more for a Fistful of Profit.
AND I would also use this Opportunity to THANK to all of the MEMBER from my Heart, for putting such Great Tags (yet Again) on my Post - bashing us, rant, again - Great job Guys!