Katrina? Iraq is more important!, page
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 4-10-2006 @ 05:01 PM by BlaznRob
Since you said you'd prefer your tax money to be spent on "Spready Democracy in Iraq," then I'll assume you're actually a tax-paying citizen of the United States.

Anyone who views spreading democracy (or rather, protecting US hegemony in the middle-east) as more important than the safety and security of the citizenry of their own nation, is incredibly calloused towards their own people.

If you want to state that the voters are responsible for what happened, then it could just as easily be said that, if the United States mainland was attacked by a state-sponsored army (not terrorists) then those people who hadn't voted for the then-current leader wouldn't have any right to demand protection from the assault.

Is the government required to fix what is essentially a state's problem? No, apparently not. But shouldn't the federal government be responsible enough to put the needs of it's citizens above the needs of another nations', and certainly the needs of a war, which most of the citizenry doesn't support?

And as for the "silence" from "other regional communities," I'd like to point out that in the wake of Katrina, the MEDIA focused almost completely on New Orleans, even though the destruction was more complete in areas of Mississippi. The city I live in was slammed hard, and many places within it were without power for over a month, and we're 90 miles north of the coast. Those communities which seem to be "solving their own problems" is due largely to the fact that many of those communities were empty for a long time, and are now filled with quite a few FEMA trailers.

Of the coastal communities affected, ALL recieved federal aid, not just New Orleans - New Orleans was just the most well-known city impacted, and got most of the publicity and media coverage.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^