American Citizens Are More Important To Our Government

After watching TV earlier, and seeing all these adds about Darfur
and wherever, every country and there brother wanting money,
it's starting to p*ss me off.

We should'nt be pumping millions of dollars into third other countries
when we ourselves have people who are (and not wanting to be)
homeless, and a huge amount of people who can barely afford the
cost of living, not to mention all the people who can't afford healthcare.


I realize that what is happening in Darfur is horrible, but the American
government should not spend a cent on them or any other country
(and that includes Israel especially) when that money could help
improve the lives of the citizens of this country.

So we shouldn't save the lives of countless thousands who are starving to death, don't even have clean water to drink and are being percecuted and slaughtered by militants?

If its the difference between making someone's life here (which ever country) better or saving the life of someone thousands of miles away, I'd go for the latter.
Sure there is suffering in our own countries but why neglect those abroad who are in need, they have as much right to life as we do.

[edit on 14-11-2006 by UK Wizard]

I couldn't disagree more.

We have the opportunity to actually save lives over there. But yet some Americans want to preach that they should spend time improving their lives, before ever attempting to save a life from another country. At the end of the day, we are all humans. Political affiliation, religious beliefs, sexual preference, color of skin, etc., none of that matters. We are all human.

I understand this is not a racial motivated thread. It's more of the Me First mentality. But it is still wrong. Take a look at the Canadian system. We spend good portions of our hard earned money on taxes and a health care system. A lot of people could use these dollars to put food on the table for their children. Yet we sacrifice these dollars to save complete strangers every day.

Children are dieing over seas. Some of their dieing wishes would be for a drink of water. And then we sit here in front of our computers saying how we need this, this, and that before we offer this drink of water? C'mon now, I think were all better then that.

Lombozo, created a thread recently and this topic was a portion of his post. His message was, why do our kids go to school without internet access, while we spend millions of dollars on people on the other side of the world. Again, its a matter of saving lives or improving lives. Regardless of our current situation in our own country, compared to the international stage, we got it pretty damn good. And we are allowing this to go to our heads, and demand more.

I would love to see more efforts from every country to sustain more life in Africa. We are all victims of this material world.

I believe this is a prime example.

[edit on 14-11-2006 by chissler]

Originally posted by iori_komei
After watching TV earlier, and seeing all these adds about Darfur
and wherever, every country and there brother wanting money,
it's starting to p*ss me off.

We should'nt be pumping millions of dollars into third other countries
when we ourselves have people who are (and not wanting to be)
homeless, and a huge amount of people who can barely afford the
cost of living, not to mention all the people who can't afford healthcare.


I realize that what is happening in Darfur is horrible, but the American
government should not spend a cent on them or any other country
(and that includes Israel especially) when that money could help
improve the lives of the citizens of this country.

As chissler said,it would IMPROVE the lives of people here,but will SAVE the lives of countless other's abroad. Dont get me wrong,we do need some serious help here. The majority of homeless here are vietnam vets,and the fact that our gov't neglected them after the war was over is pitiful.

But what's even worse is that us,THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,has the power,money and resources to stop the genocide in darfur, and drastically help the
aids pandemic. But we find other "things" to worry about, other "threats". If we can try to force democracy on the cradle of modern civilization because they are suffering,then why can't we use our power for actual good. Not something that's good to one man but not the other,but something that benefits mankind as a whole?

I don't think it's even a 'me first' attitude. Americans are a generous and altruistic people - liesure is the basis of civilization and the wealth has not been entirely wasted. Unfortunately business interests dictate foreign and domestic policy and social spending is not high on their list of priorities. Cuts into profits. Profits are important and have a place in the creation of wealth, but wealth needs to be regarded as a human as well as material resource. Profits for the few are much higher when the human resource makes no demands that cut into them, like pensions, a living wage or medical insurance.

Norway consistently rates highest on the UN scale for the best standard of living. The best place to live spends a full 50% of their GNP on social welfare. As opposed to the American model that spends 6%, with most of that going to the administration of the programs and not the people in need. What we have in North America is public subsidy of private enterprise, with most of the tax money going to corporate welfare or to bolster the military industrial complex.

I think many Americans are unaware of the foreign policies of their own government and the actions of the IMF. A few teddy bears sent overseas to a muslim nation at Christmas time does not offset a nation plunged into debt and stripped of its right to its own resources. The philosophy of personal responsibility and individual freedom that built America is an admirable one. I feel it has been misconstrued to justify exterminating anyone who finds themselves in an unfortunate position in the wildly unequal distribution of wealth that constitutes the global economy.

The altruism and generosity of the American people will be tested to its fullest when the results of current business interests, as they dictate government policy are fully felt by the people. Not by the nations already crumbling under the weight of those policies, but by American's themselves.

I'm beholden to post the memo sent from the council on foreign relations to Clinton after his inauguration speech waxed too JFKish, once again.

"The task is much more complicated and difficult than Clinton makes it out. First the president has not prepared the nation for the sacrifices that lie ahead if America's trajectory is to turn upward.
Second, he has yet to explain the complex obstacles to restarting the American economy when there is a recession in Japan and Europe.
Third, he has yet to confront the delicate problem of pleasing powerful financial markets which are all too ready to unleash their fury at the administration's first fiscal misstep.
Now that the election is over the new president will have to move quickly to deliver the tough message and make agonizing decisions. **In the CNN age, when indelible impressions are instantaneously formed around the world and when wall street and it's foreign counterparts can bring policy makers to their knees overnight**, Clinton's first hundred days are not just an opportunity to unfold a new agenda, rather they just as equally present a mine field that could blow up and damage his administration for the next four years.
Clinton's immediate priorities should be both offensive and defensive and defined in terms that are crystal clear and that the cancerous budget deficit." (social spending)

We could have lifted them up, if we'd really been watching and involved. It's the duty of every citizen of a democratic country to be informed of its governments real foreign policy.
Deception marks the character of the age.

All of Africa is dying, what is needed is a change in our lifestyles. Until the people are willing to alter their lifestyles, governments will reflect the interests at work.



[edit on 14-11-2006 by clearwater]

After reading what I wrote, I have to say I don't completely agree with
what I said.

It's what happens when I get fed-up with things, I mean I see all these
adds about Darfur, yet I've not seena single add, in quite along time,
about the poor and needy here in this country.

And that's not counting Katrina.

So that would be the me first mentality.

I've researched and done papers on the genocide in Darfur, and I could not believe it. This was about 18 months ago I was researching it for university, and I actually approached my professor to say, this is a joke right? We hear about Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Korea, etc., but how the hell do we not hear about Darfur on a regular basis?

Since then I believe this genocide is coming to the forefront. With movies like, Hotel Rhwanda, the ongoing slaughter of these people is being acknowledged by international eyes.

When we see these innocent lives being wiped out, I would like to think we are saddened and figure out a way to help. Rather than becoming frustrated that innocent lives are lost within our borders. Not being an American, I'll refrain from using American examples. But if my country chose to save the lives of other Canadians, and shunned millions in Darfur, I would be extremely disappointed. Why would saving the life of a Canadian, justify the death of a child in Darfur. It doesn't. To sleep good at night, we should be doing our damndest to save both lives.

My life is no more important than any child in Africa. It's time for western civilization to understand this. We've been blessed with many luxuries, but I fail to see why our life is more important.