It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Burma: We'd rather let people die than allow U.S. aid

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in


posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:13 PM
If the Junta are so afraid of an uprising, then why don't they help their people? I would think this would make the people, the survivors band together and revolt. I know that is what I would do.

We should be helping... trying to do what we can. We barged in on Iraq... saying the people needed help from a dictator, and now it's true and we aren't doing anything? Just sitting on our duffs, trying to talk a government that won't even help their own? I feel for the people over there... and for the people who say we shouldn't be helping, etc... what is going to happen if a new disease or an old one surfaces because of all the dead, dying people? Burma isn't going to let anyone in then either, and then it might spread farther... etc. That's one of my fears anyway.

I was always taught that America helps when we can. Disasters, etc. My grandmother served as an army nurse and that was the motto at the time... I guess no longer eh?

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:16 PM
Ya, but w said Saddam was a bad man sans sexed up non wmd's. My head is spinning.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:19 PM
Whom will feed the masses and say this junta aren't 'bad men'? Where is the justice? There is no justice! There is no logic. There are no plans.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:24 PM

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
Heres a link of the history of the country and the crimials who have ben running it. The people don't deserve this but they sure are the victims. It looks like military dictatorship is the rule of the day. The reformers in the resistance are the reasons the Military Hunta don't want the aid. They fear that the resistance will get the food and be able to keep the resistance moving forward. Not sure of the politics of both sides but this is typical of these third world countries. Most unfortunate.

I think it is important to note that even if we wanted to the US hand has been soooo weakened in the last 8 years there are no longer any options for us. We have spent all the capital, squandered all the good will and are running on fumes. Huuuuge opportunity cost to add to the seemingly infinte toll of our recent national policies.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:26 PM
Too bad they don't have a sh@@ load of oil under there turf. We'd be all over it. That's it. I'm done. Stick a fork in me.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:30 PM
reply to post by wytworm

It isn't just the last eight years..We are being blamed for everthing thats wrong with this world since the Johnson years. Your right though, we are bankrupt when it comes to aid. Its a lousy way to situational awarness.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:36 PM
reply to post by jpm1602

Your argument --no oil-- and not yours alone, is a little weary at this point of time where we have had focus on Burma since September last year.

Burma/Maynmar has some of the biggest/largest gas reserves on this planet.

The Companies They Keep in Burma

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:40 PM
What we are seeing is called Karma. The United States is now feared and can not be trusted because of this regime.

It is sad that so many people in Myanmar must die from this natural atrocity, but it is even more deplorable that the U.S. has created for itself such an image and such a mistrust throughout the world. The real good patriots of the U.S. and those that see beyond country names and perceive us all as citizens of this existence and of this planet need to stand up and take charge and not be afraid to do great things, to become presidents, and to become leaders, to make our future a better place, one where we induce patience and friendships with other countires, not arms wars and cold wars, and this constant stressful and needless egoism. Do you agree or what? The people who rule this place just suck and they are completely STUPID. Who let's them have power? We do because we do nothing to aspire to those dreams that they theirselves do. The leadership of the world will largely have an effect on and begin reflecting its citizens. We've really got to stop this now. We can't even help each other anymore, it's all about domination, exploitation and black mail.

[edit on 21-5-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:43 PM
If the US "barged in" and forced supplies on the people, there'd be posters on ATS screaming to high Heaven about the US "invading" another country and how Bush owned acres of land there to start his second secret ranch or some other such nonsense.

And air dropping it isn't a fix, either. To help that many people, you'd need every cargo plane that the USAF had.

And how are you going to explain when Burma shoots down a few after we violate their airspace?

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:43 PM
Sorry to weary you moderator. My point was more thousands are dieing because of inaction.
M.O.O.N. that spells black gold.
[edit on 5/21/2008 by jpm1602]

[edit on 5/21/2008 by jpm1602]

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:44 PM
I'm glad someone mentioned this. Yes, Myanmar does have huge oil and gas deposits.

My thoughts were very much like those echoed above, that the US should defy the junta to bring aid to the victims. I then read a very eye-opening article on regarding the sanctions that Bush passed just before the cyclone hit. I'm sorry I don't know how to link it, but I urge everyone to read it to understand the full picture.

Very sad.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:47 PM
reply to post by masqua

Excellent point! So we should send the aide through a third party nation like an anonymous donation.

Oops. Here's the article link for Anonymous ATS


The new sanctions prevent U.S. humanitarian organizations and individuals from donating money directly to causes within impoverished Myanmar. U.S. aid organizations, such as the American Red Cross, found they could provide only supplies—not personnel or money—to the relief effort under the sanctions rules. While the U.S. corporate media have carried hundreds of reports arrogantly lecturing Myanmar on what is not being done, they are not even mentioning the impact of the new U.S. sanctions that were imposed as the storm barreled toward the country.

[edit on 21-5-2008 by garyo1954]

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:48 PM
Burma is making a play for pride. Every country does it.

If Burma accepts foreign assistance for this, they feel that they may look impotent in the eyes of their people.

The United States did the exact same thing when Hurricane Katrina hit. Mexico was ready willing and able to send foreign aid to assist with evacuating New Orleans. The US was not so prepared.

The US flat out refused Mexico's assistance... and of course, people died as a result.

This is no different.

With the shoe on the other foot... The United States is going to need that aid themselves soon if the current financial trends keep up. Might as well accept the fact that Burma is refusing the aid, and stockpile it for the worst case scenario coming to the US.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 10:08 PM
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

I think it might be this article you're refering to.

Burma (which changed its name to Myanmar in 1989) was a colony of British imperialism for over 60 years. In fact the commercial production of oil in Myanmar dates back to 1871 when British colonialists set up the Rangoon Oil Company.

Since formal independence in 1948, different imperialist powers have exploited the country’s people and plundered its resources. It is beyond the scope of this article to review this history. But an example of imperialist control and development of Myanmar’s energy resources provides a picture of the country’s relationship to the world capitalist system.

Myanmar has the world's tenth largest gas reserves. It has been producing natural gas since the 1970s. Today, gas exports are Myanmar's most important source of national income.

In the 1990s Myanmar granted gas concessions to foreign companies from France and Great Britain. Later Texaco and Unocal (now absorbed into ChevronTexaco) gained rights to Myanmar’s gas as well.

In 2005 other countries in the region, including China, Thailand, and South Korea invested in Myanmar’s oil and gas industry.

What did this mean for the masses of people in Myanmar?

In 1996 a human rights suit was filed against the American-based Unocal Corp. A group of villagers accused Unocal of using forced labor conscripted by Myanmar soldiers. Villagers were raped, murdered, and brutally relocated during the construction of a $1.2 billion gas pipeline to Thailand, started in 1990.

The suit, which Unocal settled in 2004, brought to light the kind of horrible crimes that were being committed by a consortium of foreign companies, including Unocal, all of which were receiving support and protection from the military regime.

One woman testified how soldiers came to her home, shot her husband, and killed her baby. Other villagers recounted how their neighbors were executed because they refused to leave the area Unocal wanted. Two girls said soldiers raped them at knifepoint (The Nation, June 30, 2003). Human Rights Watch interviewed hundreds of villagers who were driven from their homes and farms, many forced to work at gunpoint and beaten by guards.

The UN issued warnings of serious human rights abuses in 1995. After such embarrassing evidence came out, Texaco left the country in 1997. But Unocal retained 28 percent interest in the pipeline.

Good reading to deny ignorance.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 10:19 PM
Wow. Very informative. No wonder they don't want our mitts anywhere around them. What, with Iraq and everything. Learned another thing today.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 10:30 PM
reply to post by khunmoon

Another oops....I should have read further khunmoon.

Also from the source posted earlier, I should add:

The U.S. government expresses outrage that Myanmar, while it accepts aid, will not allow foreign personnel to oversee its distribution. The government-run newspaper New Light of Myanmar on May 9 explained why this is so: “The Pentagon is desperate to station their military bases in our country.”

Shock doctrine

Many countries even in the midst of a disaster fear U.S. and Western assistance because it so often comes with strings attached, including onerous debt conditions and demands to reorganize their economy and privatize nationally owned resources.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 10:40 PM
reply to post by khunmoon

What that article misleads us about is the fact that Burma would not let any corporate workers into the fields except those used for logistics and supervision of transportation. All other employment was controlled by the Hunta so they could maintain controll of the oil. Chevron-Texaco/Shell settled so they could get they're US citizens out of Myanmar because they where being held hostage by the Military. The companies themselves had no controll over the hiring and slavery problems. Any attempts to rectify the problems where rebuffed by the government in Myanmar.


[edit on 5/21/2008 by ZindoDoone]

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 10:52 PM
reply to post by MacSen191

IMO the reason they didn't help their own people first is because their first priority is to try and make the rest of the world, including the U.S., think that they have everything under control and that their government is completely fine.

That's the entire reason for this fake "walkthrough" I included in my last post. This cyclone just killed all these people and caused all this destruction, yet the burmese somehow set up this immaculately clean and well-organised relief effort? NO. That's what they want the rest of the world to think. That was the entire reason for that video being made.

They want noone to think their government (under military rule since 1962) is somehow less capable and less powerful and has less influence than it did before because of the cyclone. They are SO paranoid about the U.S. and other outside countries because this military-ruled dictatorship has been self-isolated from the rest of the world for so long (just like North Korea).

Then you have what the UN calculates to be over a million people homeless, untold numbers of humans suffering and dying while this country tells the rest of the world "Move along. We don't trust you".

Kind of makes you wanna puke. Untold numbers of people are going to suffer and die because of a government that is unwilling to put human lives first.


posted on May, 21 2008 @ 11:00 PM
Just wanna post this gem of truth from the article previous linked.

The reality is: The US criticism of the Myanmar government has nothing to do with concern for the victims of the cyclone. It has everything to do with cold calculations about how to use this disaster to further U.S. interests—to pry open the country, to weaken the military regime, and to create more favorable conditions for a full-out regime change. The U.S. wants to bring to power a government in Myanmar that more fully serves U.S. economic and political interests, including in relationship to U.S. contention with other capitalist powers. To understand this, we need to first of all look at the geostrategic interests the U.S. is pursuing in Myanmar.

Three great regions of Asia come together where Myanmar sits on the planet—China in the north, Southeast Asia in the south, and India in the west. Looking at a map, it becomes clear how Myanmar is key to establishing land-links between Central Asia in the west, Japan in the east and Russia in the north.

Off the coast of Myanmar is the Strait of Malacca. This waterway between Malaysia and Indonesia is one of the world’s most strategic water passages. It links the Indian and Pacific Oceans and is the shortest sea route between the Persian Gulf and China. Each and every day, supertankers carrying more than 12 million barrels of oil pass through this strait. More than 80% of all China's oil imports are shipped through this waterway.

US interest in the region is strategic, more than about energy.

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 11:50 PM
*In before the U.S. gets blamed for the cyclone due to U.S. carbon emissions.

Anyways I am totally confused.

Militarily force aid on Burma? Whats with the picking and choosing of U.S. military force?

One second I see "U.S. forces are killing civilians!"

Now its "Civilians are dying because the U.S. isn't using force!"

Whats with this pick and choose military targets?

'Don't attack Iraq, but get your troops in Darfur'!

'Don't attack Iran but send the troops into Burma!'

As an American I am totally boggled, i hope this "damned if you do damned if you don't, you can't do anything right America" view is only confined to ATS forums (its not much of a hope)

How about this answer. We Americans are tired of war, and we still have to worry about Iran.

How about the E.U. get together and fight a war over Burmese oil? Show us how to do it.

How about the Shanghai 5 get in there and show us some of that Russian and Chinese military prowess?

How about OPEC use some of that oil wealth and get in there?

Why is it that the world always hates the U.S., whether or not the U.S. does anything?

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in