It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mwm1331
I can give you the awnser an one word
30000 civilians have been killed
1.2 MILLION have been displaced
The U.S. congress has labeled it a genocide
And what do our vaunted allies the E.U. and the U.N. propose we do?
People are being slaughtered like cattle by the Arab Janjuweed militia and Europe wants to take away thier charge card.
France says it does not support US plans for international sanctions on Sudan if violence continues in Darfur.
The UN Security Council is debating a US draft resolution imposing sanctions on militias accused of "ethnic cleansing" against non-Arabs.
The US also hinted that the sanctions could be extended to the government.
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
I do not care what idiots in other countries do to one another, i really dont. I think we should start policing our govornment instead, and screw the rest of the world.
Originally posted by ThunderCloud
The U.S. is doomed in the eyes of the rest of the world, no matter what we do.
If we act, then we're called imperialist, and told that we're getting into other countries' business. We are criticized when the U.S. builds military bases around the world, even though -- with the exceptions of Afghanistan and Iraq -- the host country invited us there, and can kick us out at any time (this having happened on a few occasions).
If we don't act, then we're called callous, uncaring, and isolationist, and told that we're just selfishly guarding our high quality lives and letting the rest of the world go to Hell in a handbasket.
I think this catch-22 is why many Americans cry, "Why should we care what the rest of the world thinks?" They're just going to hate us no matter what we do anyway...
Originally posted by RedOctober90
The needs of the many come before the needs of a select few I believe.
[edit on 15-8-2004 by RedOctober90]
Originally posted by Amuk
About the only place I disagree with Krazy Jethro, and this might not even be a disagreement, is I would leave government funding at a state or federal for education LOANS and job training for the TRULY disabled. This would Maximize EVERYONES chances to earn a living and would help those truly on the bottom of the heap. Give a man a fish, etc. This could be done for pennies on the dollar of the cost today.
Originally posted by KrazyJethro
I think that county (or city depending on location) governments should be in charge of social programs should they decide to have them. This is a MUCH better idea for the following reasons:
1) Easier accountability.
2) The public will be able to see the spending and budget records (unlike the Fed. Gov because it would be an Encyclopedia)
3) The local voter would have much more power and influence on their lives and communities.
4) The local leaders would be much more accessable.
5) The local governments are better equipped to assess the need of their communities which would be more cost effective which would lower overall taxes quite a bit.
Originally posted by Relentless
Man, used to think like you BUT - corruption is much easier and much more widespread at the local level.
Sorry, this wouldn't work either. Been there, done that.
Food for thought: It's never that simple, if it were somebody would have done it.