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 crimsonred
It seems like Britain carries on giving out aid with no thought or consequence to its own people..We give £1billion in aid to India for a country that has millions of its own living just on /below the poverty line, The country does quite well for itself..
Ok this was last year, but there has been no reduction in the amount of aid being handed out.
This part of the next link however makes my hackles rise ,
"The Chandrayaan mission, which cost $100m, dropped a probe carrying the Indian flag on to the moon in 2008. The agency plans a mission to the moon in 2016 carrying two astronauts at an estimated cost of Rs124bn."
WTF? Why do India feel the need to spend this amount of money for the sole purpose of researching the ability to put men on the moon? what are they going to do on there? Build a corner shop? Here is the full article, it is based around the corruption proceedings currently ongoing.
Corruption in India
It seems that the corruption that has been rife in India for many many years is finally being addressed , but who are they really trying to kid? This is / in my opinion/ one of the new conditions that the UK are imposing on the Indian government in order to keep that aid coming .
Why do India need aid if they are able to have a space programme? How are they not looking after their own people? Because they are a benefit state. their thinking is- sod the poor, the 'developed powers will look after them'.
this does not sit right with me at all, i havent a clue how much other nations are putting into this state, but i'm sure the reason why there are so many billionaires are in India is a direct result of the amount of foreign aid being ploughed into a country where the only goal is to keep a caste system- ie; keep the lower castes low, so the highers get wealthier.edit on 25-1-2012 by crimsonred because: smedit on 25-1-2012 by crimsonred because: mo
Originally posted by 547000
What I don't get is how one can hold this position and get starred but if one says that drug addicts shouldn't be given aid one is considered selfish. What's the difference between giving aid to a country that abuses it and giving aid to a man who abuses it?