One nation, one family it doesn't matter in the name of the lord and for the sake of children and their families and their lives we help them!! We are all people we cant leave somebody behind just because they don't fit our criteria for good people to spend on. That's not how it's done. Period.
First world countries, particularly those in the West are somewhat selfish when it comes to sharing natural resources to those poorer nations. I believe there is a hidden agenda that governments of First World nations, want to continue to dictate to poorer nations by inhibiting their increase in the basic standard of living for all of humanity. The greed and selfish attitudes of First World Nations is played out every minute of every day, by using low paid workers from poorer nations as slaves to provide the commodities to First World Counties. Why should there be so much poverty in the world today. The UN must not only increase aid to poorer nations, but promote and encourage third world countries to develop their own economies.
Well If you Look It Up we Israel The Get 2.4 Billion
We Fund Egypt They Get 1.7 billion
We Fund Pakistan they get 798 Million
Jordan gets 688 million
South Africa gets 574 Million
Mexico Gets 551 million
and Colombia Gets 41
These Are Just A few Countries We Fund So If we Fund these Countries, why Not Haiti
By providing humanitarian aid to poor countries, the U.N. could place certain restrictions, such as using birth control, if offered food packages, to decrease problems in these areas. That way, it would be voluntary, and still help these people to stop living in unsafe conditions.
If the UN did not increase their humanitarian aid to poor nations, thousands around the world could die of hunger. As a result of the world economic recession and widespread corruption in developing countries, many countries have reduced the amount of humanitarian aid they offer. The UN needs to pick up where developed governments around the world stopped, or else thousands could die.
Morally, it is important for people in a higher position to help those that are less fortunate. The wealthier countries in the United Nations should band together to offer more to disadvantaged nations, to help them grow and get to the point where they can join the United Nations to give back, as well.
The United Nations has a goal of providing peace and order to the world. As a model for how both nations and individuals should act, the UN has a duty to take care of the less fortunate, because if we do not see those in power acting on behalf of the less fortunate, it gives no motivation for anyone to help anyone with less.
Increasing aid to poor nations improves not only the general warfare of the nation receiving aid, but also the economic welfare of the countries giving said aid. If the United Nations invests in developing countries, the immediate benefit is the easing of human suffering (starvation, disease, etc.). The long-term economic benefit lies in developing a political and trading partner for the future. Countries propped up by the United Nations in their developing years are far more likely to side with the U.N. during wartime, and will eventually flourish into economies that can buy and sell goods to U.N. member countries. Increasing aid to developing countries, to me, is an obvious slam-dunk.
When people are in economic crisis and their needs are not being met, their political ideals fall by the wayside in favor of self preservation and getting their needs met. If a crazy dictator has a plan that promises to feed everyone, he's going to have a much easier rise to power in a hungry nation. If an extremist terrorist organization is the only free school in the area, if poor parents want their kids to go to school to improve their situation, they end up sending them to the terrorist school. Keeping dictators and extremists out of power helps make the world safer and more democratic for us all. I'd much rather have democratically elected, sane, leaders in control of armies and missiles than ones that rose to power as a result of a poverty stricken populace. Aid money now prevents military money being spent later.
Many poor nations lack the basic knowledge that some of us take for granted. Poor nations probably believe that with aid from other countries they are going to get help immediately and see those results just as quickly. May be the UN can send more humanitarian aid and educate that poor nation on how things can improve and give them some basic knowledge.
It is imperative that we stop belittling poorer nations as many for the pro side are. Now, by giving humanitarian aid to poorer nations, when the people actually receive the aid they become dependent on it and it hinders economic development in those nations. What we need to do is not give handouts to poorer nations--and subsequently use that aid as nothing but a means to influence the country--but rather allow entrepreneurs to create jobs. Instead of giving them aid and de-incentivizing let's invest in their countries, put jobs in their countries or raise a generation of entrepreneurs in their countries.
Farrah Aidid and Mogabishu, 'nuff said. Farrah Aidid the dictator of Somalia would collect food given by the UN and bring together the citizens in front of the food trucks and then mow them down with AK-47's as a warning not to take the humanitarian aid "he" had been given for his troops to eat and many other African countries this still occurs, humanitarian aid is just unchecked fuel of militant dictators.
At this point I would have to say No! We should have to take care of the people here before we stare reaching out to other countries. I get the take the shirt off your back and give to one in need. I get helping people and trying to do what is right. With that said we, ok not we as the people but the government seems to only piss off every country by interfearing in there business. Why is it we can't send over people to teach them how to build shelter, plant food, clean, most of these countries in such need of help, really neeed a broom an a mop. I feel that education would get them a lot farther.
By artificially providing support for cultures that cannot succeed on their own we create a multitude of problems. It is time to abolisht the care giving side of the UN. It should be returned to a safe spot for nations to meet and discuss issues. It does not function well as a change agent.
The United Nations should have a policy where it helps those devastated by disaster and war, and should not use funding to simply increase the wealth of individual nations. At some point, the UN needs to realize that it cannot help every issue, and that it should use financial aid in the situations for which the organization was created.
i am refugee women live IDPS comps near mogadisha wee need any can of help how to protect the affects of droughts of my family there for i hope you to assist us as soon as possiple i and my family if you can
Obviously people do not realize the corruption that occurs. The UN should not increase foreign aid, but rather pour its resources to ensure aid gets to where aid not is needed. Throwing money at a problem won't solve it, but rather taking the time to see that what you're doing is worthwhile.
Often in the poorest of nations, there is a huge divide between the wealthy and the poor. When resources are sent there, they get into the wrong hands - the wealthy hands and the poor people don't see any of the benefit. I think that the United Nations needs to regulate the resources sent to the nations and ensure that the right people benefit from the aid.
Many nations receive help from the United Nations and other sources, such as our country. Some of the food items are stolen and never get to the people who really need it. A lot of help is wasted and gangsters and thugs take over the aid. Whether it be food or medical supplies. Some of it is sold on the black market. I would not trust the United Nations with monitoring the aid. Especially when some workers have been accused of rape.
Increased humanitarian aid to poor or developing nations may not necessarily have a positive impact on the society's future in the long term. A population that is dependent on foreign aid for survival is more weak than a population that is forced to find a way to sustain its survival.