Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

20 Million People are Starving

SolonKR
Posts: 4,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.
Bailey <3

"For often evil men are rich, and good men poor;
But we will not exchange with them
Our virtue for their wealth, since one abides always,
While riches change their owners every day." - Solon, Plutarch's "Life of Solon"
imabench
Posts: 20,542
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 11:09:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Im cynical enough to think that nature should be allowed to take its course. Most of the countries on that list are failed nations occupying inhospitable desert where fewer people arguably isnt a bad thing. Im aware it horrible to simply let them die, but these are not stable nations going through hard times. These are failed nations with long histories of instability and violence with no end in sight. If people dont die of starvation this time around, theyll die from something else in the near future
DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

12/14/14 to 1/1/15 = VP of DDO
8/4/18 to 8/6/18 = Start of the Worst Spam Attack in DDO History (61 Hours, 21 Minutes, and 37 seconds... Estimated 63,175 Spam Posts during the main attack)

Be Today's Hero and Tomorrow's Hero
The trash from yesterday will still be trash from every day onwards
Quadrunner
Posts: 5,509
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 11:24:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

If we prod a bunch of stooges to work on this, there is a chance of it back firing. What do you mean by help? What kind of people are we dealing with, and what is best for them?
Skepsikyma
Posts: 9,514
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 11:32:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

UN aid doesn't ready help though, it actually hurts in the long run. What the countries need are either better leadership or to be dissolved (Nigeria, for example, will always have its tribal fracture lines).

I don't think that much progress will be made. If we wanted to fix Africa by now we could have, but instead we just continue to dump aid which feeds corruption, undermines democracy, and causes local industry and agriculture to wither on the vine. This is probably because a divided, impoverished wasteland ruled by despots and corrupt warlords addicted to Western money is great for US business interests.
"Partout ou vous verrez un autel, la se trouve la civilisation."
- Joseph de Maistre -

"Woe that I live in bitter days,
As God is setting like a sun
And in his place, as lord and slave,
Man raises forth his heinous throne."
- Translation of 'Rhyfel', by Hedd Wyn -

Virtutem videant intabescantque relicta
Hiu
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 11:37:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:09:46 PM, imabench wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Im cynical enough to think that nature should be allowed to take its course. Most of the countries on that list are failed nations occupying inhospitable desert where fewer people arguably isnt a bad thing. Im aware it horrible to simply let them die, but these are not stable nations going through hard times. These are failed nations with long histories of instability and violence with no end in sight. If people dont die of starvation this time around, theyll die from something else in the near future

So let people die because the citizens are to blame because of their failed governments? Right, great morals you have there.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 11:43:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Sending food aid doesn't increase greater geopolitical stability. What it does is put local farmers out of business, and causes total havoc on the entire economies of countries to whom we send food aid.

Agriculture is their economic base, and food aid destroys agricultural economic production by making it impossible to sell food at a profit. What happens is that in those countries to whom we send food aid, in bankrupting the local farmers, they don't have enough money to sew their fields for the next year, and then the fields themselves fall into disrepair.

As a result, there are two options that don't end in even more death: send more food aid, or force the country to import food at an even higher price than it could have produced it to begin with.

What we should be doing is engaging in joint ventures with countries so that they grow their own food, and building their educational infrastructures, while working to build secular civil societies and institutions. This applies as much in Afghanistan as it does in Mali, Somali, Sudan, etc. Only by doing both of those things can we begin to promote our geopolitical interests by inoculating them against extremist ideologies and religions.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.
Hiu
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?
Hiu
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:06:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?

So trade one lordship for another? Nah bad idea. Africa was already raped once.
Greyparrot
Posts: 21,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:21:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 12:06:51 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?


So trade one lordship for another? Nah bad idea. Africa was already raped once.

Because being raped by an African Lord is so much more satisfying?
The extinction of the species is worse than the extinction of the nation, which is worse than the extinction of the tribe, which is worse than the extinction of the family, which is worse than the extinction of the individual. The second he reverses that list of priorities, he becomes a coward, and would be summarily disposed of by any civilized society that values its own survival.
Hiu
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:23:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 12:21:48 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:06:51 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?


So trade one lordship for another? Nah bad idea. Africa was already raped once.

Because being raped by an African Lord is so much more satisfying?

No. You remove the tribal lords. Send forces to protect the people and re-establish farmlands and help people sustain themselves. Send aid and other things that will help the people. Recolonizing it is just another word for occupation.
Greyparrot
Posts: 21,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:25:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 12:23:53 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:21:48 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:06:51 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?


So trade one lordship for another? Nah bad idea. Africa was already raped once.

Because being raped by an African Lord is so much more satisfying?

No. You remove the tribal lords. Send forces to protect the people and re-establish farmlands and help people sustain themselves. Send aid and other things that will help the people. Recolonizing it is just another word for occupation.

hmm..replacing a dictator...occupying with armed forces....sounds a whole lot like colonizing.
The extinction of the species is worse than the extinction of the nation, which is worse than the extinction of the tribe, which is worse than the extinction of the family, which is worse than the extinction of the individual. The second he reverses that list of priorities, he becomes a coward, and would be summarily disposed of by any civilized society that values its own survival.
Hiu
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:38:15 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 12:25:34 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:23:53 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:21:48 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:06:51 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?


So trade one lordship for another? Nah bad idea. Africa was already raped once.

Because being raped by an African Lord is so much more satisfying?

No. You remove the tribal lords. Send forces to protect the people and re-establish farmlands and help people sustain themselves. Send aid and other things that will help the people. Recolonizing it is just another word for occupation.

hmm..replacing a dictator...occupying with armed forces....sounds a whole lot like colonizing.

That isn't colonizing because colonialists tend to stay for decades upon decades and replacing a dictator could mean sending in Special forces. Colonialism isn't just about occupying lands its also about establishing a government. There shouldn't be no interfering in social-political affairs, it's merely protecting the people from tribal militia's. As we've seen in the movie Black Hawk Down usually warlords intercept aid for the people.
imabench
Posts: 20,542
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:44:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:37:49 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:09:46 PM, imabench wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Im cynical enough to think that nature should be allowed to take its course. Most of the countries on that list are failed nations occupying inhospitable desert where fewer people arguably isnt a bad thing. Im aware it horrible to simply let them die, but these are not stable nations going through hard times. These are failed nations with long histories of instability and violence with no end in sight. If people dont die of starvation this time around, theyll die from something else in the near future

So let people die because the citizens are to blame because of their failed governments? Right, great morals you have there.

The citizens are almost certain to die no matter what is done aid-wise. If starvation doesnt kill them, a genocide nearby might. If not that, maybe another famine will come along next year because these nations are literally deserts.... Giving aid to Somalia is the geopolitical equivalent of flushing money down a toilet, and other nearby nations like Yemen and South Sudan arent better either.
DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

12/14/14 to 1/1/15 = VP of DDO
8/4/18 to 8/6/18 = Start of the Worst Spam Attack in DDO History (61 Hours, 21 Minutes, and 37 seconds... Estimated 63,175 Spam Posts during the main attack)

Be Today's Hero and Tomorrow's Hero
The trash from yesterday will still be trash from every day onwards
imabench
Posts: 20,542
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 12:46:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 12:23:53 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:21:48 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:06:51 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?


So trade one lordship for another? Nah bad idea. Africa was already raped once.

Because being raped by an African Lord is so much more satisfying?

No. You remove the tribal lords. Send forces to protect the people and re-establish farmlands and help people sustain themselves. Send aid and other things that will help the people. Recolonizing it is just another word for occupation.

Sending in forces to remove tribal lords and enforcing certain laws is occupation in itself.
DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

12/14/14 to 1/1/15 = VP of DDO
8/4/18 to 8/6/18 = Start of the Worst Spam Attack in DDO History (61 Hours, 21 Minutes, and 37 seconds... Estimated 63,175 Spam Posts during the main attack)

Be Today's Hero and Tomorrow's Hero
The trash from yesterday will still be trash from every day onwards
Hiu
Posts: 1,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 1:05:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 12:46:56 AM, imabench wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:23:53 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:21:48 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:06:51 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/26/2017 12:01:31 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:56:52 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Why? That is a bad idea

Do you think that the dictators that have overran and raped subsaharan Africa have been good for the continent?


So trade one lordship for another? Nah bad idea. Africa was already raped once.

Because being raped by an African Lord is so much more satisfying?

No. You remove the tribal lords. Send forces to protect the people and re-establish farmlands and help people sustain themselves. Send aid and other things that will help the people. Recolonizing it is just another word for occupation.

Sending in forces to remove tribal lords and enforcing certain laws is occupation in itself.

Where in my post did I say enforcing certain laws? Stop projecting. Let the people establish their own laws and government.
Geographia
Posts: 2,179
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 1:14:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

If we can't fix our schools and have economic issues of our own, why should we help a continent filled with corruption?
Fernyx
Posts: 779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 1:39:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:09:46 PM, imabench wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Im cynical enough to think that nature should be allowed to take its course. Most of the countries on that list are failed nations occupying inhospitable desert where fewer people arguably isnt a bad thing. Im aware it horrible to simply let them die, but these are not stable nations going through hard times. These are failed nations with long histories of instability and violence with no end in sight. If people dont die of starvation this time around, theyll die from something else in the near future

Plus there are starving people in your own nation, why focus on others before yourself. It's harsh but if they die, it is because they could not evolve their society to accommodate the harsh conditions.
Swagnarok
Posts: 2,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 1:54:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:43:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Frankly the best thing that could happen to Africa is to be recolonized... by anyone other than the Dutch or the Italians.

Belgium!
Rest in Peace DDO (2007-2018)
SolonKR
Posts: 4,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 1:54:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:09:46 PM, imabench wrote:
Im cynical enough to think that nature should be allowed to take its course. Most of the countries on that list are failed nations occupying inhospitable desert where fewer people arguably isnt a bad thing. Im aware it horrible to simply let them die, but these are not stable nations going through hard times. These are failed nations with long histories of instability and violence with no end in sight. If people dont die of starvation this time around, theyll die from something else in the near future

So we shrug our shoulders and just let them die? That seems pretty fatalistic. Military interventions in the past, for instance, could have at least stopped genocide (Rwanda). Failed states are failed states, but there are some failures that are a lot worse than others, and I think famine probably qualifies.
Bailey <3

"For often evil men are rich, and good men poor;
But we will not exchange with them
Our virtue for their wealth, since one abides always,
While riches change their owners every day." - Solon, Plutarch's "Life of Solon"
SolonKR
Posts: 4,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 1:54:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:24:34 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
If we prod a bunch of stooges to work on this, there is a chance of it back firing. What do you mean by help? What kind of people are we dealing with, and what is best for them?

Define "a bunch of stooges". I mean provide the resources necessary to sustain and defend a civilian population during times of crisis. We're dealing with civilians, and what is best for them is "not dying of famine".
Bailey <3

"For often evil men are rich, and good men poor;
But we will not exchange with them
Our virtue for their wealth, since one abides always,
While riches change their owners every day." - Solon, Plutarch's "Life of Solon"
SolonKR
Posts: 4,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 1:55:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:32:37 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
UN aid doesn't ready help though, it actually hurts in the long run.

Evidence?

I don't think that much progress will be made. If we wanted to fix Africa by now we could have, but instead we just continue to dump aid which feeds corruption, undermines democracy, and causes local industry and agriculture to wither on the vine. This is probably because a divided, impoverished wasteland ruled by despots and corrupt warlords addicted to Western money is great for US business interests.

This particular instance isn't about "fixing" Africa, it's about stopping a famine.
Bailey <3

"For often evil men are rich, and good men poor;
But we will not exchange with them
Our virtue for their wealth, since one abides always,
While riches change their owners every day." - Solon, Plutarch's "Life of Solon"
NothingSpecial99
Posts: 794
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 2:01:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

However, over the past 20 years, the global poverty rate is now half of what it used to be. While these people do need help, it seems that plenty of progress is being made so I'm not overly concerned.

http://www.economist.com...
Check your facts, not your privilege -- Christina Hoff Sommers

Trigger warning!! Trigger warning!! This is Ben Shapiro Thug Life. Trigger warning!! The Thug Life chose me. -- Ben Shapiro
SolonKR
Posts: 4,374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 2:02:09 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:43:05 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Sending food aid doesn't increase greater geopolitical stability. What it does is put local farmers out of business, and causes total havoc on the entire economies of countries to whom we send food aid.

Agriculture is their economic base, and food aid destroys agricultural economic production by making it impossible to sell food at a profit. What happens is that in those countries to whom we send food aid, in bankrupting the local farmers, they don't have enough money to sew their fields for the next year, and then the fields themselves fall into disrepair.

As a result, there are two options that don't end in even more death: send more food aid, or force the country to import food at an even higher price than it could have produced it to begin with.

What we should be doing is engaging in joint ventures with countries so that they grow their own food, and building their educational infrastructures, while working to build secular civil societies and institutions. This applies as much in Afghanistan as it does in Mali, Somali, Sudan, etc. Only by doing both of those things can we begin to promote our geopolitical interests by inoculating them against extremist ideologies and religions.

Walk me through this logic. Country A isn't producing enough food; let's say it's because warfare has driven many farmers off their land and the combatants have destroyed farmland. We provide Country A with the food to fill in the gaps caused by farmers not producing. X happens, and the farmers stop producing and things get worse. What is X?

I don't disagree that infrastructural aid is more valuable; I offered food aid as a starting point. Still, farm buildings don't feed the people starving today, and I'm not sure how we would build infrastructure in a war-zone.
Bailey <3

"For often evil men are rich, and good men poor;
But we will not exchange with them
Our virtue for their wealth, since one abides always,
While riches change their owners every day." - Solon, Plutarch's "Life of Solon"
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 2:04:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 11:43:05 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Sending food aid doesn't increase greater geopolitical stability. What it does is put local farmers out of business, and causes total havoc on the entire economies of countries to whom we send food aid.

Agriculture is their economic base, and food aid destroys agricultural economic production by making it impossible to sell food at a profit. What happens is that in those countries to whom we send food aid, in bankrupting the local farmers, they don't have enough money to sew their fields for the next year, and then the fields themselves fall into disrepair.

As a result, there are two options that don't end in even more death: send more food aid, or force the country to import food at an even higher price than it could have produced it to begin with.

What we should be doing is engaging in joint ventures with countries so that they grow their own food, and building their educational infrastructures, while working to build secular civil societies and institutions. This applies as much in Afghanistan as it does in Mali, Somali, Sudan, etc. Only by doing both of those things can we begin to promote our geopolitical interests by inoculating them against extremist ideologies and religions.

China's on it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Also, If I start a kickstarter campaign under 'Let's fk Africa Again' I expect many to donate. Any ideas for direct training and cooperation with Africa would help imo. By that I do not mean military action or government aid (so warlords can steal horde and sell the 'aid' adding to their power).
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 2:08:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 2:02:09 AM, SolonKR wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:05 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Sending food aid doesn't increase greater geopolitical stability. What it does is put local farmers out of business, and causes total havoc on the entire economies of countries to whom we send food aid.

Agriculture is their economic base, and food aid destroys agricultural economic production by making it impossible to sell food at a profit. What happens is that in those countries to whom we send food aid, in bankrupting the local farmers, they don't have enough money to sew their fields for the next year, and then the fields themselves fall into disrepair.

As a result, there are two options that don't end in even more death: send more food aid, or force the country to import food at an even higher price than it could have produced it to begin with.

What we should be doing is engaging in joint ventures with countries so that they grow their own food, and building their educational infrastructures, while working to build secular civil societies and institutions. This applies as much in Afghanistan as it does in Mali, Somali, Sudan, etc. Only by doing both of those things can we begin to promote our geopolitical interests by inoculating them against extremist ideologies and religions.

Walk me through this logic. Country A isn't producing enough food; let's say it's because warfare has driven many farmers off their land and the combatants have destroyed farmland. We provide Country A with the food to fill in the gaps caused by farmers not producing. X happens, and the farmers stop producing and things get worse. What is X?

I don't disagree that infrastructural aid is more valuable; I offered food aid as a starting point. Still, farm buildings don't feed the people starving today, and I'm not sure how we would build infrastructure in a war-zone.

If there is free aid food and not free food, and you're a poor starving african... which do you chose?

What is the opportunity cost of that choice?
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 2:10:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 1:14:13 AM, Geographia wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

If we can't fix our schools and have economic issues of our own, why should we help a continent filled with corruption?

A corrupt entrenched regime such as the wealthy drug cartel's in Mexico created by the U.S. War on Drugs are difficult to deal with I agree evidenced by many failed attempts to promote production development efforts their. A lot of just brute tribal force with modern weapons in Africa. I think it's much easier to get local populations on board out there to help build stable governments through trade and cooperation. Obviously legitimates high powered foreign law enforcement/protection is needed but not direct U.S. military engagement.
Quadrunner
Posts: 5,509
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 2:36:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/26/2017 2:04:53 AM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 3/25/2017 11:43:05 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Sending food aid doesn't increase greater geopolitical stability. What it does is put local farmers out of business, and causes total havoc on the entire economies of countries to whom we send food aid.

Agriculture is their economic base, and food aid destroys agricultural economic production by making it impossible to sell food at a profit. What happens is that in those countries to whom we send food aid, in bankrupting the local farmers, they don't have enough money to sew their fields for the next year, and then the fields themselves fall into disrepair.

As a result, there are two options that don't end in even more death: send more food aid, or force the country to import food at an even higher price than it could have produced it to begin with.

What we should be doing is engaging in joint ventures with countries so that they grow their own food, and building their educational infrastructures, while working to build secular civil societies and institutions. This applies as much in Afghanistan as it does in Mali, Somali, Sudan, etc. Only by doing both of those things can we begin to promote our geopolitical interests by inoculating them against extremist ideologies and religions.

China's on it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Also, If I start a kickstarter campaign under 'Let's fk Africa Again' I expect many to donate. Any ideas for direct training and cooperation with Africa would help imo. By that I do not mean military action or government aid (so warlords can steal horde and sell the 'aid' adding to their power).

China is going to rule the world pretty soon
triangle.128k
Posts: 5,127
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2017 2:52:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/25/2017 10:28:10 PM, SolonKR wrote:
South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Somalia: 20 million people are facing starvation and famine.
https://www.pri.org...

Discuss. As a starter, IMO the US should send more aid (via the UN) to help. It's not about being the world police, it's about exercising our tremendous economic muscle to do good. We can choose to save a lot of people at relatively low cost to ourselves, or we can let them die. Not to mention the geopolitical benefits of greater stability in those countries, especially Nigeria.

Sending tons of aid to Africa has done more harm than good. Quite frequently a lot of it doesn't end up in the right hands given the corrupt governments controlling Africa. The foreign aid has also put local food industries out of business, creating a "dependency" if you would call it.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.