Full Version: I wish they would make up their minds
First we are stingy. Now we are at fault for giving to much to fast. Please make up you freaking mind.
Part of the defense of the 35,ill first put forward was that until we learned the extent, logistics and scale of the matter there was no reason to throw money at the tsunami disaster . We were called stingy, greedy heartless scum for this by the u.n. Now they confirm what we said but its still our fault.
Yes, it was a direct under the cuff shot at the u.s. specifically and the West in general.UN undersecretary for disaster relief Jan Egeland called Western nations "stingy".
Today the same U.N. released a report which blames the corruption endemic in their assistance programs on the money given them by the same group of wealthy nations:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...nm/crime_war_dc
It took public exposure of the corruption of U.N. charities{see the oil for food scandal as well} and the repines by the u.n. is to attempt to shift blame for corruption from the UN to the donors.Its not us charities and u.n. aid organizations fault you idiots listen to us and threw money at us so we were corrupted.
How lame and condescending can these * edited to remove attempt to bypass profanity filter* get.
Now we see why the u.s. is so "stingy" at first when these groups stick their hands out.. The lack of accountability within the organization, from the Secretary-General on down, has been made crystal clear in the Oil-For-Food scam run out of Turtle Bay by Kofi Annan's crony Benon Sevan and assisted by Annan's son Kojo.
Captain Ed:
Part of the defense of the 35,ill first put forward was that until we learned the extent, logistics and scale of the matter there was no reason to throw money at the tsunami disaster . We were called stingy, greedy heartless scum for this by the u.n. Now they confirm what we said but its still our fault.
Yes, it was a direct under the cuff shot at the u.s. specifically and the West in general.UN undersecretary for disaster relief Jan Egeland called Western nations "stingy".
Today the same U.N. released a report which blames the corruption endemic in their assistance programs on the money given them by the same group of wealthy nations:
QUOTE
The ravages of modern warfare are too often compounded by ill-conceived and expensive post-war reconstruction projects that fuel a "feeding frenzy" of corruption and profiteering, according to a U.N.-funded report.
The report, citing graft from Liberia and Bosnia-Herzegovina to Lebanon and Afghanistan, said the overwhelming international response after wars was simply to pump large amounts of money into rebuilding programs without proper control.
"What is difficult enough to try to manage in times of peace becomes even more problematic in post-war situations where the sheer scale of works...and the weakness of public oversight create opportunities for the corrupt of historic proportions," it said.
The report, citing graft from Liberia and Bosnia-Herzegovina to Lebanon and Afghanistan, said the overwhelming international response after wars was simply to pump large amounts of money into rebuilding programs without proper control.
"What is difficult enough to try to manage in times of peace becomes even more problematic in post-war situations where the sheer scale of works...and the weakness of public oversight create opportunities for the corrupt of historic proportions," it said.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...nm/crime_war_dc
It took public exposure of the corruption of U.N. charities{see the oil for food scandal as well} and the repines by the u.n. is to attempt to shift blame for corruption from the UN to the donors.Its not us charities and u.n. aid organizations fault you idiots listen to us and threw money at us so we were corrupted.
How lame and condescending can these * edited to remove attempt to bypass profanity filter* get.
Now we see why the u.s. is so "stingy" at first when these groups stick their hands out.. The lack of accountability within the organization, from the Secretary-General on down, has been made crystal clear in the Oil-For-Food scam run out of Turtle Bay by Kofi Annan's crony Benon Sevan and assisted by Annan's son Kojo.
QUOTE
The UN answers to no one and controls billions of dollars in various aid programs. To blame the resultant corruption on the money clearly demonstrates what an ethically bankrupt organization the UN has become, and why we should endeavor to make it a financially bankrupt one as a result.
Captain Ed:
Topic closed...
Reason: Question to debate too vague or missing.
Recommended action:
If you started this topic, please contact the staff member who closed it by clicking the PM button below this post with a clear question to debate.
Helpful links:
- Starting New Topics
- Survival Guide
- The Rules
- Staff Directory
Note: This is an automated response.
Reopened with the following question to be debated:
Is there a contradiction between what the UN said initially (we're stingy) and what it is saying now? Please explain your reasoning.
Is there a contradiction between what the UN said initially (we're stingy) and what it is saying now? Please explain your reasoning.
Not necessarily... let me make (what I think) is a great analogy.
You ever been to a subway (this especially happens at lunch rush) ...have it your way type of sub place. So they ask you what kind of sandwich you want, and then you tell them. You say you want a ham and cheese with mayo. They pull out the mayo and in a rush they put thin little squiiirt of mayo. Now you want to taste the mayo offer the ton of lettuce they put on a sandwich, the meat, and the thick bread. So what do you do?? "Can you put some more mayo on that, please??" And it never fails... that PUNK behind the counter, gives you that quick look of "you asked for it" Taps that mayo bottle and SQUIIIIIRRRRTTT!!! SPLUTTER!!! SPLUTTER!! They just glob the mayo on it, ruining your sandwich. You may say something, you may not, but either way you had a complaint. Does this make you a hypocrite or just argumentive?? No, I don't think so. You wanted a tasty ham and cheese. Not a dry sandwich, not a mayo sandwich... just a GOOD sandwich.
Now, to apply this to the analogy. Is it a contradiction, no. From the excerpts I have read they are stating what is happening. Too much money in a post war atmosphere without oversight is causing great corruption... would you rather they keep their mouth shut about it??
Too little money given in face of a tragedy is considered selfish and thus people who give less percentage of their wealth may be called stingy.
One seems to be complaining about too much money without oversight, the other seems to be concerned about not enough money given period. If too much money is bringing epic corruption , you don't want that, if too little money is bringing insufficient aid, you don't want that either. Pointing out problems is not contradicting.
You ever been to a subway (this especially happens at lunch rush) ...have it your way type of sub place. So they ask you what kind of sandwich you want, and then you tell them. You say you want a ham and cheese with mayo. They pull out the mayo and in a rush they put thin little squiiirt of mayo. Now you want to taste the mayo offer the ton of lettuce they put on a sandwich, the meat, and the thick bread. So what do you do?? "Can you put some more mayo on that, please??" And it never fails... that PUNK behind the counter, gives you that quick look of "you asked for it" Taps that mayo bottle and SQUIIIIIRRRRTTT!!! SPLUTTER!!! SPLUTTER!! They just glob the mayo on it, ruining your sandwich. You may say something, you may not, but either way you had a complaint. Does this make you a hypocrite or just argumentive?? No, I don't think so. You wanted a tasty ham and cheese. Not a dry sandwich, not a mayo sandwich... just a GOOD sandwich.
Now, to apply this to the analogy. Is it a contradiction, no. From the excerpts I have read they are stating what is happening. Too much money in a post war atmosphere without oversight is causing great corruption... would you rather they keep their mouth shut about it??
Too little money given in face of a tragedy is considered selfish and thus people who give less percentage of their wealth may be called stingy.
One seems to be complaining about too much money without oversight, the other seems to be concerned about not enough money given period. If too much money is bringing epic corruption , you don't want that, if too little money is bringing insufficient aid, you don't want that either. Pointing out problems is not contradicting.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.