b3ta.com talk
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Talk » Message 612502 (Thread)

I agree.
But it's not throwing cheques at it.

If you cancel the debt (which isn't done without strict conditions on where that money goes) then the country can start building it's infrastructures again, investing etc.

Some people talking about Africa as if it's one country with one president! It's not.
(I helped save b3ta! icklepeach *relurks*, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 10:59, archived)
Or the leader
can get a nice new jet.
(I helped save b3ta! sprinkles ITS AN ISLAND, morron, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:01, archived)
Arf!
Its not like the leaders are going to say 'Golly now we've got no debt we should really change our corrupt genocidal ways' is it...

edit: news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/06/25/wnig25.xml
(I helped save b3ta! Mykeyboy A massive, salty filing cabinet, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:04, archived)
Yes, there are corrupt leaders,
but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't help those countries with diplomatic governments whose people are suffering because of debt and unfair trade laws.
(I helped save b3ta! Comma, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:08, archived)
Agreed
But we would be giving money to all of them, even the corrupt ones
(I helped save b3ta! Mykeyboy A massive, salty filing cabinet, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:10, archived)
What would you suggest the alternative is?

(s0WmVHAwZgpG, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:12, archived)
I dunno, err maybe letting a mineral rich continent pay its debt back
Without taking the imperialist attitude that they can only be helped by us and not themselves
(I helped save b3ta! Mykeyboy A massive, salty filing cabinet, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:16, archived)
re-colinisation

(I helped save b3ta! sprinkles ITS AN ISLAND, morron, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:17, archived)
I'm sorry if I'm being stupid here,
but is there any reason why we can't only give money to countries with stable democratic governments?
(I helped save b3ta! Comma, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:12, archived)
None
Thats not what im saying
(I helped save b3ta! Mykeyboy A massive, salty filing cabinet, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:13, archived)
no
There would be a systematic plan of structured debt relief requiring the meeting of strict conditions.
(I helped save b3ta! icklepeach *relurks*, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:13, archived)
If you believe that then thats blind ignorance
Tell me now, which particular bit of aid ever given to Africa went in its entirety where it was supposed to and not to line the pockets of officials?
(I helped save b3ta! Mykeyboy A massive, salty filing cabinet, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:15, archived)
I know two people
in Nigeria. They both have digital satellite and a 1mb web connection.
(I helped save b3ta! sprinkles ITS AN ISLAND, morron, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:15, archived)
So because
the two people in Africa that you know are wealthy, there is no poverty and no need for aid or any kind of western intervention?
(I helped save b3ta! Comma, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:17, archived)
The way
you lefties bang on about it, you'd swear they were still living in tribes.
(I helped save b3ta! sprinkles ITS AN ISLAND, morron, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:24, archived)
This.
'Africa' isn't just one solid blotch that can be cured by the west's magic wand.
Rich countries should try to help poorer countries as much as possible, but each African nation's fate ultimately lies in its individual hands.
(I helped save b3ta! Comma, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:03, archived)
They haven't got much hope without a little
help/interference from the rest of the world, though.
(s0WmVHAwZgpG, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:04, archived)