b3ta.com talk
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Talk » Message 612509 (Thread)

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
(, 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.
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:08, archived)
Agreed
But we would be giving money to all of them, even the corrupt ones
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:10, archived)
What would you suggest the alternative is?

(, 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
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:16, archived)
re-colinisation

(, 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?
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:12, archived)
None
Thats not what im saying
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:13, archived)
no
There would be a systematic plan of structured debt relief requiring the meeting of strict conditions.
(, 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?
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:15, archived)
I know two people
in Nigeria. They both have digital satellite and a 1mb web connection.
(, 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?
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:17, archived)
The way
you lefties bang on about it, you'd swear they were still living in tribes.
(, Sat 2 Jul 2005, 11:24, archived)