The man-made disaster in Myanmar
A monstrous cyclone in Myanmar has been followed by monstrous inhumanity by the country’s military dictatorship. The UN announced this morning that it was suspending food aid after the junta seized humanitarian shipments. This comes after the regime refused to issue visas to international aid workers:
A U.N. official says the World Food Program is suspending cyclone aid to Myanmar because its government seized supplies flown into the country.
He says the WFP has no choice but to suspend the shipments until the matter is resolved.
WFP spokesman Paul Risley said Friday that all “the food aid and equipment that we managed to get in has been confiscated.” The shipment included 38 tons of high-energy biscuits.
Reuters has more:
The two shipments, 38 tonnes of high-energy biscuits, were enough to feed 95,000 people — a tiny fraction of the estimated 1.5 million destitute survivors of Cyclone Nargis, which ripped into the southeast Asian nation six days ago.
“It should be on trucks headed to the victims. You’ve seen the conditions they are in. That food is now sitting on a tarmac doing no good,” Banbury said.
Despite the desperate needs of the survivors, the generals are adamant that only they will distribute the emergency aid that is going in after the worst cyclone to hit Asia since 1991, when 143,000 people were killed in Bangladesh.
The Dallas Morning News editorializes on the man-maded crisis:
The humanitarian crisis is almost certain to become a political crisis. Last September, Myanmar’s generals faced the biggest threat to their rule in 20 years when fuel price increases sparked mass protests that were crushed by soldiers. You can’t eat gas, but if you’re Burmese, you have to eat rice. And the cyclone may have wrecked the country’s rice-growing region during harvest time.
With the region already facing a rice shortage, how will Myanmar’s people feed themselves?
The United States has joined other governments and independent relief agencies from around the world in standing ready to help – but short of an act of war, it cannot intervene. Myanmar’s generals now join the ranks of history’s great tyrants – despots like Stalin, Mao, North Korea’s Kim dynasty – who were willing to allow the masses die of hunger and disease rather than yield the least bit of control.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: United Nations
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
American Thinker
» Sarah Palin and the low ebb of the cultural leftRedstate
» Morning Briefing for November 24, 2009Doug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomBig Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump ScandalVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Nice Deb
» O
Of course they are. It makes them feel better to say….see, we helped. See, we’re good.
Americans are the most generous people on the face of the earth. While the government of Germany pats itself on the back for coughing up 3.1 million in aid, private charity in the USA can easily collect 10 times that much. We don’t need to use taxpayer money for stuff like this either within our country or elsewhere in the world. Private charity is more that capable of fulfilling that traditional role…with less fraud, waste and abuse.
It would be better to return it to the taxpayers and let them decide how to use their own money.
OK, we both left that part out.
For the third time, you sure are very generous with other people’s money.
Darwinism is the survival of the fittest, survival of the strongest is “Social Darwinism.
This type of stuff has been going on in Africa forever. It’s terrible.
I am in favor of dropping goods by air, but in no way do I think it’s a good idea to get involved in some type of military conflict.
It’s not our job to go around the world taking on dictators and liberating people. Eventually, hopefully the people there will rise up and overthrow the regime. Things got turned around in South Africa when the oppressed starting getting violent, and setting people on fire with tires in conjunction with political pressure from outside nations.
The military leaders there are diabolical monsters, and I have respect for and hope the best for whatever counter groups looking to solve the situation.
I’m just happy I live in America, where we don’t have to deal with this type of evil.
khan,
You sure are assumptive that you are the only one who pays taxes here.
I guess I need to clarify. I don’t like giving the government much of my money at all because, in my opinion, they piss it away on stupid crap that doesn’t matter. I was trying to say that if the government has OUR money anyway, I would rather them spend it on saving people than spend it on earmarks or waste. I totally agree with taking less from us in the first place or giving it back, but given the choice between feeding starving people and paying for ‘Piss Christ’, I would rather feed people.
That is where I am coming from.
All I can say is if I were Burmese, I would be thinking now’s a pretty good time to overthrow the government.
Otherwise, what will the U.N. do besides issue another condemnation against Israel?
Harris,
I’ve never implied nor assumed that I’m the only one here who pays taxes. I’m just not going to lay claim to another’s money based on my personal belief system or tugged heartstrings.
I see no difference between paying for Piss Christ and spending money on another country’s citizens in a massive relief aid “to save people”. If people want to donate, let them, but do not forcefully take other people’s money to do so.
Harris #99, I get what you’re saying.
Can I pick at your arguments for a second, though?
Just a couple of things:
1) Comparing “keeping people alive” to “bridges to nowhere in Alaska” and “outrageous works of so-called art” seems pretty obvious. And, if those were really the choices, then they would be no-brainers. But, we know appropriations aren’t so simple and that makes this comparison a bit specious.
Wouldn’t we want to avoid spending on “bridges to nowhere” and “outrageous works of…art” altogether? Shouldn’t that be a given right out of the gate?
Plus, if there were extra discretionary funds available after eliminating the useless and the inane, could there be other alternatives to spending rather than “keeping people alive”?
2) Implicit in the comparison you make is that tax money needs to be spent. This is the disconnect between your point and at least one of the points made against you. Perhaps, taxes should be less. Perhaps, government shouldn’t be making decisions about where in the world to provide humanitarian aid. If we’re that wealthy, couldn’t US citizens make their own decisions about where that money should go? One would hope that an enlightened concerned citizenry could invest, donate, spend their dollars according to their personal values. (We know we’re a pretty giving people.)
3) This will seem like a nit, but it is an important question, I think: what is the value of “keeping people alive”? Let me rephrase: what is the price of a human life? How much money is enough? With a bridge, we know when it is complete. Same with a so-called work of art. How do we know we’re successful at keeping people alive? Where is the boundary for this sort of spending? Where do the costs start outweighing the benefits? That proposition can get expensive. Somewhere we’ll be forced to choose: whom do we keep alive? Is it the Burmese people? The Sudanese? The Congolese? AIDS sufferers? Cancer victims?
I’m not picking on you, Harris. You just got me thinking.
And if China accuses us of using the cyclone to put troops in their backyard? Then what? Then the UN despot club get together and condemns the U.S. for exerting influence in another part of the world, the whole thing escalates and again we are th bad guys for trying to help.
When did we become the big brother/police/saviors/protectors of the world? Why is it our responsibility to take care of everyone that won’t take care of themselves?
If we drop food and sneak in a few weapons to foment revolution, how many Burmese will die in the fighting that we caused? Then when we take the flack for interfering in another countries internal affairs (again), who’s going to take the blame then?
Let the U.N. do it’s job for once, and take the blame for the result.
The REAL DEAL on Myanmar?
The Burmese people made a choice. They saw their nieghbor, Thailand, become an economic powerhouse. But at the expense of the Thai culture! There is truth to the fact that since becoming “international,” many Thai women have become prostitutes. Many Thai men and women are drug-addicted and HIV positive.
The Burmese chose isolation, at the cost of riches!
They value THEIR culture.
Myanmar has it’s own oil.
Myanmar has its own riches in gems and jewells.
But the “International Community,” or GLOBALISTS, want a piece of that action. Oil companies have lobbied for decades for access to Myanmar, usually under the guise of “DEMOCRACY!”
And the Burmese know; once you let the oil companies in, they’re NEVER LEAVING!
The Burmese have made their choice. Let’s stop being the Ugly American. Let’s RESPECT their wishes.
One of the things I often use to determine who should be helped and who should be left to twist is the type of government the people have over them. Take Cuba and Mexico, for instance. They are both crappy countries, but Mexico is a capitalistic (supposedly) democracy and Cuba is Communist. Cubans were just allowed cell phones last month, for God’s sake. Although I can’t stand illegal immigration, I don’t have as much of a problem with Cubans coming here because I would try and leave a Communist hell-hole myself. The Mexicans, however, can change their country, but they don’t.
I was trying to think, “What would it be like if the US Army took over the US government and instituted martial law. What could we do about it as citizens?” They truth of the matter is I don’t know.
My thing is, these aren’t people who voted in socialism or communism. They had their government taken from them by the military, and although there have been ‘votes’, the results have been consistently ignored by the regime. People should be held accountable for the decisions and choices they have made, but I really don’t see what chances these people have without help. I am saying we could at least help out with giving them a little to eat.
You all make it sound like this is the first time this exact scenario has happened. Newsflash, the world is full of evil dictators. Anyone care to remember when we tried airlifting supplies into Somalia only to have those with the guns take it away and hold the food hostage and murdered their own people if they tried to take any of that food? Power corrupts, and nothing short of a full scale military invasion is going to get food to the people who need it most in Burma and that is something no country is going to do.
The US and much of the free world is trying its best to get food into a country that is run by a violent dictatorship and military. It is not easy, and many thousands will die and not because we didn’t try and help. And since most of Burma’s rice and wheat were on those coastal plains wiped out by this hurricane (cyclone in the pacific) and they had not yet had a harvest yet, many hundreds of thousands more if not millions face death by starvation in the near future. Rather than sit back and argue like armchair generals on how you would run US foreign policy, get off your butt and stop complaining and do what you can to get aid to groups who have boots on the ground and are getting limited success such as the Danish Red Cross.
Again, that’s fine if you want to help. That’s what charities, foundations, non-profits, etc., are for. Knock yourself out and donate your own money.
Do these Generals have names?
Let’s let them die because:
A) It’s not our job to feed them.
B) We don’t want to suffer the wrath of world opinion.
C) The people should suffer because because of the choices their military rulers made.
For how long? And if the military government complains to the U.N. that we are interfering, and the U.N. agrees and condemns our actions (as we all know they would even if we have veto power), then what? After giving the people food, do we just cut them off and let them starve next month? Assuming that the food we drop actually gets to the people that need it instead of having it stolen by either the local government or the central government.
Let’s face it, unless the government lets us in with the blessing of the U.N. this is a hopeless situation and will result in a major loss of the Burmese population. And the libs will blame us for not taking unilateral action to overthrow the junta.
A) When did it become our job?
B) We are tired of suffering the wrath of world opinion for our good deeds.
C) The choices that their rulers are currently making are the reason help isn’t getting in.
Harris, why are you having such a difficult time understanding the difference between willingly donating (charity) and force funding (collecting taxes)? You keep trying to distill any opposing viewpoint into logical fallacies and false dichotomies instead.
Sorry sosnodfly but there is also a magic device called a “jammer”…
If you drop food, drop a few weapons too…armed responsible people get to make choices their government would rather they not make. (2nd Amendment plug)
I’m waiting for all those Tibet protestors to hit the streets and start after Myanmar. I haven’t seen them in the news lately; break-time is over, people. This junta is on shaky ground right now, and they don’t want the people to know that the relief is coming from abroad. They want the people to know it came all from the government. Like N. Korea, this junta doesn’t want their people to know how terrible conditions are in their country. Outside influence is definitely not welcome. They may be forced into some sort of action, based on the death/homeless toll. Hopefully, they will open the gates and let their people start to live again. It shows how extreme a government can be…interested in only holding power rather than the welfare of its people. Some people here are wanting to deny any relief to them. I, for one, don’t corrupt my morals simply because others do. Charity is something you give from the heart and faith; not from the political pocketbook.
I don’t think the junta can be ‘forced’ to do anything by the UN or any country unless it involves pointing a gun at them. I think that they simply do not care at all about the people. I say that because I understand that their military has done NOTHING in the way of relief action thus far? You’d think they would have done something by now if they were ever going to?
Harris said:
Huh? What ‘wrath’ did we and Aussies suffer for being the first responders to the Tsunami disaster?
Let’s air drop guns and ammo to the people who can then overthrow the junta and then let in the aid. Now would be a good time..
I’m all for providing aid to help with the recovery from natural disasters and other acts of God, but only if the aid in no way increases the longevity of corrupt governments. The problem with giving any relief to a place like Burma or North Korea is that it takes the pressure of the government. Even if you deliver the food directly to the oppressed peasants, all you have done is make it feasible for the government that used to steal 90% of their money now able to steal 99% for the same effect. Corrupt governments eventually destroy themselves when left to their own devices, either through rebellion or simply running out of people to oppress. As painful as it may be to watch this happen, any help you give to such a society simply delays the inevitable. Without aid, country X may have a famine that kills 5 million people, at which point the government collapses. With aid, that country kills 1 million people every year for 25 years at which point the aid ends and that famine you postponed finally occurs.
The only way, other than cutting them off entirely, to deal with a corrupt state, is military action. It is the most humane option, insofar as you may only have to kill a few hundred thousand people. But a populous that has been oppressed for any amount of time would be incapable of self government immediately following the resolution of the regime change action. This type of solution would require the political will to impose a non-democratic government run by the occupying power on the state in question long enough for effective political machinery to develop and for normalcy to return to such a degree that the people can make rational decisions.
Sadly, the popular opinion seems to be against anything but continual subsidies to failing governments, and in the few cases that regime change is tolerable, the only acceptable plan of action is immediate democracy. Basically it’s foreign policy that feels good but only really serves to increase suffering.
this is code pink’s utopia right here, folks. they want the UN to solve all the world’s problems and deal with dictators? this is what happens. what we see in myanmar today is what the world would be like without the united states. and i wish the liberals in this country would see it.
Sorry, Dances. What I meant was that the junta may be “forced” by itself, into some sort of action, not by the U.N, in order to maintain power. I see on Foxnew.com that the junta has seized the U.N. shipments already. They say they want to distribute it themselves. They either plan on giving it to the people as something they themselves have done (not the U.N.) or hold it all for themselves for profit and power. I imagine that they want to use the relief shipments as hostage to attain something they want. Time to pull the plug, U.N.. All you are doing is feeding into a very tyrannical government bent on themselves, not the people. That isn’t charity.
You got me Changer
But I sure was hoping….
Khan I didn’t specify who gave them guns.. Just let them do what they have to to survive. I would appreciate a weapon from anyone if it meant saving myself and country
Good point An-artist. This situation is the poster-child of what happens when imbeciles like code-pink get their way.
We never gave code-pink a fair chance to prove how they would have solved the problem with Saddam but here is a golden opportunity for them to show us the ‘right way’ to deal with thug dictators and save ~50 thousand lives.
Where are you hiding code pinkers? How come you aren’t in the news trying to go to Burma to negotiate with the thugs to allow us in to prevent the deaths from starvation and disease that are CERTAIN to happen without any outside help?
Let’s start a collection drive to: SEND CODE PINK TO BURMA!
I’m seeing on the news that they are going to let the UN get supplies in there, just as an update.
feeler said:
WHAT?! You think the Burmese people had ANYTHING to do with ruling junta being in power? Nothing could be further from the truth. Take your head out of the sand; what part of “MILITARY COUP” is it that you do not understand? Next you’ll tell how much the North Koreans appreciate their ‘cultural isolation’ while they eat tree bark and coal.
since this is on topic, i thougth it might be worth a post.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354677,00.html
title of the article:
A Gulf in Giving: Oil-Rich States Starve the World Food Program
And a quote, to put the generous nature of America in perspective:
Donor listings on WFP’s website show that this year, as in every year since 1999, the U.S. is far and away the biggest aid provider to WFP. Since 2001, U.S. donations to the food agency have averaged more than $1.16 billion annually — or more than five times as much as the next biggest donor, the European Commission.
We give FIVE TIMES as much as anyone else.
Take the story, and that knowledge, in any way you like
Democracy is not the solution to preventing suffering. Capitalism, that is, free enterprise and free markets are the solutions.
Democracy, especially in a place as diverse as Myanmar, shifts the tyrannical behavior away from a military junta to a majority. And having a democratic form of government doesn’t mean the economy will be free.
Majorities…er…democracies can be just as tyrannical and stupid as a military dictatorship, only in the former, the population feels good about it because they’re doing it to themselves (unless you’re in the minority, of course.)
The problem in Myanmar and every other backwater dictatorship around the world is that the people aren’t free to act economically. The power to vote just doesn’t matter all that much if you’re free to create, accumulate, and spend wealth. Myanmar should be an economic powerhouse, but the political idiots in charge are too worried about keeping their offices.
Maybe a democracy would change that, but it isn’t a prerequisite. It could be argued that democracy is actually preventing economic freedom and prosperity in progressive-leaning (socialist) democracies.
Once people believe that government is a creator of wealth (versus a confiscator of wealth,) there is no end to the spending on ourselves. That will spell the failure of some democracies within our lifetimes.
US foreign policy should be about pushing economic freedom around the world. Democracy is overrated.
Myanmar has political problems, obviously, but restoring their democracy is neither necessary or sufficient to cure them. (Though, admittedly, it wouldn’t hurt.)
Just as I thought, what relief has gotten into that country is being distributed as propaganda by the generals. It shows the sorry state of affairs that junta has become. If the U.N. is worth anything (which is doubtful) international pressure needs to be placed on them. Something has to be done other than accepting their terms and thousands starve and die. Maybe the people will revolt in order to eat and live.
Now we have more relief going in and oddly enough, with very little (or no) capacity to transport it to the affected regions, the government is still refusing aid workers permission to go in.
Gee, I wonder why?
Seems like maybe prayers are the best thing we can give those people right now.