MYANMAR

[texaspackerbacker]

Here again, we have a GOLDEN EXAMPLE of how the rest of the world operates--particularly that portion LEAST influenced by America and the American Way.

It ain't the Muslims that are the culprits in Myanmar. It is a leftover regime of Cold War era Communism. They have a military dictatorship dominated by their gigantic neighbor--formerly known as Red and still Communist to a great extent, China.

That extremely anti-American regime is rejecting the American aid and compassion which we ALWAYS extend, even to the countries which are the most extremely hateful of us--usually because the hate reflects the government, not the people.

And if that callous disregard for the survival of their own people isn't bad enough, there are rumors that the regime is greatly inflating the death toll--why they would do that, I have no idea. Even the left-leaning American media outlets are afraid to send their people into this country, though, so the only figures we have are provided by the pro-Communist government there.

It would be interesting to hear the opinions on this of some of you who have so much disdain for the American Way--and who talk about "stuffing it down people's throats"--and who can't stand the idea that our way of life is greatly superior to basically everybody else's.

[red]

where did you hear that they were inflating the death count tex?

that seems backwards, you would think they would make the numbers smaller to make it look like things are fine and controlable

hey, if they don't want it then fine, we don't have to shove it down their throats, its not like were have money to just give away

let china help them, they have all the money

just as long as someone helps them, cause they just got the crap kicked out of them by that storm

[Gunakor]

Not our problem.

I have agreed with you already that I feel - same as you - that our way of life is in many ways greatly superior to that of many other countries in the world. But it's not our problem that other countries can't develop and sustain American style democratic governments on thier own. Just be happy that you can enjoy such a wonderful way of life and stop worrying about people halfway around the world that don't know you and probably wouldn't like you if they did.

[Joemailman]

Here again, we have a GOLDEN EXAMPLE of how the rest of the world operates--particularly that portion LEAST influenced by America and the American Way.

It ain't the Muslims that are the culprits in Myanmar. It is a leftover regime of Cold War era Communism. They have a military dictatorship dominated by their gigantic neighbor--formerly known as Red and still Communist to a great extent, China.

That extremely anti-American regime is rejecting the American aid and compassion which we ALWAYS extend, even to the countries which are the most extremely hateful of us--usually because the hate reflects the government, not the people.

And if that callous disregard for the survival of their own people isn't bad enough, there are rumors that the regime is greatly inflating the death toll--why they would do that, I have no idea. Even the left-leaning American media outlets are afraid to send their people into this country, though, so the only figures we have are provided by the pro-Communist government there.

It would be interesting to hear the opinions on this of some of you who have so much disdain for the American Way--and who talk about "stuffing it down people's throats"--and who can't stand the idea that our way of life is greatly superior to basically everybody else's.

Actually they are rejecting aid, other than cash from the UN, not just the U.S. http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSBKK1919620080506?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

Despite the magnitude of the disaster -- the most devastating cyclone to hit Asia since 1991, when 143,000 people died in Bangladesh -- France said the ruling generals in the former Burma were still placing too many conditions on aid.

"The United Nations is asking the Burmese government to open its doors. The Burmese government replies: 'Give us money, we'll distribute it.' We can't accept that," Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner told parliament.

In New York, the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said it was prepared to make available a $5 million grant from its central emergency response fund.

But Rashid Khalikov, a senior U.N. aid official, appealed to Myanmar to waive visa requirements for U.N. aid workers trying to get into the country.

"Unfortunately we cannot tell you how many people are in need of assistance," he said. "We just clearly understand that it will probably be in the hundreds of thousands."

It's a terrible, corrupt regime, bit I don't know there refusal to let aid workers in has anything to do specifically with the U.S.

[red]

well, with that i can easily see why they would inflate the death toll

if all they want is money, then of course they'll say more are dead, more are homeless, etc

just to get more money, and if they aren't willing to let people in to take count of the total damage, then they could make a ton of money off this disaster

the un is doing the right thing here i think

[Freak Out]

Typical of the Burmese military...refuse to issue a visa to a nurse.....could be media, spy or a terrorist.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't recall where I heard about possible inflating of the death toll, but I read or heard somewhere. What Red says makes sense about possible motivation.

The bottom line here IMO, is that wonderful morally equivalent just-as-good-as-we-are world out there that liberals fantasize, just doesn't exist. Maybe all or most of those crap third world countries aren't as bad as Myanmar, but they are all just varying degrees of lower levels of civilized behavior, even to their own people in most cases.

[red]

i don't think the fact that they are commies is the reason why they live so poor. poor countries are poor countries. if they had a democratic government theres no promise that they would all be living in nice homes. they could still be dirt poor. look at cube, when they were our allies they still had most of the population living in poverty

on the flipside, if the us were to convert to commies over night, we all wouldn't have to go move into dirt shacks. you'd be shocked to know that in a true socialist society the average citizens lifes wouldn't change much at all, the poors life would get better and only the very wealthy lose out

poor countries are poor no matter what type of government they have

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, if you believe what Laura Bush said in her speech yesterday--which you probably don't, Myanmar used to be a rich country--lots of gemstones, minerals, etc. The current pro-Communist regime destroyed things and dragged it down to poverty and depravity.

The point here, though, is the callous disregard of the regime for its own people. I would even go so far as to say, that regime just happens to be Communist. The relevant factor is the tendency of basically everybody other than America and a very few other western nations to be in varying degrees, inferior in the realm of humanity, compassion, and civilized behavior.

Myanmar may be among the worst, but it is by no means, alone.

[Freak Out]

The country still is rich in all kinds of mineral wealth.....we (being the west) still have operations going on there through intermediate companies. Burma is not a communist country...its a fucking military regime of a brutal nature who cares about power and money above all else. The military has done next to nothing to help its own people there and should be forced out of power. But money talks....Thailand gets most of its gas from there and they are afraid of any disruptions.

[Guiness]

I was working overseas two summers ago, and met a guy from Burma/Myanmar. He had left there to find some work, but was now unable to go back and visit his family, etc. He had money he could give them, but wasn't able to do so...no banking system or anything to get it to them.

He was pretty distraught and concerned, and said there were a fair number of his countrymen in the same situation. He really envied Canada and what we have over here.

[Badgerinmaine]

Not that Wikipedia's always totally reliable, but they report that the Communist party is illegal in Myanmar, as is any party not affiliated with the military junta:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Burma

They would seem to be unideological xenophobic thugs above all else. They seem to care far more about preventing any outside influence from reaching their people than they do about the survival of hundreds of thousands of their own citizens.

[texaspackerbacker]

Neither I nor anybody else said Myanmar IS/WAS Communist--just that the military dictatorship there is a client state of its huge Communist neighbor--the nation formerly known as RED China.

[Kiwon]

For those who might be interested......, I spent this weekend in discussions about organizing relief operations with an established NGO head who lives and works in Myanmar but was in Korea when the disaster happened.

He has been in contact with fellow workers in country via satellite phone each day and the news is not encouraging.

The government is taking donated relief supplies and selling them out of country for cash. They are refusing any on-site supervision from foreign aid workers and confiscating foreign currency and communication equipment, like satellite phones, upon arrival to keep the true story from being told.

In addition, the country has not postponed a referendum on a new constitution that essentially gives even more power to the military and the 12 generals that basically run the country.

Get this, in the disaster areas, if the people vote "yes" for the new constitution, they are allowed food and water. Anyone refusing to vote "yes" is deprived of relief supplies and has his national ID card taken from him and branded a subversive.

The dead bodies are being thrown into the rivers that provide the water supplies to tribal groups opposed to the government.

The NGO head left for Bangkok today and will attempt to reenter Myanmar sometime tomorrow. The movement of foreigners into the country is being very tightly controlled as the government dictates the amount and type of relief that it is accepting. Its preferred relief item is cash. Unbelievable. What good is cash to people dying from hunger, thirst, and disease?

In any case, very little of the donated food and medicine has reached those who need it the most so far. As foreigners are completely banned from the hardest hit areas, its distribution is completely up to the whim of the government.

It's an incredibly sad situation. Hundreds are dying each day due to the government's indifference, incompetence, and extreme xenophobia.

Man's inhumanity to man is in full and rich display right now in Myanmar.

[MJZiggy]

According to the news on the radio this morning a relief plane was finally allowed to land this morning with 28K lbs. of supplies.

[Badgerinmaine]

Thanks for the post, Kiwon--even if the news is outrageous and horrible.

[Kiwon]

Here is a news story that confirms much was what I mentioned yesterday.

Myanmar regime accused of hoarding cyclone aid

YANGON, Myanmar (AP) The United Nations said Tuesday that only a tiny portion of international aid needed for Myanmar's cyclone victims is making it into the country, amid reports that the military regime is hoarding good-quality foreign aid for itself and doling out rotten food.

The country's isolated military regime has agreed to accept relief shipments from the U.N. and foreign countries, but has largely refused entry to aidworkers who might distribute the aid.

Two U.S. planes have already delivered aid to the country, and, in an apparent broadening of the initial agreement, the government seemed willing to allow future shipments.

But logistical bottlenecks, poor infrastructure and the junta's restrictions have delayed the distribution of the aid, which is piling up at the airport in Yangon.

"There is obviously still a lot of frustration that this aid effort hasn't picked up pace" 10 days after the cyclone hit, said Richard Horsey, the spokesman of the U.N. humanitarian operation in Bangkok, Thailand.

Cyclone Nargis devastated the country's Irrawaddy delta on May 3, leaving about 62,000 people dead or missing, according to the government count. The U.N. has suggested the death toll is likely to be more than 100,000.

With their homes washed away and large tracts of land under water, some 2 million survivors — mostly poor rice farmers — are living in abject misery, facing disease and starvation.

The U.N. said the World Food Program is only getting in 20 percent of the food needed.

"That is a characterization of the program as a whole. We are not reaching enough people quickly enough," Horsey told The Associated Press.

The survivors are packed into Buddhist monasteries or camped in the open, drinking dirty water contaminated by dead bodies and animal carcasses. Food and medicines are scarce.

The military — which has ruled the country with an iron fist since 1962 — has taken control of most aid sent by other countries including the United States.

The regime told a U.S. military commander who delivered the first American shipment on Monday that basic needs of the storm victims are being fulfilled and "skillful humanitarian workers are not necessary."

But the junta's words and actions have only served to back up complaints that the military is appropriating the aid for itself.

A longtime foreign resident in Yangon told the AP in Bangkok that angry government officials have complained to him about the misappropriation of the aid by the military.

He said the officials told him that quantities of the high-energy biscuits rushed into Myanmar by the WFP on its first flights were sent to a military warehouse.

They were exchanged by what the officials said were "tasteless and low quality" biscuits produced by the Industry Ministry to be handed out to cyclone victims, the foreign resident said.

He spoke on condition of anonymity because revealing his identity would jeopardize his safety.

He said it was not known what's happening to the high quality food — whether it is sold on the black market or consumed by the military.

The government did not immediately respond to requests for comment. But the claim appeared to be backed up on the ground.

CARE Australia's country director in Myanmar, Brian Agland, said members of his local staff brought back some of the rotting rice that's being distributed in the delta.

"I have a small sample in my pocket, and it's some of the poorest quality rice we've seen," he said. "It's affected by salt water and it's very old."

It's unclear whether the rice, which is dark gray in color and consists of very small grains, is coming from the government or from mills in the area or warehouses hit by the cyclone.

"We were using food from the World Food Program, which is very high quality," Agland said by telephone from Yangon. "Certainly, we are concerned that (poor quality rice) is being distributed. The level of nutrition is very low."

The foreign resident also said that several businessmen have been told to make "donations" in cash of a minimum of $1,800 to the government to aid cyclone victims. Companies approached include jade mining concerns in Hpakant, restaurants and construction companies in Yangon, he said.

The authoritarian junta has barred nearly all foreigners experienced in managing such catastrophes from going to the delta — an area west of Yangon — and is expelling those who have managed to go in.

Jean-Sebastien Matte, an emergency coordinator with Medecins Sans Frontieres, said his foreign staff have repeatedly been forced to return to Yangon from the delta.

"We can go for two days and then we have to come back," he said. "We're able to do 100 or 200 consultations a day but we should be doing 1,000."

Armed police checkpoints were set up outside Yangon on the roads to the delta, and all foreigners were being sent back by policemen who took down their names and passport numbers.

"No foreigners allowed," a policeman said Tuesday after waving a car back.

After its first aid delivery on Monday, the United States sent in one more cargo plane Tuesday with 19,900 pounds of blankets, water and mosquito netting. A third flight was to take in a 24,750-pound load.

U.S. Marine Lt. Col. Douglas Powell said the situation remains fluid, but flights were expected to continue after Tuesday, which appears to broaden the original agreement for three flights on Monday and Tuesday.

Yangon was pounded by heavy rain Monday and more downpours were expected throughout the week, further hindering aid deliveries.

But for many, the rainwater was the only source of clean drinking water.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080513/ap_on_re_as/myanmar

[Harlan Huckleby]

It would be interesting to hear the opinions on this of some of you who have so much disdain for the American Way--and who talk about "stuffing it down people's throats"--and who can't stand the idea that our way of life is greatly superior to basically everybody else's.

I'm not sure what your point is, if any. Where are the liberals who are soft on Myanmar? That country has been a cause of human rights advocates for years, This lady (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aung_San_Suu_Kyi) has been a hero of the left for 25 years.

Is our life greatly superior everyone's? How about Ireland? Their economy is booming. They invested heavily in education, and their kids are smarter and more productive than ours. Everyone has quality health care. They have successfully combined capitalism and socialism.

[The Leaper]

The debacle in Burma really only is evidence of the utter erectile disfunction that is the United Nations. Honestly...what good is the UN for these days? It chooses to allow some power-obsessed ruling junta to prevent aid from reaching those affected by a crisis?

There should be a world-wide show of force on the shores of Burma so fast that the ruling junta would quickly rethink their foolish position and allow aid to freely flow to an area that desperately needs it.

[Freak Out]

The debacle in Burma really only is evidence of the utter erectile disfunction that is the United Nations. Honestly...what good is the UN for these days? It chooses to allow some power-obsessed ruling junta to prevent aid from reaching those affected by a crisis?

There should be a world-wide show of force on the shores of Burma so fast that the ruling junta would quickly rethink their foolish position and allow aid to freely flow to an area that desperately needs it.

The UN is only as tough as it's member nations want it to be. Period.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The debacle in Burma really only is evidence of the utter erectile disfunction that is the United Nations. Honestly...what good is the UN for these days? It chooses to allow some power-obsessed ruling junta to prevent aid from reaching those affected by a crisis?

I am very much in favor of creating a league of democracies.

I don't see it as a replacement for the U.N., more as a goad. I suppose a lot of people who want to create such an organization are right-wingers looking to undermine the U.N., but I don't see it that way.

We need a U.N., they quietly do a lot of good work, where politics allow. But we also need a reminder to distinguish and honor countries that are more legitimate. And the democracies might be willing to take actions that would otherwise be blocked by thuggish countries like China & Russia.

[Harlan Huckleby]

McCain Favors a 'League of Democracies'
Apr 30 By LIZ SIDOTI

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain envisions a "League of Democracies" as part of a more cooperative foreign policy with U.S. allies.
The Arizona senator will call for such an organization to be "the core of an international order of peace based on freedom" in a speech Tuesday at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University in Palo Alto, Calif.

"We Americans must be willing to listen to the views and respect the collective will of our democratic allies," McCain says, according to excerpts his campaign provided. "Our great power does not mean we can do whatever we want whenever we want, nor should we assume we have all the wisdom, knowledge and resources necessary to succeed."

"To be a good leader, America must be a good ally," he adds in the speech, another in a series of policy addresses as he seeks the Republican presidential nomination.

Such comments offer a contrast to President Bush, who critics contend has employed a stubborn, go-it-alone foreign policy that has dramatically damaged the U.S. image abroad.

McCain is careful to note that his proposed multinational organization would not be like Woodrow Wilson's failed "League of Nations." Rather, McCain says the organization would be far more similar to what Theodore Roosevelt favored—a group of "like-minded nations working together in the cause of peace."

"It could act where the U.N. fails to act," McCain says.

Such a new body, he says, could help relieve suffering in Darfur, fight the AIDS epidemic in Africa, develop better environmental policies, and provide "unimpeded market access" to countries sharing "the values of economic and political freedom."

And, McCain adds, an organization of democracies could pressure tyrants "with or without Moscow's and Beijing's approval" and could "impose sanctions on Iran and thwart its nuclear ambitions" while helping struggling democracies succeed.

Recalling Harry S. Truman's actions during the Cold War, McCain also urges a similar "massive overhaul of the nation's foreign policy, defense and intelligence agencies" to meet the world's current challenges. He says details will come later.

[texaspackerbacker]

Good posting, both Leaper and Harlan.

The very very few times that the UN has EVER been any kind of a positive force in its whole history have been when it has been a tool for American compassion and interventionism. A League of Democracies would, indeed, be a good thing, as it would serve to share the load in promoting good, without the obstruction and harm done by the solid majority of third world countries as well as the remnants of Communism and socialism in the world.

Consider the Obama approach to foreign policy in comparison to McCain's: giving legitimacy by negotiating with the worst of the worst evildoers in the world, emasculating American power and dominance--and thus, our ability to promote good.

[Freak Out]

So would this replace NATO with a wider group of global governments? Who's going to get to join? Iraq? Russia? Venezuela? Pakistan? Can any democracy sign up? Oh....details to come later.

[Harlan Huckleby]

So would this replace NATO with a wider group of global governments? Who's going to get to join? Iraq? Russia? Venezuela? Pakistan? Can any democracy sign up? Oh....details to come later.

Hah! You make a very valid point. Just like with the UN, as things are politicized, countries trade political favors when they make votes.

Its a solvable problem. Perhaps it would require a combination of a minimum score from respected independent agencies like Freedom House, followed by a vote. Freedom House would give the 4 countries you mentioned mixed reviews, they would be questionable candidates. Certainly Russia is no longer a democracy. Iraq & Pakistan probably not because of weak judiciary. Maybe Venezuala.

[Harlan Huckleby]

So would this replace NATO

No, NATO, or the new European security alliance, would have nothing to do with it.

[Joemailman]

So would this replace NATO with a wider group of global governments? Who's going to get to join? Iraq? Russia? Venezuela? Pakistan? Can any democracy sign up? Oh....details to come later.

If a country awarded their Presidency to the person who finished 2nd in the popular vote, would that country qualify as a Democracy? :satan:

[Freak Out]

I understand what Mac is trying to do but take a look at Afghanistan....NATO is made up of our best friends and its like pulling teeth to get commitments from many. It would be nice to see commitment to a group/cause like that come in the way of a national vote in potential member countries. Get the backing of the people not just a short term political leader. He has a tough sell ahead of him considering how many in the world see the USA these days.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I understand what Mac is trying to do but take a look at Afghanistan....NATO is made up of our best friends and its like pulling teeth to get commitments from many. It would be nice to see commitment to a group/cause like that come in the way of a national vote in potential member countries. Get the backing of the people not just a short term political leader. He has a tough sell ahead of him considering how many in the world see the USA these days.

I don't think it is McCain's idea, the notion of an alternative U.N. has been percolating for a while in right-wing circles.

You're right that the U.S. is at a low point in prestige. But the U.S. does not have to lead the effort, and it wouldn't be hampered by an archaic "some pigs are more equal than others" Security Council. It would start out symbolic, but in time could do work in parallel with the U.N.

[Harlan Huckleby]

So would this replace NATO with a wider group of global governments? Who's going to get to join? Iraq? Russia? Venezuela? Pakistan? Can any democracy sign up? Oh....details to come later.

If a country awarded their Presidency to the person who finished 2nd in the popular vote, would that country qualify as a Democracy? :satan:

Good point. Perhaps the U.S. could be partially admitted with observor status, full-membership potential after the electoral college problem is dealt with. If Obama is elected, I'm afraid his tainted nomination (FL-MI) might also be a blackmark for the U.S. to overcome.

[texaspackerbacker]

Who said anything about replacing NATO with this League of Extraordinary Nations? It's the God damned worthless UN that would be replaced. NATO was, and to a lesser extent, is a DEFENSE organization--an alliance dominated by America, and consisting of allies choosing to be loyal to us. Yeah, I know the French are in NATO, but they have kinda bounced in and out of participation.

The key is that it is dominated by us--U.S. For the "League" to be successful, it too, would necessarily need to be dominated by America--which should also answer the question of who decides who gets in and stays in.

Venezuela would be the least likely of that group with the current regime, as it is a cancer--an active destroyer of democracy in the western hemisphere. Some of those others may not BE democratic, but they are at least, not actively harming democracy.

If it was up to me, it would be a League of nations standing for good in the world--even if they weren't textbook democracies. That, however, probably would be too easy for the anti-America forces in the media and Democrat Party to shoot down.

[Harlan Huckleby]

it too, would necessarily need to be dominated by America--which should also answer the question of who decides who gets in and stays in.

this is sounding more like the tree fort in Spanky & Our Gang.

[Joemailman]

I understand what Mac is trying to do but take a look at Afghanistan....NATO is made up of our best friends and its like pulling teeth to get commitments from many. It would be nice to see commitment to a group/cause like that come in the way of a national vote in potential member countries. Get the backing of the people not just a short term political leader. He has a tough sell ahead of him considering how many in the world see the USA these days.

I don't think it is McCain's idea, the notion of an alternative U.N. has been percolating for a while in right-wing circles.

You're right that the U.S. is at a low point in prestige. But the U.S. does not have to lead the effort, and it wouldn't be hampered by an archaic "some pigs are more equal than others" Security Council. It would start out symbolic, but in time could do work in parallel with the U.N.

The problem with the U.N., which perhaps you are referring to, is that any one of the permanent members of the security council can scuttle anything the security council wants to do. That needs to be changed. The U.N. still serves a purpose in that it keeps a dialog going between democracies and authoritarian regimes. I don't see how isolating the two makes things better. You talk of the 2 organizations working in parallel ways, but I don't think that's what many supporters of a League Of Democracies have in mind.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I agree the U.N. remains vital. And that many proponents of League of Democracies are simply anti-U.N. I don't care. I think a LoD would have great benefits, no down side. The idea of isolating China and Russia is ridiculous and impossible, so I don't worry if some people think that will result from LoD.

[Harlan Huckleby]

any one of the permanent members of the security council can scuttle anything the security council wants to do. That needs to be changed.

Good luck! Any organization that has three European countries on the executive council, and not Japan, India, Brazil or South Africa is hopelessly archaic. It's not going to change, need to start over.

[texaspackerbacker]

Damn straight, Joe. We don't need no stinking second UN, run by the third world trash of the world.

Harlan's line of crap is pie-in-the-sky similar to the idiocy spewed by his favorite nemesis, Barak Osama (intentional typo).

What is needed is to have a group of follower nations, willing to subordinate themselves to the compassionate wisdom of the United States of America. We could easily do it ourselves, but having a few self-important wannabe nations of old Europe, etc. share the cost, sacrifice, and risk wouldn't be too bad a thing--assuming command and control is firmly in the hands of America.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Harlan's line of crap is pie-in-the-sky similar to the idiocy spewed by his favorite nemesis, Barak Osama (intentional typo).

What is needed is to have a group of follower nations, willing to subordinate themselves to the compassionate wisdom of the United States of America.

Lets pause to ponder what we've uncovered here. You object to the notion that the League of Democracies, an organization founded to honor and promote democracy around the world, should itself be organized democratically.

:?:

You put the "nut" into "right wing nut."

[texaspackerbacker]

If the "United" Nations isn't united (thank goodness), then why should the League of Democracies be democratic? Note, I called it the "League of Extraordinary Nations".

Call it whatever euphemism you want to call it, but if it isn't merely a means to get other countries involved in following America's lead in being the force for good in the world, then it's pure bullshit, just like the God damned UN.

I ask you, what is so right wing or nutty about the concept that America is the primary force for good in the world, and that we should NEVER trust command and control, much less sovreignty, to any other nation or group of them?

[Harlan Huckleby]

If the "United" Nations isn't united (thank goodness), then why should the League of Democracies be democratic? Note, I called it the "League of Extraordinary Nations".

What you have in mind is a coalition of the willing, where condition of membership is support of the United States. There is nothing wrong with such an arrangement, but it is not a starting point for building a world-side organization of democracies, and really has nothing to do with what McCain is proposing or what we are talking about.

I'll just mark you down as opposed to creating a League of Democracies.

You are also off base in talking about sovereignty. Maybe it is a concern that would need addressing 50 years from now, but I doubt it.

[texaspackerbacker]

"What you have in mind is a coalition of the willing, where condition of membership is support of the United States. There is nothing wrong with such an arrangement, but it is not a starting point for building a world-side organization of democracies, and really has nothing to do with what McCain is proposing or what we are talking about."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now you've got the right idea, Harlan.

I'd like to think this indeed IS what McCain has in mind. McCain, however, for better or worse, keeps everybody guessing exactly what he means and which side he's on.

As I have said, whether I'm for it or against it depends on exactly what IT is.

You never really answered my question about exactly what you think is right wing or nutty about considering America the primary force for good in the world, and why we shouldn't dominate and lead the civilized nations in promoting goodness, compassion, etc.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You never really answered my question about exactly what you think is right wing or nutty about considering America the primary force for good in the world, and why we shouldn't dominate and lead the civilized nations in promoting goodness, compassion, etc.

I don't believe we should dominate the world. I think this attitude reflects the cold war era, when most of the world was far behind us economically. I think we need to think of other countries as our peers, and that is the coming reality. I have no problem with the U.S. taking a leadership role where it can.

But that's not why I suggested you are nutty. You are nutty because of the extreme, our-way-or-the-highway ideology that you think can form the basis for an international organization. You are not daled into the real world.

[texaspackerbacker]

You never really answered my question about exactly what you think is right wing or nutty about considering America the primary force for good in the world, and why we shouldn't dominate and lead the civilized nations in promoting goodness, compassion, etc.

I don't believe we should dominate the world. I think this attitude reflects the cold war era, when most of the world was far behind us economically. I think we need to think of other countries as our peers, and that is the coming reality. I have no problem with the U.S. taking a leadership role where it can.

But that's not why I suggested you are nutty. You are nutty because of the extreme, our-way-or-the-highway ideology that you think can form the basis for an international organization. You are not daled into the real world.

So given the record of America indisputably preserving civilization at least three times in the last century from three separate and distinct evils that would have driven the world into a new dark age (or are you loony enough not to believe that?)--Nazism, Communism, and radical Islam, and given the abject evil of some of the rest of the world and the wishy-washy spineless attitude of most of the rest of it, you honestly are taking the position that there is something "nutty" about wanting America in charge of accomplishing any good that really needs to be accomplished? Sheesh, who do you want calling the shots? The God damned French? The worthless UN?

You show me a nation that comes close to being our "peer" among the stinking rabble of the world--with the possible exception of Britain, and I'll think of them as our peer--but I assure you, such does not exist.

Harlan, you can't even SPELL "dialed" into the real world--literally.

I haven't accused anybody of being an America-hater since I've been posting in this forum, and I'm not going to start with you, but your words are SO idioctically naive as to approach America-hate--or at very least, gross disrespect.

[Kiwon]

Priorities...new constitution more important than getting aid to 2.5 million people at risk.

Cyclone-wracked Myanmar says constitution approved

Myanmar's junta announced Thursday that voters overwhelmingly backed a pro-military constitution — a move critics claim was an attempt to divert attention from its failure to deliver aid to victims of a devastating cyclone.

State radio said the draft constitution, which critics dismissed as a sham document designed to entrench the military's rule, was approved by 92.4 percent of the 22 million eligible voters. It put voter turnout Saturday at more than 99 percent.

Voting was postponed until May 24 in the Irrawaddy delta and Yangon areas, which were worst hit by Cyclone Nargis. But state radio said the results of the late balloting could not mathematically reverse the constitution's approval.

The constitution announcement came a day after Myanmar's government issued a revised cyclone casualty toll, saying 38,491 were known dead and 27,838 were missing.

But the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies said its estimate put the number of dead between 68,833 and 127,990. U.N. officials have said there could be more than 100,000 dead in the May 2-3 cyclone.

Human Rights watch slammed the timing of the constitution announcement and questioned the accuracy of the results.

David Mathieson, a spokesman in Bangkok, Thailand, said the junta hopes that by announcing the results now it would divert attention away from its handling of the disaster and its refusal to cooperate with the international community.

"It seems strategically timed because you would have thought with how busy they were in cleaning up the cyclone that they never would have had time to count this properly," he said.

With up to 2.5 million people in urgent need of food, water and shelter, aid agencies were preparing or moving in a wide-range of relief supplies including material for temporary shelters, rice, drinking water, kitchen utensils and medicines, including 2,000 anti-snake bite kits. The World Health Organization said an increase in snake bites was feared in coming days.

U.N. agencies and other voluntary groups have been able to reach only 270,000 of the affected people. But instead of accepting foreign help freely, the government continued to issue only a few visas to foreign aid experts, and all but shut them out of the hardest-hit areas.

The regime insists it can handle the disaster on its own — a stance that appears to stem not from its abilities but its deep suspicion of most foreigners, who have frequently criticized its human rights abuses and crackdown on democracy activists.

Critics see the May 9 referendum as another attempt by the junta to stifle democracy. In a country ruled by the feared military since 1962, few would have dared to vote against the constitution. Human rights groups dismissed the vote as a mockery, saying government officials were told to mark the ballots with "Yes" ticks for those who failed to show up at polling stations by 1 p.m.

The junta says the new constitution will lead to a general election in 2010. But it guarantees 25 percent of parliamentary seats to the military and allows the president to hand over all power to the military in a state of emergency — elements critics say contradict the junta's professed commitment to democracy.

The junta's iron-fisted rule has been clearly demonstrated in the way it has dealt with international humanitarian agencies offering their services in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis.

The Hawaii-based Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance says seven U.N. agencies, more than 60 non-governmental organizations and about 45 nations or regional blocs are directly or indirectly involved in the aid operation.

But the junta has limited international staff to Yangon, and has also used police to keep foreigners out of the delta. It did grant approval for a Thai medical team to visit the delta as early as Friday.

Amanda Pitt of the U.N. Office for Humanitarian Affairs said that unless the disaster response was improved, more lives would be lost. "It is clearly inadequate, and we do not want to see a second wave of deaths as a result of that not being scaled up," she said.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch also said that countries delivering aid should insist on monitoring to ensure aid reaches the cyclone victims most in need and to prevent the military government from seizing it.

It said it has confirmed an Associated Press report this week that the junta had seized high-protein biscuits supplied by the international community and distributed low-quality, locally produced substitutes to the people.

"Simply dropping aid off at (the) airport under the control of the abusive and ill-equipped ... military will not necessarily help victims of the cyclone," it said.

The junta also said Wednesday it would accept 160 relief workers from India, China, Bangladesh and Thailand, though it was not clear if anyone but the Thais would be permitted to go to the delta.

On Thursday, the U.N. said that an emergency rapid assessment team from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, would also head into Myanmar within 24 hours to assess the most critical needs.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080515/ap_on_re_as/myanmar

[texaspackerbacker]

I've heard estimate of a death toll of as high as 150,000 in this Myanmar cyclone--28,000 + confirmed as of several days ago.

I looked up the official death toll from Katrina--a storm at least as bad, and it was 1,810.

I just read an article about a country near and dear to me, the Philippines, specifically, the ten worst typhoons there over the last sixty years--presumably, at least some of which were as bad or worse than what hit Myanmar. One of these had an estimated 5-8,000 killed. All of the others had less than 1,000 killed.

The Philippines is not exactly a country with a sterling record of lack of corruption either. However, it has always been solidly pro-American and Christian--and thus, a legitimate member of the community of civilized nations. That is in stark contrast to a third world pro-Communist government in Myanmar which is in effect murdering its own people by indifference and neglect.

Now we have the earthquake in China--Communist China--15,000 dead confirmed, estimates of over 50,000. China does not seem to be deliberately letting people die like in Myanmar, but I have to ask, would a body count like that be allowed to occur here? Not unless the circumstances were far worse.

An 8.1 Richter Scale quake (compared to 7.9 in China) killed 10,000 in Mexico City in 1985in a more densely populated area--a huge number, but way under the China toll.

Leftists, etc. get all bent out of shape when I speak of superiority of America, the American Way, etc. Well, the evidence is right there, not only with this cyclone, but with dozens of indisputable events every year.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You show me a nation that comes close to being our "peer" among the stinking rabble of the world--with the possible exception of Britain, and I'll think of them as our peer--but I assure you, such does not exist.

It's not a problem that you think that America and its ways are far superior to those of, say, Brazil and India.

The disconnect from reality comes where you think we can treat other countries as subordinates, and this will somehow work out OK.

Brazilians and Indians are proud people too, and increasingly successful. For instance, India has beat-us out to be the brains behind China's exploding economy, they do the computer programming and business accounting for China. Brazil has built an entire auto-industry around 100% ethanol-fueled cars. These are no longer little brown people that we can lead around by the nose.

[MJZiggy]

I've heard estimate of a death toll of as high as 150,000 in this Myanmar cyclone--28,000 + confirmed as of several days ago.

I looked up the official death toll from Katrina--a storm at least as bad, and it was 1,810.

I just read an article about a country near and dear to me, the Philippines, specifically, the ten worst typhoons there over the last sixty years--presumably, at least some of which were as bad or worse than what hit Myanmar. One of these had an estimated 5-8,000 killed. All of the others had less than 1,000 killed.

The Philippines is not exactly a country with a sterling record of lack of corruption either. However, it has always been solidly pro-American and Christian--and thus, a legitimate member of the community of civilized nations. That is in stark contrast to a third world pro-Communist government in Myanmar which is in effect murdering its own people by indifference and neglect.

Now we have the earthquake in China--Communist China--15,000 dead confirmed, estimates of over 50,000. China does not seem to be deliberately letting people die like in Myanmar, but I have to ask, would a body count like that be allowed to occur here? Not unless the circumstances were far worse.

An 8.1 Richter Scale quake (compared to 7.9 in China) killed 10,000 in Mexico City in 1985in a more densely populated area--a huge number, but way under the China toll.

Leftists, etc. get all bent out of shape when I speak of superiority of America, the American Way, etc. Well, the evidence is right there, not only with this cyclone, but with dozens of indisputable events every year.

Ummmm...I hate to break this to you, but the Phillipines are quickly becoming a Muslim nation...

The reason that people don't die in developed countries in these instances is because the developing nations don't have the access or the money to invest in good infrastructure. It's not the superiority of America and Mexico, it's the superiority of our buildings, bridges, tunnels and roads to withstand the forces of these storms and not crumble on the residents and to allow rescue workers to get to them (not so much the case in Myanmar, but that's the usual scenario). So then what you're saying is that America is better because people don't die in disasters, which means that we're better because we have money which means that China is better than us because they have all of our money right now. Thanks George.

[texaspackerbacker]

Ummmm...I hate to break this to you, but the Phillipines are quickly becoming a Muslim nation...
__________________________________________________ _______________________

This is almost too idiotic to even comment on, but never let it be said I don't comment on idiocy.

Approximately 8% of the population of the Philippines is Muslim. They are a downtrodden and hated minority group--with good reason based on their general behavior. They had a flourishing rebel group in the Cold War days which still exists way back in the hills, but is no longer a threat.

As for your thoughts on why anti-American third world countries--and even China, which is hardly third world--allow so many more of their citizens to suffer and die, you can be in denial all you want, but the reason is the simple obvious answer that it seems to be: they lack the compassion, humanity, and civilized behavior even toward their own. Are you going to try to spin it differently in Myanmar? China? The earthquake in Iran a few years ago? Rwanda? Somalia? All of these are glowing examples of how the other half lives--the portion of the world sick American liberals like to fantasize is somehow NOT inferior to America. They are also shining examples of the kind of socialist republic American liberals used to install and still do picture as the ideal third world government.

There have been numerous natural disasters in third world countries where the American Way has been promoted and rubbed off to varying degrees, also. In addition to Mexico and the Philippines, there has been similar situations in Chile, Ecuador, Honduras, even Pakistan and Turkey in recent years. Even the horrendous tsunami in Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka etc. was much less deadly than it might have been and would have been if the governments had reacted like Myanmar.

Why are blame-America-first liberals so loath to acknowledge that there is a superior, more compassionite attitude with greater emphasis on humanity promoted by America in stark contrast to the indifferent to human life attitude of our enemies?

[MJZiggy]

First off, I excepted Myanmar in my post. There is no excuse for the behavior of the junta turning down available aid. And the situation in Rwanda Secondly, I'm well aware of the compassion and generosity of not only the American government, but its people as well. And I'm not willing to go back into a cyclical argument about the willingness of Christians to abuse their fellow humans just like any other religious group (except MAYBE the Buddhists and Taoists). That is human-based, not religious and we've been there, done that.

If you recall, 126,000 people died in that tsunami. How is that about an non-compassionate government as opposed to a horrible tragedy of nature? I don't recall Iran turning down American aid. How were they lacking in compassion? What were they supposed to do for the folks trapped in the mountains that they couldn't get to (recalling that the Americans had a helluva time reaching them as well)? Sometimes it's about logistics and cash, not about civilized behavior. Have you been to any of these regions that were hit and learned about their people and infrastructure? I somehow highly doubt it.

[texaspackerbacker]

You show me a nation that comes close to being our "peer" among the stinking rabble of the world--with the possible exception of Britain, and I'll think of them as our peer--but I assure you, such does not exist.

It's not a problem that you think that America and its ways are far superior to those of, say, Brazil and India.

The disconnect from reality comes where you think we can treat other countries as subordinates, and this will somehow work out OK.

Brazilians and Indians are proud people too, and increasingly successful. For instance, India has beat-us out to be the brains behind China's exploding economy, they do the computer programming and business accounting for China. Brazil has built an entire auto-industry around 100% ethanol-fueled cars. These are no longer little brown people that we can lead around by the nose.

Harlan, I almost missed your post.

Yeah, Brazil and India are nice thriving examples of pro-American free enterprise representative democracies--examples of what CAN BE when countries follow the American Way. Just the same, both these countries are relatively recent converts to seeing the light. Rest assured, the pre-Reagan/Bush/Bush foreign policy would NOT have encouraged that kind of American style development. Indeed, this is exactly the kind of American lifestyle which the anti-American idiots of the left--God damned piece of shit Obama at the top of the list--CRITICIZE the Bush Administration for INFLICTING on the crap third world. As relative newcomers to the responsible pro-American portion of the world, both of these countries still fall well below America both in terms of freedom and in terms of standard of living.

Nice try, though, Harlan. If we can just keep Obama and his kind out of office, in a generation or two, maybe Brazil and India will progress to near our level. Or maybe if Obama and other leftist trash like him get in, America will drop down to the level of those two and other countries.

[MJZiggy]

Tex, how could you have missed his point so completely?

[red]

:soap:

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex, how could you have missed his point so completely?

Oh, I know what his point is--denial of the superiority of the American way of life--I thought I covered that in a nice positive way by accepting his examples, as well as citing the reason why.

Or perhaps you mean his laughable criteria for national success--ethanol-powered cars and phone centers for American businesses.

What I failed to say and probably should have is that probably the best thing that ever happened to India was the rise of Muslim terrorism, etc., which gave them and us a common enemy and drove India to our side in the worldwide clash of civilizations.

The point which apparently escapes YOU, Ziggy, and other libs, is that the Bush foreign policy which is so hated by the idiots on your side--spreading and encouraging representative democracy and free enterprise--is RESPONSIBLE for the great success of these countries--something which could turn around drastically if a socialist-loving America-hating IDIOT like Obama gets in.

[MJZiggy]

1. His point is not a denial of American life. His point is that if you try to act all superior to them like you have the right to tell them what to do, they will reject you cold and your promotion of the American way of life will fail.

2. He is trying to tell you that the two countries in discussion have made a great deal of progress and are innovating all on their own without us telling them what to do.

3. India cooperates with us because we have money and power. They are not resenting us by any means but remember that they pulled themselves out of British rule. BRITISH. Their enemy was the British. They simply figured out a better way to make their point than terrorism. But their enemy was the British, not the Muslims.

4. I'd say that India and Brazil have been rising long enough that you might want to look to give that credit to Clinton and all the nation building that the Republicans were bitching about for so long...and with Bush in office, it's hard to call anyone else an idiot.

[Kiwon]

Ummmm...I hate to break this to you, but the Phillipines are quickly becoming a Muslim nation...

MJZ, I go to the Philippines at least a few times a year. I definitely don't see any evidence of this.

There are some very vocal Muslims in the southern part of the country, but they are a separatist movement looking for independence. The violence that some of them have embraced has turned the rest of the country against their cause, IMHO.

[MJZiggy]

Good.

[Tarlam!]

Ummmm...I hate to break this to you, but the Phillipines are quickly becoming a Muslim nation...

There are some very vocal Muslims in the southern part of the country, but they are a separatist movement looking for independence. The violence that some of them have embraced has turned the rest of the country against their cause, IMHO.

Yup. Having been to the Philipines 8 times, I can confirm what Kiwon says to be spot on. I haven't been there in 2 years, but I doubt it's gotten that Muslim in that time that thie statement doesn't hold.

[texaspackerbacker]

1. His point is not a denial of American life. His point is that if you try to act all superior to them like you have the right to tell them what to do, they will reject you cold and your promotion of the American way of life will fail.

2. He is trying to tell you that the two countries in discussion have made a great deal of progress and are innovating all on their own without us telling them what to do.

3. India cooperates with us because we have money and power. They are not resenting us by any means but remember that they pulled themselves out of British rule. BRITISH. Their enemy was the British. They simply figured out a better way to make their point than terrorism. But their enemy was the British, not the Muslims.

4. I'd say that India and Brazil have been rising long enough that you might want to look to give that credit to Clinton and all the nation building that the Republicans were bitching about for so long...and with Bush in office, it's hard to call anyone else an idiot.

First of all, as I said, and the other two pretty much confirm, the Muslims are fading--the Moro National Liberation Front--ever since they lost their Soviet benefactors, more so since Bush scared the bejesus out of Khaddafi, their other major backer.

Regarding your points above:

1. If that's the case, they--whoever "they" may be--will be the losers along with their people--case in point: Myanmar.

2. A big "yeah right" to that. It's not so much "telling them what to do" as it is backing the right side and encouraging the right people. That is why it is so important to keep scum like Obama out, as he would go back to backing the socialists.

3. Britain was a benevolent colonial power which the early Indian leaders pretty much emulated. The relevant issue, however, is not 50 or so years ago, but now. The Hindus are blood enemies of the Muslims. That is why Britain set up India and Pakistan as separate countries. Perhaps you have heard of Kashmir, where there has been open warfare 3 or 4 times in the past 50 or 60 years.

4. I said back to Reagan/Bush/Bush--with a brief respite under Clinton--whose foreign policy encouraged socialist regimes, although not quite as virulently and actively as in the pre-Reagan era.