Insomnia (insomnia) wrote,

Stingy or not stingy?

Was it stingy of the Bush administration to initially offer up only $15 million to help Indonesia, Thailand, India, Sri Lanka, and other countries after earthquakes and tsunamis killed over 60,000 people and destroyed whole cities?

Let's see... India pledged $30 million in humanitarian assistance to Iraq, and offered to write off most of their $1 billion dollars in Iraqi debt.  Thailand sent 443 soldiers to Iraq as a member of the coalition, losing two in the process. They also sent doctors, engineers, and humanitarian aid.  Indonesia has also sent doctors and humanitarian aid, despite their huge debt woes. Sri Lanka is a poor country, but has supplied a considerable amount of the contract labor needed for Iraq. They've had their people kidnapped and killed, and yet they have quietly helped the U.S. by not taking any significant action to prevent their people from working in  a war zone.

Considering that we are talking about a great degree of generousity from some of the world's poorest nations when we asked for it in Iraq, stingy just doesn't seem like the right word to describe our initial offer of assistance.

(Christmas just wouldn't be the same without Scrooge, would it?!)

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.