g8 results

[Cloud No.9]

well the g8 is over and chinoocs and gunships keep flying over my house just to prove it (there's been a chinooc a day for the last week).

so what do you make of the results? no change on africa's trade rules, no more debt relief that was agreed previously, no move for climate change, and more debt for africa, subsidies to remain.

i myself am not too impressed. after all that has been said and one, live-8, the marches and protests, the hype that this may end poverty in africa. but no. harldy anything comes out of it and even less for climate change. and what has been agreed won't take place for another 5 years in which time millions will die.

your views?

[Raistlin]

How, exactly, does one "end poverty in Africa?" Wave a magic wand? We can send over boat-loads of money, but until they're willing to help themselves, nothing will change. Same with the AIDS epidemic there.

[Shoden]

the AIDS thing is because they are catholics


for some stupid reason the smurfed up catholic religions wont allow use of condoms or abortion


there should be more Aid and tell Africa to take care of itself with the money

[Yamaneko]

There needs to be more pressure on the part of the Western world to reform various corrupt governments in the African continent. They won't do it themselves. Then we can send aid to them.

[Raistlin]

There needs to be more pressure on the part of the Western world to reform various corrupt governments in the African continent. They won't do it themselves. Then we can send aid to them.

So...what do we do? How does one "reform" a foreign government? We could invade, conquer, and establish democracy - but unless an African government or body is committing genocide, this is wrong and illegal.

[Shoden]

tell it straight to them and the government

[Yamaneko]

So...what do we do? How does one "reform" a foreign government? We could invade, conquer, and establish democracy - but unless an African government or body is committing genocide, this is wrong and illegal.

Sudan?

[Raistlin]

I don't remember the specifics of that incident, but "we did it once, so we can do it again" is not a valid reason.

[crashNUMBERS]

I've heard of this over the news yesterday. I also heard they're attempting to help africa which is a good thing...

[-N-]

Public opinion has little to no effect on government decisions.

[Raistlin]

Public opinion has little to no effect on government decisions.

Tyrants only rule by the consent of the people. Public opinion doesn't affect government decisions because people just like to bitch to their barber when the government does something stupid.

[Madame Adequate]

There needs to be more pressure on the part of the Western world to reform various corrupt governments in the African continent. They won't do it themselves. Then we can send aid to them.

So...what do we do? How does one "reform" a foreign government? We could invade, conquer, and establish democracy - but unless an African government or body is committing genocide, this is wrong and illegal.

If a government is not ruling it's people, is not aiding them, attempting to educate them (And I mean by telling them that sex without condoms = AIDS, I don't mean school and college just yet.), is corrupt and not willing to make large-scale and rapid reforms, then I believe we would not be in the wrong.

However, as Iraq shows, helping foreigners is bad. I think trade is the only way to help Africa which anyone would even consider. And I'm not remotely surprised that Live 8 did, essentially, nothing.

[Raistlin]

[1]If a government is not ruling it's people, [2]is not aiding them, [3]attempting to educate them (And I mean by telling them that sex without condoms = AIDS, I don't mean school and college just yet.), [4]is corrupt and [5]not willing to make large-scale and rapid reforms, [6]then I believe we would not be in the wrong.

1. What do you mean by "not ruling?" I think that would be a good thing.
2. How much does have to aid its people before it's ok? Is there a specific dollar amount per person?
3. First off, the typical African males refuse to wear condoms outright. Secondly, how much does a government have to educate? I wouldn't consider a country without public education to be evil.
4. How do you judge "corrupt?"
5. So...not wanting change warrants invasion?

These are not objective issues for invasion. They are subjective - meaning something could or could not fit into a certain category(no "black and white" but all shades of gray). Laws(including international laws) must be objectively defined - if someone did something, he either broke the law, or he didn't. It can't be "well, stealing is sometimes against the law, but...given the unusual circumstances, he can go free."
As far as I know, the only objectively defined precedent for invasion(besides self-defense, of course) is genocide: if one body of people is murdering another specific body of people with a probable cause of intent to wipe out that body. Politicians have tried to tip-toe around this, making up shades of gray where there are none(see: White House press releases in '94 about Rwanda), but it's obvious bull.

[Cloud No.9]

hiow can we help africa?well for one ened the illigetimate deabt that has been paid many times over but still more is being charged in interest. we can start trade justice and stop placing unfair tarrifs on african goods. we can stop dumping our subsidesed goods and crops on africa which drives down their prices and puts their farmers out of business.

climate change was also a major disappointment. but that is to be expected with america.

[Raistlin]

well for one ened the illigetimate deabt that has been paid many times over but still more is being charged in interest.

You do realize that every single country has debt, right?

we can start trade justice and stop placing unfair tarrifs on african goods.

This one I agree with. I don't know of any specific tarifs on African goods, but I am against any sort of trade restrictions like that.

we can stop dumping our subsidesed goods and crops on africa which drives down their prices and puts their farmers out of business.

Wait...so, according to your last point, you want to establish free trade between Africa and America...but here, you want to STOP free trade to Africa from America? So "free market...but not too much free market?"

EDIT: Also, I should point out, by driving down prices it allows people to buy food cheaper...isn't that a good thing?