Uh...over here <back to the point of the thread>
Bottom line is in the "Rush" to create politics out of disaster by questioning relief, aid, motivation, etc. the fact is even the US as illustrated by the international response to Katrina isn't above asking for, being offered and receiving aid, relief, etc.
In these circumstances it comes from all quarters. From your so called enemies, those who happen to disagree with your leadership and EVEN from those who were themselves the victims of disaster less than a year earlier.
Some have cited the US' role in WWII as an example of our entitlement to such reciprocal acts by asserting we didn't have to help the Europeans. First of all, Europe is not a country it's a continent of countries in which some countries tried to remain neutral, some were our allies and some were our enemies.
Secondly, apparently needing to act in WWII for example is such a semantical distinction in this case to some as to cause them to believe we were merely acting out of good will in fighting with our European allies to defeat the Axis powers. I suppose no one ever has to do anything but experience the consequences of their decisions.
Germany, Japan and Italy joined forces in 1940. The terms of their pact stipulated that anyone at war with either was at war with all. With the European Axis powers in the process of routing our European allies Japan attaked the US, Germany declared war on the US days later.
Now let's stop here. Had the Axis powers routed our European allies, our middle eastern allies and African allies the US would not JUST be facing Germany, Italy and Japan. Some of you with no understanding of warfare don't understand how this works. We would have not just faced those countries with their newly fortified positions in the world but forces of consciption in the countries (and their resources) they occupy and countries who would have been forced to side with them. I mean, that's the whole purpose of conquest in warfare to fortify new fronts from which to attack and propagate the reach of your forces.
In light of that, some of you for semantical purposes are still free to contend there was still some choice in the matter. That's your choice. I for one am glad people like you weren't in charge of the decision making back then. After all, there are people in this world who don't won't hit the brakes until after they crash.
But it is ironic some of these same people had absolutely no problem arguing with a straight face the case for spending nearly a trillion dollars to "free" people they assumed were constrained by the invisible bonds of tyranny. While causing untold destruction, death and suffering in the process.:hatsoff:
For those of you who are now all of a sudden disposed to questioning why we are aiding a country with a sum of money on par with a large lottery prize when we have our own people in need. I would redirect you to the people who are in the process of obstructing and trying to derail those very efforts today.:2 cents:
There are circumstances in which we as people are united under our flag and national pride first. In cases of humanitarianism during disaster, we are all one world. I freely admit for political purposes some will never understand nor accept that concept.
