<$BlogRSDURL$> abbr, acronym { cursor: help; font-style: normal; font-weight:bold; color: #2a548d; /*border-bottom: 1px solid; */ }

Eminent Domain Stuff

New London Update (2/24/06)
Coverage of the Rally at New London's City Hall (w/ pics)

Tuesday, January 04, 2005


Who Should Help?

USS Neverdock has some good comments on a true POS from the Guardian. I think that this particular piece reveals, yet again, the backward mindset of liberals. George Monbiot asks why it is that so little has been done to help the victims of the Tsunami and then writes:

The obvious answer is that governments have other priorities. And the one that leaps to mind is war. If the money they have promised to the victims of the tsunami still falls far short of the amounts required, it is partly because the contingency fund upon which they draw in times of crisis has been spent on blowing people to bits in Iraq.

The US government has so far pledged $350m to the victims of the tsunami, and the UK government £50m ($96m). The US has spent $148 billion on the Iraq war and the UK £6bn ($11.5bn). The war has been running for 656 days. This means that the money pledged for the tsunami disaster by the United States is the equivalent of one and a half day's spending in Iraq. The money the UK has given equates to five and a half days of our involvement in the war.
Why is it that Mr. Monbiot (too close to Moonbat for comfort, I think =)) takes for granted that it is the job of the American and British governments to provide help to these people? Where in the Constitution of the United States of America is there a provision authorizing Congress or the President to designate funds to provide monetary assistance to anyone, let along foreigners?

Now don't get me wrong. I am 100% for helping these people. They need it because they live in countries that cannot help themselves. However, there is still no requirement, legal or moral, necessitating the involvement of the US (or British) Government. Already private donations to help the people affected by this disaster have soared well into the hundreds of millions of dollars. And consider how much more would be given privately if 1) we did not see governments helping and 2) had more money in our pockets due to lower taxes.

There are certainly logistical arguments for using US and other militaries for the delivery of relief supplies. After all, there is not a private organization in the world with the capacity to move people and material like the US Armed Forces. And although the use of military forces for this purpose, strictly speaking, falls into the same category as cold hard cash, the fact that they're the only game in town does make a difference.

So, Mr. Monbiot, why does the US government exist? Oh, that's right. To protect the citizens of the United States of America. And yes, that includes waging war on bad guys who want to hurt us.


I'm apparently not alone. Say Anything provides an interesting solution to this problem and presents some of the objections being raised.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?