> Because if we just send them resources 1) there's no> assurance that they>
> will receive them via a layer of corrupt bureaucrats and 2)> even if they do>
> receive those resources it teaches them nothing about how> they can sustain>
> themselves.> Please understand that I am not opposed to humanitarian> relief;
> I'm very> much in favor of it, but it is not a long term solution.I guess you
> skimmed over the part where I said advanced countries (especially those who
> profit from trade with these nations) should jointly impose sanctions and
> other incentives to force oppressive governments to provide for their own
> people. (in the same manner as uplift species have an obligation to improve
> the lot of their client species.)> > what do you believe can be done to
> catalyze human> rights in those countries; pre-emptive attacks?> To be
> honest, I think the only real solution is a world> government that has> the
> power and the resources to correct severe problems.> If
one nation tries to do it alone, their motivations might> be questioned> and
for good reason (see Iraq).> Doug
the global economy has been structured to maintain the historical status quo of
the rich feeding off the poor.
the united nations, world bank and other international institutions could do a
lot more to correct those inequities, and make sure relief is targe to those
who need it.
i used the model of pre-emptive attack against iraq as a prime example of how
the most powerful nation in the world attempted to use its power to corner
iraq's oil under the guise of opening them up to democracy.jon
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
