T Nation

Myanmar or Burma or Whatever

[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Speaking of which, how come the world’s sole superpower is only giving 3 millions? Japan and Britain are giving out six times as much.

Again, because this post was pretty funny. How can you ask why the US hasn’t given more aid, in a thread about Myanmar’s thugs snatching up…aid. And, why would you even try to turn the subject of this thread into the US? Can’t we discuss the problems with getting aid to where it is actually needs to go? There is an awful lot of people suffering over there, after all. And thugs seemingly pleased to allow it. So, can you take a break, just this once, and hijack some other thread into an anti-US rant, some other time?

Is there anything to discuss? They want absolute control over the distribution of aid. The US did the same during Katrina. People were suffering in New-Orleans while the Feds were holding up foreign aid. I remember tons of European foods left to rot on airfields, and cargo planes stalled waiting for approval. I distinctly remember it because the Swedish Rescue Services Agency was very pissed at the US for not allowing them to deliver the aid packages.

But I don’t suppose it made headlines in the US…

You could’ve made a much briefer response.

“Yes, I intend to hijack this thread, making it another anti US thread. No, I won’t admit how silly it was to criticize what the US has given in aid, in a thread about such aid being siezed by thugs.”

I didn’t criticize. I asked a question. The aid seemed disproportionate to me. Then you jumped in, completely ignoring my question, and derailed the thread into something utterly different.

The OP’s questions were not worth addressing in my opinion. We all know what “the flying fuck” is wrong with Myanmar. The country is ruled by one of the strictest military juntas around. This has never been up for debate.

So go ahead. Let’s hear what insights will follow an OP whose thesis is the lack of a hell hot enough for that particular group.[/quote]

You are so full of shit. If the aid seems dispropotionate to you so what? You don’t live here, we don’t live and work to please you. You’re the one that sent the thread spinning off on your anti-US bullshit tangent.

If the OP’s questions were not worth addressing then fuck off and don’t address them. How hard is that? Love your description of these assholes too. Oooooh their “strict”. Maybe there just “morally challenged”. Take that shit elsewhere.

The third paragraph you try and brush everyone off by trying to set some bullshit parameter that now “defines” the context of the argument, while conveniently “elevating” you above it all and attempting to focus the attention away from the main point. Which at this point in time has once again been hijacked away from the topic and onto, “Lixy, how much of a douchebag can I be.” Are you a lawyer cause your discourse style smells like typical lawyer tactical dumbassery.

Why don’t you just create a little batch file that will cut and paste “America Sucks” into every 5th post in every thread and find another hobby.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Speaking of which, how come the world’s sole superpower is only giving 3 millions? Japan and Britain are giving out six times as much.

Again, because this post was pretty funny. How can you ask why the US hasn’t given more aid, in a thread about Myanmar’s thugs snatching up…aid. And, why would you even try to turn the subject of this thread into the US? Can’t we discuss the problems with getting aid to where it is actually needs to go? There is an awful lot of people suffering over there, after all. And thugs seemingly pleased to allow it. So, can you take a break, just this once, and hijack some other thread into an anti-US rant, some other time?

Is there anything to discuss? They want absolute control over the distribution of aid. The US did the same during Katrina. People were suffering in New-Orleans while the Feds were holding up foreign aid. I remember tons of European foods left to rot on airfields, and cargo planes stalled waiting for approval. I distinctly remember it because the Swedish Rescue Services Agency was very pissed at the US for not allowing them to deliver the aid packages.

But I don’t suppose it made headlines in the US…

You could’ve made a much briefer response.

“Yes, I intend to hijack this thread, making it another anti US thread. No, I won’t admit how silly it was to criticize what the US has given in aid, in a thread about such aid being siezed by thugs.”

I didn’t criticize. I asked a question. The aid seemed disproportionate to me. Then you jumped in, completely ignoring my question, and derailed the thread into something utterly different.

The OP’s questions were not worth addressing in my opinion. We all know what “the flying fuck” is wrong with Myanmar. The country is ruled by one of the strictest military juntas around. This has never been up for debate.

So go ahead. Let’s hear what insights will follow an OP whose thesis is the lack of a hell hot enough for that particular group.[/quote]

Perhaps after providing monetary aid to followers of your death cult after the earthquake in Pakistan and the tsunami in Indonesia and seeing it spent on terrorism and shari’a, we’ve become more cautious with our charity.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Come on, Lixy. You weren’t just asking a question. You wanted to raise an unrelated point. [/quote]

It’s hard for me to demonstrate it, but I can assure you that my question was genuine.

Actually, I was pretty content with that “American private donations” answer.

You’ll notice, my question was about the amount being relatively smaller than what other countries gave.

I’m more interested in what there is to discuss in the first place.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Speaking of which, how come the world’s sole superpower is only giving 3 millions? Japan and Britain are giving out six times as much.[/quote]

Cause that’s how the Great Satan rolls bitch!

How much are the fucknuts in the “Land of Islam” giving with oil at $126/barrel… Call your patron in Saudi Arabia and tell him to cut a check.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Speaking of which, how come the world’s sole superpower is only giving 3 millions? Japan and Britain are giving out six times as much.

Again, because this post was pretty funny. How can you ask why the US hasn’t given more aid, in a thread about Myanmar’s thugs snatching up…aid. And, why would you even try to turn the subject of this thread into the US? Can’t we discuss the problems with getting aid to where it is actually needs to go? There is an awful lot of people suffering over there, after all. And thugs seemingly pleased to allow it. So, can you take a break, just this once, and hijack some other thread into an anti-US rant, some other time?

Is there anything to discuss? They want absolute control over the distribution of aid. The US did the same during Katrina. People were suffering in New-Orleans while the Feds were holding up foreign aid. I remember tons of European foods left to rot on airfields, and cargo planes stalled waiting for approval. I distinctly remember it because the Swedish Rescue Services Agency was very pissed at the US for not allowing them to deliver the aid packages.

But I don’t suppose it made headlines in the US…

You could’ve made a much briefer response.

“Yes, I intend to hijack this thread, making it another anti US thread. No, I won’t admit how silly it was to criticize what the US has given in aid, in a thread about such aid being siezed by thugs.”

I didn’t criticize. I asked a question. The aid seemed disproportionate to me. Then you jumped in, completely ignoring my question, and derailed the thread into something utterly different.

The OP’s questions were not worth addressing in my opinion. We all know what “the flying fuck” is wrong with Myanmar. The country is ruled by one of the strictest military juntas around. This has never been up for debate.

So go ahead. Let’s hear what insights will follow an OP whose thesis is the lack of a hell hot enough for that particular group.[/quote]

Bullshit. You were hijacking, pure and simple. You were being arrogant and condescending…No matter how much we do, it’s wrong or not enough. You ain’t doing shit. We are begging to help them. You are trying to find an angle to criticize the U.S. when right fully you should be criticizing the actions of thise miserable regime. The UN planes they confiscated are still sitting on the runway, full. But that is OK, because they are not the U.S., theya can’t be wrong.

There was not a single ounce of sincerity in your post save for your unmitigated hatred for the U.S. It is unfounded and worthless and full of shit.

Quite frankly, I think it would be unwise to give much money directly to the government; that will disappear into the coffers of corrupt leaders.

I am on the verge of saying that I would support an invasion by some of the regional powers (China, Japan, etc) just to get the needed supplies to these desperate people. Obviously that isn’t going to happen, but the situation there pisses me off.

[quote]pat wrote:
What the flying fuck is wrong with these people?
[/quote]

My understanding is that they are about to have a plebiscite there to justify the military junta forever.
They don’t want foreigners in there to witness the sham.

Agreed. You wonder how they sleep at night.

[quote]entheogens wrote:
Quite frankly, I think it would be unwise to give much money directly to the government; that will disappear into the coffers of corrupt leaders.

I am on the verge of saying that I would support an invasion by some of the regional powers (China, Japan, etc) just to get the needed supplies to these desperate people. Obviously that isn’t going to happen, but the situation there pisses me off.[/quote]

Somolia

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Somolia[/quote]

I don’t know. Do they have in Myanmar the kind of gang situation that you had in Somalia?

I am not too serious about sending in troops from regional countries, but this is very frustrating to watch. It appears these bastards don’t give a shit about their citizens.

[quote]entheogens wrote:
Quite frankly, I think it would be unwise to give much money directly to the government; that will disappear into the coffers of corrupt leaders.

I am on the verge of saying that I would support an invasion by some of the regional powers (China, Japan, etc) just to get the needed supplies to these desperate people. Obviously that isn’t going to happen, but the situation there pisses me off.[/quote]

Isn’t china giving them the guns in the first place? Japan could care less, I’m sure.

http://www.asiapacificms.com/articles/myanmar_influence/

I think the best we could hope to do is ship guns to the opposition, heeding Eisenhower’s famous dictum, “Never get involved in a land war in Asia.”

Unless Team America does something about it, nothing will be done. And since we’re not going to get involved in a third war, (I hope), nothing will be done.

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:

Isn’t china giving them the guns in the first place? Japan could care less, I’m sure.

http://www.asiapacificms.com/articles/myanmar_influence/
[/quote]

Yes, Realpolitik always wins. Thanks for the link. Maybe China could be convinced to use its influence to get the Junta to allow more direct aid in there.

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:

I think the best we could hope to do is ship guns to the opposition, heeding Eisenhower’s famous dictum, “Never get involved in a land war in Asia.”

[/quote]

Actually I believe that quote goes to Vizzini

[quote]storey420 wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:

I think the best we could hope to do is ship guns to the opposition, heeding Eisenhower’s famous dictum, “Never get involved in a land war in Asia.”

Actually I believe that quote goes to Vizzini[/quote]

Heh. I was going to add that.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Speaking of which, how come the world’s sole superpower is only giving 3 millions? Japan and Britain are giving out six times as much.[/quote]

Funny, this coming from a guy who said America should go stick their aid up their ass.

Did you guys hear?

The regime now tries to make it look like the aid and food parcels are from them.
It’s getting really ugly.

Sidenote:
If things escalate, how will China 's position look with the impending Olympics? I mean, if the Birmese people raise up and fight (which I hope), China can’t look like a dirtbag four weeks before the games.

[quote]entheogens wrote:
Quite frankly, I think it would be unwise to give much money directly to the government; that will disappear into the coffers of corrupt leaders.

I am on the verge of saying that I would support an invasion by some of the regional powers (China, Japan, etc) just to get the needed supplies to these desperate people. Obviously that isn’t going to happen, but the situation there pisses me off.[/quote]

I like the way you think: sometimes, the situation is so bad, you just gotta send in the troops. Sounds very familiar…

FWIW: I have to give good troll points to Lixy for his participation in the thread. He makes us think — that is rarely bad. But he did hijack, so that’s bad.

The only thing Lixy ever makes us “think,” is that he is a moron.

I love how the US can’t win. If we get involved we hear “keep your nose out of other nations business;” If we don’t get involved we hear “the US just sits back and doesnt do shit.” Go Fuck Yourself.

Why are we giving them any money?

How does a hurricane in some asian shithole factor into our nation?

It isn’t our government’s role to wipe the asses, of other countries.

We have our own national disasters to worry about, if Myanmar sucks and can’t even manage to produce it’s own aid, oh fucking well.

Maybe their people should slough their tyrannical loser ass regime, and build a new nation with a strong economy.

It’s not our place to baby sit the mud people nor is it our place to conquer them.

Our tax dollars should never leave the country, unless it is related to some sort of international economic project which produces us profit.

Profit is the bottom line.

[quote]Guerrero wrote:
Why are we giving them any money?

How does a hurricane in some asian shithole factor into our nation?

It isn’t our government’s role to wipe the asses, of other countries.

We have our own national disasters to worry about, if Myanmar sucks and can’t even manage to produce it’s own aid, oh fucking well.

Maybe their people should slough their tyrannical loser ass regime, and build a new nation with a strong economy.

It’s not our place to baby sit the mud people nor is it our place to conquer them.

Our tax dollars should never leave the country, unless it is related to some sort of international economic project which produces us profit.

Profit is the bottom line.[/quote]

It is profitable for something to be done about the regime in Burma.

For starters, a lot of manufacturing is done in southeast Asia now and a larger conflict in that part of the world due to a rogue regime is not good for the bottom line of the global companies who own that manufacturing. There is also untapped cheap labor and talent that’s being shot or starved there. Lastly, if you’re a Christian, they’re killing a bunch of Christian tribes in the highlands there.

My take is that if China can’t be convinced to make the Burma government knock it off, then we should ship the people guns so that they can shoot back. I’m sure plenty of people here will disagree with me, but that’s my opinion.

China has an abysmal human rights record of its own, and I can’t see why they would care about intervening for the positive good of the Burmese people.

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Guerrero wrote:
Why are we giving them any money?

How does a hurricane in some asian shithole factor into our nation?

It isn’t our government’s role to wipe the asses, of other countries.

We have our own national disasters to worry about, if Myanmar sucks and can’t even manage to produce it’s own aid, oh fucking well.

Maybe their people should slough their tyrannical loser ass regime, and build a new nation with a strong economy.

It’s not our place to baby sit the mud people nor is it our place to conquer them.

Our tax dollars should never leave the country, unless it is related to some sort of international economic project which produces us profit.

Profit is the bottom line.

It is profitable for something to be done about the regime in Burma.

For starters, a lot of manufacturing is done in southeast Asia now and a larger conflict in that part of the world due to a rogue regime is not good for the bottom line of the global companies who own that manufacturing. There is also untapped cheap labor and talent that’s being shot or starved there. Lastly, if you’re a Christian, they’re killing a bunch of Christian tribes in the highlands there.

My take is that if China can’t be convinced to make the Burma government knock it off, then we should ship the people guns so that they can shoot back. I’m sure plenty of people here will disagree with me, but that’s my opinion.

China has an abysmal human rights record of its own, and I can’t see why they would care about intervening for the positive good of the Burmese people.

[/quote]

I’d be down with supporting the Chrisitans, but see our government doesn’t do stuff like that, apparently it is ‘racist’ to openly support people you share a background with.

I’d be down if we shipped guns in there, and there and made sure the Christians killed the shit out of the buddha heads and muzzies.

Drop John Rambo off too, it doesn’t matter to me.

I guess though, I think pouring 3 million dollars into any bourough of any city of the USA would be a more valuable cause than giving it to a bunch of worthless slants, who have never done anything for us and can’t even do a genocide right.