Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I posted a question about if we should be sending money to Pakistan to help them because of the flooding. Most people were against it. So my next question is how do you feel about helping the Kiwis in New Zealand, the just suffered from a terrible earth quake. If you were against helping Pakistan but for helping the Kiwis (or vice versa) i'd really be interested in hearing your reasons.

The difference is that the poor Kiwis don't have a host of other Kiwi nations who are obliged to help their fellow Kiwis by the Kiwi Religious Text.

Save the Kiwis theyre going to be extinct!

I would adopt a kiwi if there weren't so many here already! If I want to do that I just go to Dee Why Bro Cuzy!

Gwar! wrote:The difference is that the poor Kiwis don't have a host of other Kiwi nations who are obliged to help their fellow Kiwis by the Kiwi Religious Text.

Or nuclear weapons and an unstable state.

Two billion in damages and counting...

How many deaths?

Ktulhut wrote:Two billion in damages and counting...

Pakistan or NZ?

Nurglitch wrote:How many deaths?

None from what I've heard so far. Several serious injuries though.

The Kiwi's should get off their butts and start solving their own problems

Andrew1975 wrote:I posted a question about if we should be sending money to Pakistan to help them because of the flooding. Most people were against it. So my next question is how do you feel about helping the Kiwis in New Zealand, the just suffered from a terrible earth quake. If you were against helping Pakistan but for helping the Kiwis (or vice versa) i'd really be interested in hearing your reasons.

I'm not really against helping Pakistan, but I can see how some people could oppose helping Pakistan and favor helping New Zealand.

New Zealand, to my knowledge, has never claimed to be our ally, accepted military funding from us, and then killed American soldiers while holding it's hand out for more money. While I know that the people of Pakistan who are in need of aid aren't really at fault for that, my knee jerk reaction when I hear "Pakistan" is to mumble "Yeah, whatevah. Feth Pakistan."

There is no Hobbiton in Pakistan.

Besides, as an English speaker and citizen of a commonwealth country, I feel more of a cultural bond with the Kiwis. Plus, to be brutally honest, they're white.

^Someone eventually would say it.

Khornholio:

At least you're honest about it. Personally I'm against aid to New Zealand for the same reasons that I'm against aid to Pakistan, and perhaps moreso. All the problems in delivering aid to Pakistan are multiplied by the remoteness of New Zealand, and then toss in the fact that they don't actually seem to need the help. It's like Chile and Haiti: Haiti wasn't laid low by an earthquake, it was destroyed by its own mismanagement and thoroughly inadequate infrastructure, while Chile suffered a worse quake but far fewer people died because the Chileans were prepared.

There's a reason why in some parts of the world an earthquake or flood or famine will kill thousands, while in others a similar magnitude disaster puts a few people in hospital (the two I heard about where variously crushed by bricks and by broken glass - think about that for a second) and simply causes property damage. That reason is the development of a civic culture on the part of the wealthy.

Help NZ: Kiwi is damn good boot polish! The fuzzy Fruit is good too!

Pakistan: They make cheap (read: sub-par) knives and blankets.....

Gotta have boot polish!

Khornholio wrote:There is no Hobbiton in Pakistan.

Besides, as an English speaker and citizen of a commonwealth country, I feel more of a cultural bond with the Kiwis. Plus, to be brutally honest, they're white.

I would like to point out the Pakistan was part of the British empire and is a member of the commonwealth.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I would also like to say that I'm opposed to giving money to either country but that is more of a general opposition to charity.

It's simple.

Either you are a good samaritan or you aren't. A good samaritan helps the people who need it most.

That's the Pakistanis, not the Kiwis.

Who among us will truly say it is good that thousands of children might die of starvation, disease and exposure in Pakistan so that instead we can send our money to New Zealand, which isn't even asking for help.

I wouldn't be against a government loaning money to either countries if it was inclined to, or for private individuals or organizations to give to those countries or go and help their people. As an institution governments are there to provide a service to it's citizens. Until all the needs of a countries citizens are met I think it's irresponsible of a government to be giving money away to other countries.

Kilkrazy wrote:It's simple.

Either you are a good samaritan or you aren't. A good samaritan helps the people who need it most.

That's the Pakistanis, not the Kiwis.

Who among us will truly say it is good that thousands of children might die of starvation, disease and exposure in Pakistan so that instead we can send our money to New Zealand, which isn't even asking for help.

This. 2 billion in damage but the Earthquake Commission has about 15 billion for situations exactly like this. We don't need any financial help, so you Americans should give it to the people who need it.

Thou shalt give equal worth to tragidies that occur in non english speaking countries as those that occur in english speaking countries.

Fallen668 wrote:Thou shalt give equal worth to tragidies that occur in non english speaking countries as those that occur in english speaking countries.

Why?

Why, how much money has Pakistan sent to help us?
I'm tired of the US being every states big brother. Thats why so many people hate us.

Are people sending money to New Zealand? I would have thought that most people consider NZ a civilized and wealthy enough nation to take care of itself.

Add to this that it's a predominantly white, English speaking country with pleasant scenery. The endless famine, civil war and religious nonsense that comes from ''black'' countries can only bore people sitting on their arses in front of the telly. Comfortable westerners get jaded with third world fallout. Show them New Zealanders who are little different from themselves and they might be forgiven for having more sympathy.

Personally, I find the images of Pakistani kids covered in flies more upsetting than the lesser conflict down under.

Anti-Mag wrote:Are people sending money to New Zealand? I would have thought that most people consider NZ a civilized and wealthy enough nation to take care of itself.

Add to this that it's a predominantly white, English speaking country with pleasant scenery. The endless famine, civil war and religious nonsense that comes from ''black'' countries can only bore people sitting on their arses in front of the telly. Comfortable westerners get jaded with third world fallout. Show them New Zealanders who are little different from themselves and they might be forgiven for having more sympathy.

Personally, I find the images of Pakistani kids covered in flies more upsetting than the lesser conflict down under.

Personally, I think that if a country can afford a nuclear deterrent then it should not be a recipient of foreign aid.

Albatross wrote:Personally, I think that if a country can afford a nuclear deterrent then it should not be a recipient of foregin aid.

This is a fair point.

Ah, but those families starving amongst their smashed up homes have no use for nukes. Take issue with Pakistani leadership all you want, but they're not the one's who'll be needing the aid.

Anti-Mag wrote:Ah, but those families starving amongst their smashed up homes have no use for nukes. Take issue with Pakistani leadership all you want, but they're not the one's who'll be needing the aid.

They wouldn't need the aid if they had competent leadership.

if the leadership can afford to have nukes, why can't they afford to look after their citizens?

Albatross wrote:

Anti-Mag wrote:Are people sending money to New Zealand? I would have thought that most people consider NZ a civilized and wealthy enough nation to take care of itself.

Add to this that it's a predominantly white, English speaking country with pleasant scenery. The endless famine, civil war and religious nonsense that comes from ''black'' countries can only bore people sitting on their arses in front of the telly. Comfortable westerners get jaded with third world fallout. Show them New Zealanders who are little different from themselves and they might be forgiven for having more sympathy.

Personally, I find the images of Pakistani kids covered in flies more upsetting than the lesser conflict down under.

Personally, I think that if a country can afford a nuclear deterrent then it should not be a recipient of foregin aid.

That rules out Israel then.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Albatross wrote:

Anti-Mag wrote:Are people sending money to New Zealand? I would have thought that most people consider NZ a civilized and wealthy enough nation to take care of itself.

Add to this that it's a predominantly white, English speaking country with pleasant scenery. The endless famine, civil war and religious nonsense that comes from ''black'' countries can only bore people sitting on their arses in front of the telly. Comfortable westerners get jaded with third world fallout. Show them New Zealanders who are little different from themselves and they might be forgiven for having more sympathy.

Personally, I find the images of Pakistani kids covered in flies more upsetting than the lesser conflict down under.

Personally, I think that if a country can afford a nuclear deterrent then it should not be a recipient of foregin aid.

That rules out Israel then.

Fair enough, no argument here.

Anti-Mag wrote:Ah, but those families starving amongst their smashed up homes have no use for nukes. Take issue with Pakistani leadership all you want, but they're not the one's who'll be needing the aid.

Nukes cost money. Aid for disaster victims in addition to better infrastructure in order to lessen the impact of natural disasters also costs money.

I'm not going to insult your intelligence by pointing out a possible correlation between these two facts.

Lets see. Almost fifteen hundred dead in natural disaster in one country. None dead in natural disaster in another country. Which one should I aid? ...well that would depend on whether the people of those countries are english speaking whites or not.