Will the U.N or any other countries help the U.S. because of Katrina?

I was wondering if the U.N or any other countries will be sending any kind of aid to the U.S. for the destruction suffered at the devestating force of Katrina. What are your thoughts, and Should help be accepted from anyone?

 

I don't know, do we need the money?

 

I heard on the radio here that Canada is considering sending help. But other than that, I don't know.

 

We get hurricanes every year, as well as other natural disasters. We pull through just fine, but if other countries wanted to help us out, we'd be grateful. I can imagine the outcry from the people of those other countries, though. "Why do they need our aid? They're the richest, most powerful nation in the world!"

 

We are just barely starting to recover from a recession, this indeed will likely increase the demand on all other seaside ports. Shipping traffic of the Mississippi that enters from the gulf will have to be diverted and placed on trucks or find alternate transportation to get the goods to their final destinations. Perishable goods are definately a loss especially if payed at origin. The money was already spent on those goods and now the boats have no docking and unloading destinations.

 

The US is one of the richest country in the world, not a 3rd world country. I don't think the UN will intervene.

 

Indeed. Patomon, while the things you posted are true, they do not answer whether we need the money. As bad as KAtrina was, it does not approach the scope of a crisis that would be too great for the US to handle internally. Given that there's only going ot be so much aid given for these kind of things by the UN and the international community, there are much more pressing concerns. The new bout of starvation in Niger, for instance.

I wouldn't expect there to be any serious aid.

 

That's kinda what I was getting at. Natural disasters that occur in other countries are definately ready to hold out the hand for the U.S. to drop the cash. Something happens to the U.S. and suddenly the U.S. doesn't need any help or barely gets acknowledgement. Maybe a little lip service. "Our country's citizens feel your pain, blah, blah, blah." Then nothing, back to the status quo. Heck some even think the U.S. deserves it. I've been thru two natural disasters in my lifetime. 1972, earthquake due to a Volcano in Managua,Nicaragua. My family left the country with the clothes on our backs. In 1989 the Loma Prieta earthquake. In the 1972 EQ the U.S. was there to help, in the 1989 I don't recall any help really.

 

Indeed. Patomon, while the things you posted are true, they do not answer whether we need the money.

I would think that man power and other logistical assistance is more of an issue than $. Expirianced search and rescue, resource management, ect.

But I would believe that we have resources in uaffected areas that could lend a hand. If Canada wants to help, we have an infrastructure over in Iraq thay could help out with...

 

If Canada wants to help, we have an infrastructure over in Iraq thay could help out with...

Which reminds me (because someone has to say it): We'd have plenty of money for repair and restoration, IF we hadn't started the Iraq War.

 

Venezuela offers aid to U.S.

Guess Chavez really wants to make Pat Robertson look like a jackass.

 

I was just going to post that!

 

cal, lol, that's classic.

And Halcyon, while I don't agree with the war in Iraq either, I really have to reiterate that we have enough money and resources to deal with Katrina ourselves regardless.

 

[image=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v148/azrael19/Owned%20Pics/Robertsowned.jpg]

Creative as it is and all, can we please remember what forum this is? It's not like the mods around here have been mentioning anything related to the forum atmosphere lately....

 

Why would Chavez need to do that, when Robertson has been doing it since he popped outta his momma?

E_S

 

On CNN (or something like that) today, there was a report that every state in the US has over 50% of their reserves at home. I think it was reserves, I have a bad memory. But anyway, you get the idea we have more than enough man power. Wouldn't it be cool if New Orleans stayed underwater, though? We'd have a new lake.

 

Hades, it's correct that for the overwhelming majority of Americans, there largest single source of net wealth is in the form of their home's equity. Is that what you were referring to?

 

I just hope those people had their homes insured. When bushfires destroyed 400 homes in Canberra Australia a few years ago, it turned out that a huge proportion had no insurance whatsoever.

 

What I mean is that when a natural disaster strikes another country, some of the money the US spends is in paying men to help. They still have to pay men to help here, but it won't be spreading our troops thin or anything like that. BTW, how long do you think they will be under martial law?

 

I'm guessing if the USA asked for specific aid - like specialist search and rescue people then they would get them. The USA doesn't need anyone's monetary aid though.

 

I'm sure some will send aid as a good will gesture (Canada always helps out-God bless the Canadians!), but to get miffy about people sending US aid just because we do it is really silly. We're the richest nation in the world-it's not like we need it.

 

Hades2021 posted on 8/30/05 7:03pm

---

On CNN (or something like that) today, there was a report that every state in the US has over 50% of their reserves at home. I think it was reserves, I have a bad memory. But anyway, you get the idea we have more than enough man power. Wouldn't it be cool if New Orleans stayed underwater, though? We'd have a new lake. [hr][/blockquote] From what I saw, some states had as high as 74% of their reserves at home.

 

Well, I guess one definate outcome of this is that insurance premiums worldwide will escalate to pay for it.

E_S

 

Although I do truly feel for the people down there, may I ask why they were living in a sinking flood plane to begin with? Also why didn't the people down there evacuate like all the people that did?

In terms of property damage, does anyone know how it compares to the tsunami in December? Obviously we lost less in terms of lives (thankfully).

 

Most of them were unable to leave, perhaps due to lack of a mode of transportation.

A few seemed to be arrogant or stupid.