Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dr. Id who wrote (135707)	6/5/2004 9:52:42 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The second annual CGD/FP Commitment to Development Index ranks 21 rich nations on how their aid, trade, investment, migration, environment, security, and technology policies help poor countries... foreignpolicy.com foreignpolicy.com Don’t the United States and Japan give more aid to developing countries than any other rich country? How can they rank so poorly on aid? Why do small countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands rank so well? <<...The index assesses policy effort rather than impact. For example, the United States and Japan give more aid in absolute terms, but they are among the least generous when the size of their economies is taken into account. The top-scoring countries give a lot of aid in proportion to gross domestic product and/or have relatively low trade barriers and/or generate relatively little pollution, and so on...>>

To: Dr. Id who wrote (135707)	6/5/2004 11:38:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

Don't forget that 911 happened on his watch too! And, although Condoleezza says nobody could think of such a thing, Osama and sidekicks did. Maybe he should have her job [and President AWOL's]. While Osama was planning, King George II was playing golf. "Watch this drive!" Nero fiddled while Rome burned. It wasn't as though there was no intelligence to suggest that aircraft would be flown into buildings. Airline pilots could have been told to keep the cockpit axe handy, to resist hijacker demands rather than comply with them [which was the policy at the time] and to shut and lock the cockpit door. I thought a few years before 911, while sitting just behind the cockpit on one trip, that it was ridiculous that I could just stand up with a weapon and be inside the cockpit in three steps. It didn't require major brain-power to figure out. The buck must stop somewhere. I wonder if they warned all customs officers [three years ago] to NOT take bribes for smuggled opium/heroin as they will perhaps be allowing in nuclear bombs for terrorist purposes. Have they established, [years ago], audit processes to ensure customs officers were doing their job? I doubt it. Judging from the amount of cocaine and heroin and stuff that Americans ingest, there's a LOT of it getting in - it's not all home-grown. Afghanis aren't producing the stuff for their own use. They are selling it to people with the money and desire to addle their brains. Or, will the Condi and co say that nobody could have thought of such a nefarious ploy to deliver nukes? The USA is spending a fortune to build a dodgy space shield, but if I was delivering nukes, I'd use cheaper, more reliable, delivery by sea and send it FedEx, paid for with an American Express credit card and false name. Maybe the nukes were delivered 20 years ago by Russia and they are now sitting in warehouses around the USA and some have been sold to Islamic Jihad by naughty disaffected Russian military guys, without telling their boss! I thought nukes decompose quite quickly and have to be re-armed, but apparently that's not the case [I should ask Google I suppose]. Mqurice