UN says largest humanitarian crisis since 1945

[Minimalist]

Wait.  You think if you go into these countries you deal directly with poor people?  You have to deal with (translation=bribe) the powers that be and basically pay protection so that the other side(s) allows you to give the starving a bowl of gruel.  There have been far too many examples of aid becoming just another weapon in these civil war.

All of which does nothing to resolve the underlying crisis which in most of these cases is entirely man made.  In situations where it is not man made it is totally insolvable, as the rather nutty Sam Kinnison pointed out years ago.

[abaris]

All of which does nothing to resolve the underlying crisis which in most of these cases is entirely man made.  In situations where it is not man made it is totally insolvable, as the rather nutty Sam Kinnison pointed out years ago.

We're producing enough food to feed the world several times over. We throw it away and have nothing more than a saturated belch to adress famine riddled regions. That's not to say there's an easy solution to the problem. But there is a solution if one were to employ some brain power. It's in our own interest after all, since if we want to keep these masses from our shores, we better make sure they're not starving in their countries of origin.

[Minimalist]

And if you dump it there you will put the surviving farmers out of business worsening the problem in the following year.  Moreover you are talking about countries with no discernible infrastructure where the food convoys have to be guarded from rebel or merely criminal gangs and the continuance of the famine serves the needs of the warring parties each one of whom wants to be seen as the sole savior and will kill whoever they have to in furtherance of that goal.

Wheels within wheels on a problem like this.

[brewer]

So, if the aid is going to be sent and distributed how does the UN do it? 

Do they pick a side, the one likely to get the aid to the most people? 

Do they try to give each side their represented percent of the pie? 

Or do they set up their own distribution and bring in their own military to enforce the distribution, becoming a player in the conflict? 

Maybe indiscriminate air drops and it becomes catch as catch can.

[Amarok]

Republicans don't spend money are you insane republicans blow billions

1. On military weapons America doesn't need

2. Giving tax break to people who should be paying more

3. And corporate welfare to those who don't deserve it

All the while fucking the poor and those who need the money over

[Minimalist]

So, if the aid is going to be sent and distributed how does the UN do it?

Piss-poorly, no doubt!

[abaris]

Piss-poorly, no doubt!

But still better than a single contributor would.

---

On poor people?

No, on the military industrial complex, if that makes you sleep at night. Rest assured, he didn't spend on the great unwashed.

[brewer]

Republicans don't spend money are you insane republicans blow billions

1. On military weapons America doesn't need

2. Giving tax break to people who should be paying more

3. And corporate welfare to those who don't deserve it

All the while fucking the poor and those who need the money over

This about the UN, not the USA.

Canada the prize, USA the shit hole. Your constant diatribe is getting old. Or are you just stuck and this is all you can talk about?

https://www.pressprogress.ca/meanwhile_i...ith_racism

[abaris]

Canada the prize, USA the shit hole.

For the ordinary worker there's not much of an argument there. I would love to see you dispute this, since for starters people don't end up in the gutter when falling ill in Canada.

[brewer]

Canada the prize, USA the shit hole.

For the ordinary worker there's not much of an argument there.

Ya really going to start with the glass houses again?