Tsunami Aid

Discussion in 'Multinational HQ' started by wotan, Jan 3, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. As we are aware, the tsunami(s) that struck Southern Asia are a horrendous event. I have even heard that they may be the single most devastating disaster in recorded human history. The death toll is estimated to reach well beyond 150,000 just from the direct effects and may well climb far higher should disease, starvation, etc take hold. Hopefully, such a situation will not come about and any further loss of life can be prevented.

    However, here in Canada, I have seen some degree of criticism levelled towards my government and that of the United States. Now, I believe that the Canadian government has reacted slowly, that resources that should have been despatched immediately were held back due to dithering and that liaison should have been set up immediately with the affected countries to determine their needs and where we could be most useful. For example, we have Disaster Assistance Relief Team (DART) that has two water purifiers that can each produce 50,000 litres of pure water a day from utter muck. Obviously a valuable asset that could have been put to great use days ago. Basically, I believe that the criticism of my country is justified, whether from Canadian citizens or others. We dropped the ball, but we are starting to get in the game.

    More troubling to me is the criticism levelled towards the United States. I was wondering what the thoughts of other board members were. Do you believe the US is doing enough or falling short? And if you believe they are falling short, why do you believe so? I can't say that I know what is "enough" in a situation like this, however, in the early hours of the disaster the news reports did not quote horrendous numbers of deaths like 150,000. I don't think any agency or government had any real inkling of the magnitude of the disaster, so the initial amounts of aid money pledged by almost all countries have been significantly increased as the horror of the events revealed themselves. But, and I have no reports to base this one, I would believe that the US, along with any UK, Australian or any other nations forces would have responded immediately to assist civilians in such dire circumstances. I certainly do not mean to leave out or ignore any country for assisting. I am sure that if the Russians, Japanese, Germans or Upper Mongolian tribes had forces in the area, that they then assisted. But my point and my question is, I have heard criticism of only two nations response, those being Canada and the US. I believe the criticism levelled at Canada is basically justified. But, is the criticism levelled towards the US justified or simply an anti-American knee-jerk reaction. Personally, I think the US government and especially the US people will be seen, in retrospect, to be most generous during this terrible time. So, let me know what your thoughts are and why.

    That said, I sincerely hope that the troops from all countries assisting there are able to return home safely and that the poor souls suffering through this awful ordeal will find comfort from their God or Gods and that help will reach them very quickly.
  2. Poor old Wotan - seems like a nice bloke but I dread the answers he will get from this in here.
  3. I am not even gonna justify this with a sensible response
  4. I'm in a cranky mood. My response? Fcuk 'em. Every year we lose people in floods, fires, hurricanes, avalanches, and tornados, and my personal and local favorite, volcanos.

    The "International Community" has yet to send so much as a padre on a swaybacked mule or a box of saltines.

    Over and over the US is blasted for it's interference with and the Americanization of other countries, and the for having the audacity of asking for support.

    Had enough. Don't think we should send aid at all.

    And P*SS on the freakin' Norskies. Or was that Finns? Either way,

  5. They usually are very generous in times like this, but always the most criticised.

    What countries sent disaster relief after Florida was hit by four Hurricanes this year? Was there even one? What was the UN position on it?
    Of course the destruction and loss from this Tsunami doesn't begin to compare with any recent national disaster.

    Isn't this sort of aid one of the main reasons for the UN? How fast have they acted, other than rhetoric and criticism?

    edited for typos
  7. Exactly. This is just the sort of huge natural disaster that should mobilise the UN as it has never been before.
  8. I find it hard to beleive that this was posted in the Naffi.

    But, anyway if the tables were turned and a Tsunami hit the UK France, Germany et al would any of the Srilanken and others donate anything....................

    I dont think so

    Hence I give nothing!

    Feck em
  9. Issues of sovereignty prevail. The less developed a country, the more they seem to make things difficult for official aid and to a lesser extent NGOs.

    HMS Chatham and RFA Diligence have been tasked with disaster relief but they have to store up and get there first. Ships don't appear by magic were they and their companies are required. They may have been 'just around the corner' on a map but in reality, the distances are huge.

    Maybe some countries affected don’t give that big a fcuk (this is the NAAFI) about their own people so are not in a hurry to get offers of help turned into good deeds. Thailand seems to be responding properly to offers of help and is able to incorporate foreign aid (men and materials) into its relief effort. The Thais have that organisation, flexibility and pragmatism. Others don't.

    There are matters of areas of responsibilities, coordination and chain of command for foreign militaries working on disaster relief. Language difficulties anyone? To some people, whatever you do to help, it’s not enough. Rather than jumping on a plane with a case of Evian and some blankets and demonstrating how easy it is to help, those who moan loudest are writing letters of complaint.

    Some countries will (it seems) turn down aid from countries they don’t like.


    When the Kursk sank in the Barents Sea, western maritime expertise and technology offered may have given the submariners a chance of rescue but the Russians prevaricated and help was accepted too late. The submariners died. There was more concern shown by the sailors of other nations for the plight of fellow mariners than was shown by the Russian State.
  10. Yes, and wont they let us know it!
  11. Extracts from story by James Kirkup in today's Scotsman. Full story at http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=4652005 The Scotsman are donating the entire cover price from their Wed 5 Jan edition to the DEC's Tsunami Appeal.
  12. Bloody Tiprat: On review, you are quite right, I should have posted this in the Current Affairs forum. My bad and I apologize.

    Sabre: No problem with you not seeing the thread as deserving a "sensible post", but then why respond at all? Just seems odd.

    Anyway, thanks for the posts provided and hopefully more will follow. Cheers to all.
  13. I called Tsunami aid and offered

    1. a mouth organ
    2. three chamois leathers
    3. A piece of royal dalton
    4. a welsh recipe book
    5. some mudflaps for a 1982 escort pop
    6. a connect four set (three pieces missing)
    7. a set of novelty buttocks

    They turned down the offer, so there must be plenty getting through...
  14. Probably not
  15. Colin Powell has already been on the telly tonight telling us how generous the US have been with aid.