great...here we go again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11027970

Quote :

"Speaking in New York, Mr Holbrooke said the US had been the first country to offer help to Pakistan in the early days of the crisis. He said much-needed helicopters had been diverted from the war in Afghanistan to deliver aid and rescue stranded people in north-west Pakistan, where the flooding began. "We're going to help as long as we can, as long as we're needed. We have been Pakistan's best friend in this crisis.... We are really going all out.""

[Edited on August 19, 2010 at 4:02 PM. Reason : /]

8/19/2010 4:02:37 PM

Hopefully you understand that failing to act in this situation would just alienate more young Pakistanis and drive them towards anti-American extremism.

8/19/2010 4:13:55 PM

From a political standpoint, this is a really good thing.

8/19/2010 4:44:36 PM

Fuck politics.

This is the right thing to do, given the circumstances (you are rich, have the equipment, and are next door).

A lot of people don't realize how much damage the floods have done. They have done a lot more damage than the Tsunami, and have affected a lot more people, around 10% of the population.

8/19/2010 5:39:12 PM

You realize that our fight in Afghanistan is very much also an operation in Pakistan, and has been for over 30 years, right? The border between those two nations is, for all practical purposes, a sort of continuum, and we certainly can't view Afghanistan outside of the context of Pakistani involvement.

8/19/2010 5:46:09 PM

^ Exactly.

Just looked up the latest numbers. 20 million are homeless, 12% of the population (imagine 35 million people in the US suddenly becoming homeless).

These before and after pictures below are amazing, and shocking. See the big 'pools' of flood water in the after picture. Also see how the rivers have immensely swollen up.


BEFORE



AFTER

8/19/2010 6:00:17 PM

we shouldnt be in afghanistan at all anyway. i'm glad we are doing a good thing for a change.

8/19/2010 6:13:27 PM

Quote :

"They have done a lot more damage than the Tsunami, and have affected a lot more people, around 10% of the population."

The 219,400 extra dead tsunami victims might disagree, but yes, this is very, very bad. I'm glad we're doing something and am certainly open to the possibility that we should be doing more.

My two hopes are:

1) After the water recedes and rebuilding begins, an effort is made by all parties to not repeat the incident. Flood control projects could offer employment and guard against future disasters on this scale. In an ideal world, we'd be able to do something about everyone living right next to the goddamn river. Of course, it's not an ideal world, and judging from 0EP's pictures that's where all the food is.

2) That other wealthy countries in the vicinity (cough cough Gulf States cough cough) are ponying up as well. I don't recall Saudi Arabia or the U.A.E. falling all over themselves to get to Haiti; hopefully they're being good in their own neck of the woods. It's not like they don't have equipment, because we damn well sold it to them.

8/19/2010 6:41:09 PM

Quote :

" In an ideal world, we'd be able to do something about everyone living right next to the goddamn river"

We're working on it. As long as we continue to enlarge our carbon footprints and drive big inefficient cars the rivers will run dry sooner than later.

8/19/2010 6:46:17 PM

Well yeah but the ice caps will melt and flood everything else so that isn't going to help at all.

8/19/2010 6:52:51 PM

GrumpyGOP, I used my words carefully. I talked of people being affected, not killed. Here are the facts:

1) The tsunami killed 100 times as many people as the floods.

2) But the floods have made homeless and/or displaced 10 times as many people as the tsunami.

3) Agricultural and infrastructure damages by the flood are orders of magnitude greater than by the tsunami. Look what the UN says:

Quote :

"The United Nations estimates over 20 million people are suffering with over 60,000 square miles affected as a result of the flooding, exceeding the combined total of the affected of 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the 2005 Kashmir earthquake and the 2010 Haiti earthquake. However, the death toll in each of those three disasters was much higher than the number of people killed so far in the floods. Around a fifth of Pakistan's total land area was impacted by the flooding."

Quote :

"Floods have submerged 17 million acres of Pakistan's most fertile crop land, have killed 200,000 livestock and have washed away massive amounts of grain. A major concern is that farmers will be unable to meet the fall deadline for planting new seeds in 2010, meaning a massive loss of food production in 2011, and potentially leading to long term food shortages. The agricultural damages are more than 2.9 billion dollars, according to recent estimates, and include over 700,000 acres of lost cotton crops, 200,000 acres of sugar cane and 200,000 acres of rice, in addition to the loss of over 500,000 tonnes of stocked wheat, 300,000 acres of animal fodder and the stored grain losses. Floods have damaged an estimated 2,433 miles of highway and 3,508 miles of railroad."

Also, the tsunami was a violent short-lived disaster, whereas the flood is just not going anywhere, and is spreading more and more. And even more rains are expected.

Now to your 2 hopes:

1) Yes, that would be great, but is unlikely. Look at Bangladesh; they have monsoons every year, which have been damaging lands and killing people for the last few decades, but nothing is done to rebuild in a way to minimize damage when they strike again the following year. Sadly, that's the way it is in poor [and HIGHLY CORRUPT] countries.

2) Just heard on BBC earlier today that Saudi Arabia has overtaken the US to become #1 in donations, a total of $100 million or so. That is good news. UAE is not in the link below. Kuwait is giving $5 million, which is pitiable for such a rich country, and shameful considering that utterly poor Afghanistan is giving $1 million and also poor Bangladesh is giving $2 million. But yeah, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, and Qatar need to step up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Pakistan_floods#Response_by_national_governments

[Edited on August 19, 2010 at 7:21 PM. Reason : ]

8/19/2010 7:19:35 PM

I still can't believe the moronic original post. Had he been complaining about the US helping period, at least he would have had some point. But no, he is pointing out that it is stupid of the US to help by taking away attention and equipment from Afghanistan, implying that the mission in Afghanistan is very important, which it is. Well, in that case, does he not know how things work in that part of the world?

Quote :

"The Pakistani Taliban have also engaged in relief efforts and make inroads where the government is absent or seen as corrupt.[45] As the flood may have dislodged many property markers, it is feared that governmental delay and corruption will give an advantage to the Taliban to settle these disputes swiftly.[45] A Taliban spokesperson asked the Pakistani government to reject Western help from "Christians and Jews" indicating that, instead, the Taliban can raise $20 million."

It is imperative that rich countries, especially those heavily involved in the war against terror, help as much as they can. And again, not just because of politics, but because it is the right thing to do.

8/19/2010 8:12:26 PM

^^We just overtook Saudi Arabia again by pledging another 60 mil., bringing us to $150 million.

I hear our private donations have been miserable though, especially compared to the $400+ million regular citizens gave to Haiti.

[Edited on August 19, 2010 at 9:13 PM. Reason : I haven't given anything.]

8/19/2010 9:12:13 PM

for my once a year Soap Box post, I'd just like to say

0EPII1 bolds a lot

8/19/2010 9:30:03 PM

^^I'd like to say that our private donations have been low because of "disaster fatigue" -- we already helped out Haiti a lot, and there's a recession on, and we can't be expected to open our personal wallets every time a third world country has a disaster.

Unfortunately I think the real answer is that people are thinking, "Pakistan? Isn't that where Osama bin Laden is hiding out with his cronies, and aren't Pakistanis helping murder our boys on the other side of the Khyber pass? Fuck 'em, let 'em drown."

8/20/2010 2:05:37 PM

^True. And I think there is legitimate skepticism about whether or not donations will be spent properly. I don't wanna send money to a place where they are systematically denying help to minority groups.

Another reason I think donations have been low is media coverage. I'm embarrassed to admit this, but I didn't know there was any flooding until three days ago. In the case of Haiti, the media wouldn't let you forget it--they were immediately on the scene with live coverage of the devastation. Remote Pakistan, on the other hand, ain't so easy to get to.

What a difference a Clooney makes.

8/20/2010 2:41:46 PM

I can't think of any good reason to NOT help the Pakistanis in this situation whether it be from a humanitarian, military, or geopolitical perspective. This flood decimated Pakistan's primary agricultural regions right before the harvest, wiping out what was supposed to be a bumper crop and leaving the survivors not just economically bankrupt but on the brink of death by starvation assuming the cholera doesn't get them first. The whole country now suddenly faces famine especially at a time when wheat prices are already high because of the Russian fires.

8/20/2010 3:49:56 PM

I thought that Wyclef fixed all of this.

8/20/2010 4:27:47 PM

Cool, our invasion of Pakistan has begun! According to wikileaks they were our enemy anyway, smuggling arms and money to the Taliban.

8/20/2010 5:18:47 PM