Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
after the Haiti earthquake, it seemed like everyone was bending over backwards to aid the Haitians. there seems to be nowhere near the lvel to aid the Chileans. Agree or disagree?
after the Haiti earthquake, it seemed like everyone was bending over backwards to aid the Haitians. there seems to be nowhere near the lvel to aid the Chileans. Agree or disagree?
Agreed!
I brought this up earlier in the week in a post, and somehow the Obamacrat Kool-aid crowd took it as a racist comment.
While I'm glad Hillary arrived today with a handfull of satelite phones, there is much more the US should do to help Chile. When will Obama pledge dollars and help to Chile the way he did to Haiti?
Oh, gawd, you can't possibly be doing your own typing with a brain that dead.
Obama and other world leaders immediately offered aid and it was refused at first!
Do a little fact-checking before trotting out your moronic right wing nutjob cliches.
You'll notice in time that it stems from a lack of intellectual ability, but as time goes on that inability or unwillingness to absorb the nuance of the world results in an unquenchable desire to simply "pick a team." Nothing more.
You'll notice in time that it stems from a lack of intellectual ability, but as time goes on that inability or unwillingness to absorb the nuance of the world results in an unquenchable desire to simply "pick a team." Nothing more.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Exactly what Obamacrats have done. Follow the leader (pretend leader)....pick a team.
I agree that it seems no one is in a rush to aid Chile. But here's why (I believe):
Chile is MUCH better-equipped to handle a disaster like this as it has buidings designed to withstand earthquakes, better emergency response, etc.
Haiti, on the other hand, was very poorly equipped to handle such a disaster as it is not used to such things happening whereas Chile has earthquakes relatively often. Relatively (key word there).
Haiti is an EXTREMELY poor country compared to Chile. Hardly any people had good access to good food to begin with and after the earthquake, they had pretty much zero access to ANY food OR water. So Haiti was in dire need of assistance.
I lived in Chile for two and a half months a couple years ago so I would know about these things. Not to sound like a know-it-all, but, you know. lol
Couldn't have said it better myself. Exactly what Obamacrats have done. Follow the leader (pretend leader)....pick a team.
Yeah, that must be it. It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that in Haiti, the devastation was 10x's as severe as in Chile. It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that Chile will be able to recover on it's own while Haiti would become a cesspool of disease and continued inhumane conditions without assistance.
Could it be because Chile with a GDP of $16 billion dollars and a casualty rate that has yet to approach four digits does not have the same dire need as a country which by every possible indices is the poorest and most desperate country in the Western Hemisphere even without a national disaster?
Oh, of course that couldn't be the answer, only some bizarre argument of Obama's (you can add this one to the list after you look it up) Neo-Pan Africanist sentiments could be!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.