Thread: Good job......
06-07-2005, 01:22 AM #1
This is a good move by GW in my opinion.......especially tying the aid to government responsibility......
Bush to announce Africa aid plan
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush administration will announce plans to spend $674 million for "humanitarian emergencies" in Africa during a visit by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, according to a U.S. official.
An extensive aid package for poverty-stricken African nations is expected to top the agenda for Blair when he meets with U.S. President George W. Bush on Tuesday in Washington.
The $674 million will come on top of about $1.4 billion the White House is spending on humanitarian needs this year, a National Security Council official said.
Blair won a new mandate from British voters in May despite the unpopularity of the war in Iraq.
But his ruling Labour Party lost more than 90 seats in the House of Commons, and British lawmakers say it is time for Bush to lend a hand to his staunchest ally on the issues Blair wants to address.
In addition to announcing the aid, Bush and Blair "will call on the international community to increase their funding for humanitarian emergencies in Africa," the NSC official said.
"They will call on the world to step up with increased resources for emergencies occurring now and those that might arise in the future."
As this year's chairman of the Group of Eight economic powers, Blair is seeking U.S. help for a 10-year, $25 billion plan to double aid to Africa from developed nations, including programs to forgive debts and battle poverty and disease.
"This is not a time for timidity, nor is it a time to fear reaching too high," Blair's finance minister and sometime rival, Gordon Brown, said last week.
U.S. officials have made it clear the White House doesn't want to double aid to Africa or forgive debts unless countries weed out corruption and reform their governments.
Bush told reporters last week that developed countries "are not going to want to give aid to countries that are corrupt, or don't hold true to democratic principles, such as rule of law and transparency and human rights and human decency."
Tuesday's announcement is a way to show Blair's critics back home that he can pry commitments out of Washington on his priorities.
For years Britain's prime minister has had a mission, one he outlined in a memorable speech after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in America.
"The state of Africa is a scar on the conscience of the world, but if the world as a community focused on it we could heal it," Blair told his Labour Party that autumn.
Last week, South African President Thabo Mbeki said July's G8 summit "has the possibility to communicate a very strong, positive message about movement on the African continent away from poverty and development."
"Your contribution to the practical outcomes of the G8 summit is critically important," Mbeki told Bush.
But Bush at the time said the British plan "doesn't fit our budgetary process."
"On the other hand, I've also made it clear to the prime minister I look forward to working with Great Britain and other countries to advance the African agenda that has been on the G8's agenda for ever since I've been the president," he said.
A senior administration official expressed frustration that when the U.S. president ruled out signing onto that plan, it was taken to mean that the United States wasn't willing to participate at all.
"The president was referring to that specific proposal. It's almost impossible to accept that in its current form. There are alternative ways to meet the same goals," the official told CNN.
Blair's spokesman said Britain agrees that the situation in Africa won't be solved "by throwing money at it," but said the continent needs "a proper combination" of debt relief, trade, political reform and aid.
CNN White House Correspondent Dana Bash and European Political Editor Robin Oakley contributed to this report.
06-07-2005, 06:29 AM #2
Its crap. Some dictator is going to go out and buy a jet. I hate it when the us pisses money down the toilet this way.
06-07-2005, 03:58 PM #3
Pure idiocy. The only people that will help Africa are Africans.
06-07-2005, 08:17 PM #4
Didn't he announce a $15 billion African aid plan for something a few months ago? And Congress refused to fund it?
Ya, he can announce plans for anything, but it doesn't mean it'll happen - or even that he really wants it to happen. It does, however, get him some good press for a day.
06-08-2005, 04:44 AM #5
he only announce plan for invading and destroying new countries
06-08-2005, 05:48 AM #6
better to spend 15 billion on africa then to spend 15 billion on military tech.
But the best thing would be to spend the 15 billion om hiv research so we can find a ****ing cure.
06-08-2005, 05:59 AM #7Originally Posted by johan
06-08-2005, 06:13 AM #8
06-08-2005, 10:22 AM #9
The major cause of HIV is lack of morals.......the US and Africa have lots of AIDS and other STD problems because the people are copulating like a bunch of rabbits...... multiple partners...etc etc
06-08-2005, 10:24 AM #10
Why is it so wrong to screw around If there wasnt for disease and I was single I would nail every chick that weights less then me.
06-08-2005, 07:41 PM #11Originally Posted by johan
It has even been shown that sex between married people is heart healthy.....whereas illicit sex is harmful to the cardiac system.....
06-08-2005, 09:27 PM #12Originally Posted by Badgerman
If Jehovah really was concerned about healthy living, it would have given a few rules about proper food preparation and washing hands before and after examining sick people or assisting in childbirth. Might have even given a helpful hint about disinfecting surgical tools with boiling water.
Last edited by Tock; 06-08-2005 at 09:30 PM.
06-09-2005, 02:35 AM #13Originally Posted by Badgerman
I dont belive in a god that has made any laws like that.
I would be very interested in knowing where you have read the thing about sex betwen married and non married. With illicit do you mean people cheating or single people screwing around
06-09-2005, 07:32 AM #14Originally Posted by johan
Never thought I would agree w/badger but married ppl having sex would have a very different physical response than the latter two. I dont need a study to back that up, its just common sense.
06-10-2005, 05:39 AM #15
Well getting married here in sweden isnt such a big deal like in the state and Im sure there are thousands of unmarried couples here that gets the same benifits from sex.
Getting married to me has almost no meaning or importance but that doesnt prevent me from loving someone.
I think the key factor here is beeing in love, not beeing married.
I also find it hard to belive unemotional sex like one night stands can have a negative effect on health since even jerking off is healthy. Im not doubting there is a study that claims it, I just want to read it.
Cheating Im sure can add extra stress and lower immune system function since so many negative emotions are attached to it.
06-10-2005, 05:42 AM #16
Only reason I can think of for unmarried sex betwen 2 single people to be harmfull is if the society has put such a importance on beeing married that the unmarried sex has negative tabu emotions attached to it.
I dont know if that is the case in america? It sure as hell aint in sweden
06-10-2005, 10:41 AM #17
Nuke them all (long time we didnt see this sentence)
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)