Gimme some points on why humanitarian aid to third world nations is not a waste of time and money??

Question

Its my debate topic, plzzz help

Answer 1

1) food makes more friends than bullets.
2) decreases the likely hood that war will break out in that area.
3)decreases the chance of diseases spreading.
4) decreases the amount of refugees moving from area.

Answer 2

As stated its good PR. Plus it speaks volumes of our nation as one that is not selfish. It served us extremely well in the past for example:

Following WWI the winners of the war essentially did as we wanted with the countries we conquered. We made them pay for the war, we crushed their economies, divided up lands etc.

The resentment from that lead to WWII, Germans seeing their country in shambles just placed resentment which allowed it to fester into a war.

Following WWII the great Marshall Plan essentially a huge humanitarian aid rebuilt the European Nations involved in the war.

This is was new and wasn't something you would see following a war. It would make you ask the same question of why do we give 20 billion to nations who were aggressors against us?

But now Germany is rebuilt by us and it showed a side of the US that they could get along with. It was beneficial in the long term.

But to make another point sometimes humanitarian aid gets over done. For instance, aid to Israel in the form of military weaponry can hurt us. If the enemies of Israel who are fanatical see the US as arming their enemy to kill people this can easily be misread.

And attacks will happen to the US because of "aid".

So to me its a huge benefit if used correctly. But if used incorrectly without thought of consequence then it can me both a waste of time and money!

I just want to add that aid in the form of food cannot ever be misread.. you give a gun, nukes, or tanks and well thats something different :(

Answer 3

You could use the example of the Marshall Plan.
After WWII President Truman appointed Gen George Marshall to oversee the rebuilding of Europe. History/critics say that Marshall's plan kept most of Europe from falling into dictatorships. England, France, Germany and Italy became strong allies for the U.S.

Humanitarian Aid is also the right thing to do. President Bill Clinton and Bill Gates realize the importance of good medical care for the people of poor African nations.

Having a healthy population is less costly than caring for a population that is sick and dying.

Leaders of these poor nations need help in administering the funds. Quite often the funds are misdirected to corrupt government officials and little or no aid reaches those who need it most.

You will need to give "official" sources for this information. It's up to you to find it.

Answer 4

Because some countries need aid. And America is so rich in foodstuffs that we actually have figured out a way to kill ourselves with it. Because it is better to make friends than enemies. Because the impoverished countries of today could be the super powers of tomorrow. Look at China, India, and post WWII Japan.

Answer 5

I'm on the fence on this issue. In countries like Niger were they have famines every year because they live on a frigen desert are doomed and the humanitarian thing to do would be to help them to greener land and stop feeding them to stop the generational suffering. But if its in a countrey were food can be produced they just had a bad harvest i think we should help them out because if i was starving i would want food , wouldnt you?

Answer 6

do your own homework
learn to spell
oh hell.
We need many things these third world nations have. Cobalt, gold, rubber, cocoa, coffee, whatever, look up some more. How, if they are all dead or dying from HIV or malaria are they going to grow it/dig it out of the ground/whatever. You going to do it? Fat chance. You going to let most of the able-bodied adults die and the rest become resentful anti-western islamisist extremist because the USA could have helped but didn't?

Answer 7

We have poverty stricken folks right here in the USA we should be helping. How about sending some humanitarian aid to Kentucky or Loiusiana.

Answer 8

Because, we should be taking care of our own people in our country first. i am a conservative, but all these movie stars and celebrities who are all worried about the third world countries can send their money to MS and LA. We are still in a mess from Hurricane Katrina. We need to take care of our own here. End of story.

Answer 9

it advertises the USA in a positive light, helping our world image. If people can view us as having a helpful humanitarian side they would be more willing to allow us to liberate other countries because we can show the good we have done in other countries.

Answer 10

Natural resources
A Future Partner
Helping these countries will benefit those helping and those receiving the help.

But I still think that we should resolve issues that are in our own country.(Hurricane Katrina)