16 million people in the world died from Malaria while Clinton was in office. The same will happen under Bush.
Over 5,000 innocent kids, moms, and dads will die by this time tomorrow night --- from malaria.
Is it right that we give so little attention to the 5,000 poor people who will die from malaria during the next 24 hours?
2007-02-12 15:07:18 · 17 answers · asked by junglejoe 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
We you spend energy and hatred worrying about the 1000 Americans who will die in Iraq this year? Will you do that while ignoring 2 million who die from malaria?
2007-02-12 15:08:08 · update #1
It's called DDT
And because DDT is banned, the 3rd world does not havethe tools to fight Malaria. There was an over-reaction to DDT and now Malaria is rampant in Africa and Asia.
2007-02-12 15:15:42 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't care how many die of malaria or anything else anymore. You Third World pissants have yapped one time too many about "Yankee interference" and "American imperialism" as far as I'm concerned. If we're the "Great Satan", why are you always there with your hands out when there's a calamity in your dungheap of a country? I would think if we're Evil incarnate when things are good, we are still Evil incarnate when *shock* the desert fails to produce enogh food...AGAIN!
Come and talk to us about foreign aid after a few pro-US votes at the UN. Until then, I hear beetles are more palatable when they're roasted in the desert sun.
2007-02-12 15:15:54 · answer #2 · answered by Rick N 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You can thank Richard Nixon for signing the absolutely retarded ban on DDT. DDT, a wonder chemical, was maligned by Rachel Carson who succeeded in whipping-up political hysterics. More people have died from penicillin the DDT.
I kid you not: hundreds of millions of lives have been saved from malaria due to DDT.
2007-02-12 15:42:08 · answer #3 · answered by Jesus Jones 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Malaria cases in Africa have gone up something like 600% since the UN outlawed the spraying of DDT.
2007-02-12 15:14:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We cannot all focus on a disease because there is less that those who are not in that area of expertise can do than about a war. It is hard to protest a disease that we are not able control, it is much easier to be heard when it is something that is controllable by people. I would suggest that if you feel strongly about this subject that you go and speak in front of people who can help the cause...
2007-02-12 15:16:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How many kids will die in AMERICA in the next 24 hours, or how many kids will not eat in the next 24 hours in AMERICA, that should be our main goal, help people in our own country before helping other countries.
2007-02-12 15:32:07 · answer #6 · answered by Marcus P 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
curiously a black guy won't be able to do some thing with out "getting fortunate"... it truly is their declare for various failed assaults lower than Obama, and likely, as you assert, they forget concerning the various different assaults after the worst one in us of a historic previous, 9/11, and attempt to say Bush saved us secure yet Obama is weak on terror... purely prevalent racist hypocrisy.
2016-11-27 19:26:46 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We have lost fewer men per year in Iraq than we have in any other war or conflict. Why isn't that front page news? Oh thats right, media bias...
2007-02-12 15:16:51 · answer #8 · answered by freeatlast2200 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Huh? Are you saying that because there is malaria in the world, we should all be pro-Bush and pro-Iraq War because the incidence of death is lower?
This is some convoluted rant.
2007-02-12 15:11:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Well you see Junglejoe, it's all smoke-and-mirrors.
Liberals don't give a damned about the US troops and never have. As a matter of fact, they hate them!
But using the troops deaths is conveinent for them to show phony "outrage" against their political opponents.
2007-02-12 15:18:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋