• Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The US spent two decades sapping what resources the country had in the name of “bringing democracy” and then just abandoned them to the Taliban. Humanitarian aid is the bare minimum for any wealthy country, let alone the one that fucked everything up.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. The point and question I was trying to explore was: Should the country that burned down the house be the one that offers to rebuild it? We could give that money to international organizations. Maybe they will. Which is good. The article doesn’t say that though, it just wants you to hate Republicans.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes the country that burned down the house should ABSOLUTELY help pay for the rebuilding and it can by law not give money to NGOs to do it as that would jeopardise their neutrality. As for private citizens voluntarily donating to humanitarian aid charities, that’s unreliable at the best of times and dwindles significantly as the economic situation of the people worsens.

        And yeah, regardless of anything else, it IS justified to spend a lot of time criticizing something that is genuinely abhorrent, such as wanting to deprive starving and oppressed people of aid under the flimsiest of pretenses.