Author Topic: Tsuname (Read 497 times)

skravlinge · « **on:** January 01, 2005, 12:16:42 PM »

I am in a way religious, but in this heavy days I have problems with my english knowledge. An ACT OF GOD its not MY god. The natural disasters has been for milion years and it is not an act of god.

We have seen a disaster which is the worst since long time. Before we did not even know, but the world is small today. 120000 is the deafh toll . and thats has been before. The globalisation and modern communications make it known to everybody, we belongs to the same planet. The disaster in the south Asia may have count not the local, they takes anyhow the biggest burden, but a lot of western people are victims. In Thailand it migth be half of the toll is western and half of it is from Sweden, making the biggest toll of our country since the the year of 1670. In the Indonesia the inpact is heavy they takes half of the total pain. Its not easy to get help to the suffering people. The Swedish goverent ask the US to help taking swedes home, US refuse. I think US did rigth, we in Sweden can get the resources to fix our probems, the US funds and other resources will go to the milions of people in area of the disaster.

Reading the papers and see the news I am afraid they think a pale face is worth more than a darker.

skravlinge · « **Reply #1 on:** January 01, 2005, 05:21:48 AM »

Please forgive even wors spelling, this days are heavy!

nack · « **Reply #2 on:** January 01, 2005, 06:00:13 AM »

Yeah, the US needs to save it's money for making rubble in Iraq.

US gov't aid to disaster relief $15Mil

US private citizens contributions 21.7Mil

Bush 2nd inauguration $45Mil

Iraq liberation $115Mil/day

I think you can see where the priorities lay.

skravlinge · « **Reply #3 on:** January 01, 2005, 06:48:00 AM »

Up to no the Swedes are up to USD 75 milions , and thats among 9 millions of people. We use to contribute, and in the international statistic the show $ pro country not by individuals.

wdyasq · « **Reply #4 on:** January 01, 2005, 06:56:31 AM »

Well, the US sent a carrier group. The ships will supply more water and fuel in the comming days that all other nation's efforts combined.

US charitties are probably already there. Our government is not our charity support tool. It is done through the individual. According to our laws it is illegal to spend money without appropreation by congress. Even they use the citizens money illegally.

-Ron-

skravlinge · « **Reply #5 on:** January 01, 2005, 07:21:48 AM »

Right the 75 millions are directed by public funds (ie tax money) but the individual contribution is high, may be more than the 75 million. They go trough the church, red cross or some other organisations, which people here think will better use the money due to less stiff organisation , better response to local needs and more spirit in the volontary organisations.

hope you can read it, my english is as my feelings today. hope for better

drdongle · « **Reply #6 on:** January 01, 2005, 07:48:39 AM »

Last I heard the US is providing 80 million in private ( non government) aid, and I expect that that will at least double before every thing is over. Private aid voluntarily given is the best kind, you don't get any attached strings.

Carpe Vigor

Dr.D

And may all the odd gods show those people mercy.

RatOmeter · « **Reply #7 on:** January 01, 2005, 08:04:39 AM »

I was going to make a point about natural distasters using one particular example from the last century that I recalled hearing about, so I did some googling. When I found this link:

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/disaster.html

I saw that the one example I was thinking of paled in comparison to others so I guess I must change my point a bit.

Looking through the above list of disasters, I'd say we've had a great deal of improvement in the area of controlling disease epidemics/pandemics and, though scientists are gravely concerned about a possible super-bug or super-strain outbreak that we've currently no medicine for, we do have science and methods in place to combat those problems. What improved protection do we have against volcanos, hurricanes, earthquakes and tsunamis? Better construction methods in vulnerable areas, education and early warning. The latter may be the most important angle to consider as it appears that many or most of the people in the areas affected by these latest tsunami had very little or no warning of what was coming. Several govts are already vowing to install or improve early detection and warning systems. Early warning or not, all our advances over the last 100 years seem to offer very little protection against mother nature's worst.

c'est la vie

skravlinge · « **Reply #8 on:** January 01, 2005, 09:23:21 AM »

Yes but early warning will help, Japan is hit by this more than india,they can provide early warmings. It takes sometimes 12 hours from the spot in the sea until the waves is present at land. In high areas it is safer, but the egde of water gives attraction to fishing and tourism. The reason we in Sweden lost so many children and the locals lost children is the fact a beach is just a place chidren and tourists love to be on.

LEXX · « **Reply #9 on:** January 01, 2005, 11:59:24 AM »

Irac Liberation??? That's a funny phase for it.

LEXX

richhagen · « **Reply #10 on:** January 01, 2005, 01:06:48 PM »

I e-mailed my Congressman (Danny Davis IL-D) requesting to know why the U.S. would not help Swedes and other foreigners evacuate the are if space was available on returning aid planes or otherwise. I have not received a response yet. I'll let you know if I get one. Rich Hagen

dalibor · « **Reply #11 on:** January 01, 2005, 03:17:42 PM »

i just want to say this disaster just put us humans in proper place, showing us a nature forces in act.

photos i saw these days were therifying, making my heart going into peaces.

for scravlinge - i saw on tv video from sweden, instead of happiness in celebrating new year, there was hundreds of small candels on streets in memory of swedish people who will never go back home.

my deepest sympaties.

RatOmeter · « **Reply #12 on:** January 01, 2005, 08:36:54 PM »

He won't know the answers to your questions, but perhaps he'll think a bit upon it, given your concern.

In other news, for those who are keeping score, the US has upped its commitment to $350M as of yesterday. Sweden is (as of the same time) #3 in per capita commitment with Quatar being #1. What does that say? Hell if I know, but my suggestion is, if you get the urge to complain about how people or governments are or are not contributing to the well being of folks who's lives have been up-rooted by mother nature, make sure you've done your part first.

The per capita contribution/commitment so far from the US, $1.18. From Sweden over $8. From Quatar, over $16. From me, $15.

It ticks me off to the Nth degree when folks (not specifically you, richhagen) start complaining about who hasn't done what for those in peril. Do your part as you see fit and can afford and keep the damned politics out of it, please.

johnlm · « **Reply #13 on:** January 01, 2005, 10:38:24 PM »

From the numbers I saw, which agreed with Ratometers numbers it looked like the USA gave (will give) 350 million which is almost as much as all the other 10 countries listed combined ($492 million). This plus the other types of aid we give, Yet we always hear that the US doesn't do enough. We hear about money spent to create rubble in Iraq yet if one measures disasters by how many die, Sadam Hussain murdered over 200,000 of his own Iraq people yet I hear no one bemoan the dead or comment as to the tradegy or make comparisons that about how much their country is not giving more to aid or stop those kind of diasters. Whats the difference spending billions to rid the world of some terrible disease like smallpox or build early warning systems or spend billions to rid the world of some diseases (in human form) like terrorists and mass murders like Hitler or Hussain?

skravlinge · « **Reply #14 on:** January 02, 2005, 12:53:44 AM »

I agreed to that in my first posting, We should be able to solve our problems.

Its far more problems to be solved among the countries at the area.

nack · « **Reply #15 on:** January 02, 2005, 02:06:53 AM »

Just trying to brush up on my double-think.

bob golding · « **Reply #16 on:** January 02, 2005, 08:12:41 AM »

hi john, think the problem is not so much any one dictator, there is no shortage of them, but the way the "war in Iraq" has been tied into "the war on terror" me thinks it might have someting to do with oil. One thing about the tsumane aid is the way it is being propelled by peoples goodwill. in the uk the goverments measly 15 million was dwarfted by the 40 million from the genereal public. this cannot be a bad thing, politicions following the publics lead for a change. no offence meant to anyone on the board if yoy dissagree with my angle on world politics. i have always had a healthy misstrust of politicians and dont beleive a word any of them say.

bob golding

finnsawyer · « **Reply #17 on:** January 02, 2005, 09:54:58 AM »

How about government caused (individual) disasters. Some time ago you mentioned that Sweden has universal health coverage. I recently heard an account of a woman, who can be considered a member of my extended family, who is living in Sweden. She was pregnant and had a hard delivery. The umbilical cord was wrapped around the baby's neck. She was required to have the baby at home with a mid-wife in attendance. As a result the baby was deprived of oxygen for three minutes and is now severely handicapped. Apparently a C-section was also not allowed. In the U. S. the practice is to have the delivery to take place in a hospital with a doctor in attendance. Every thing that can be done is done to make sure the health of the baby is preserved. It appears Sweden's health system is broken and needs to be fixed.

skravlinge · « **Reply #18 on:** January 02, 2005, 10:39:43 AM »

I dont for a second belive she required to deliver the chid at home, its anyhow not forbidden to do so. Some fancy New Age people fancy to do it at home as it is suppoused to be more "natural".

finnsawyer · « **Reply #19 on:** January 02, 2005, 10:49:59 AM »

Can you provide data to substantiate this? What proportion of births occur in hospital, for instance? The person who related this to me called your medical care "backwards". It's a serious charge. What is the official policy? If you wish you can E-mail me at: Thefinnsawyer@yahoo.com

windstuffnow · « **Reply #20 on:** January 02, 2005, 02:00:35 PM »

In reality, we shouldn't have to have a disaster to put our differences aside. We are all the same species reguardless of color, race, religion, deformities etc. We all share this world. If another form of inteligence invaded our world to wipe us out wouldn't we fight side by side as equals to survive? What are the differences?

Isn't it possible that any disaster no matter where could be caused because of what we are doing to the earth? Mother nature may just shake us off like a bad case of fleas on a dog if we're not careful.

Bless all the survivors of last weeks disaster and may god be with them in the times to come. He's already taken care of those who parished.

Windstuff Ed

johnlm · « **Reply #21 on:** January 02, 2005, 02:22:50 PM »

Bob,

I also dont trust government(s) much, I believe most are self serving and self perpuating. I heard the stuff about the Iraq war being a war for oil all throughout the last year during the election process as it was one of the antiwar battle cries of the Democrats. I guess I need help understanding that concept. If it is a war for oil, then why doesn't the US just get rid of any and all Iraqies that get in the way, take over the oilfields and start shipping it all to the USA? If the Bush people are such oil mongers, why did we not take over the Iraq oil fields when Bush Sr was in power during the first iraq war? If it is a war to preserve a supply of oil to the USA for the forseable future, (and paying Iraq for the oil as we do any other country which seems to be what the plan is) while getting rid of the terrorists along the way, what is wrong with that? The USA (as does the world) needs oil, yet we dont just steal it from anybody. We are being restricted and fought at every turn to drill for more in areas we own (coastal regions and Alaska) yet I dont see the folks that protest drilling the loudest quit driving or flying or heating their homes or not using anything that requires petrolium (plastics, cosmetics, food supply, to name only a few amoung thousands of products). They whine alot but sure dont provide much of an example. Ie, the Kennedy's are fighting putting a big wind farm off the coast of Mass cause it would be in their back yard spoiling thier ocean view yet they are some of the whiners regarding "war for oil". (personally I think a bunch of big windmills is a thing of beauty art and grace). Would it be acceptable if our gov just stepped back and urged the total non use of any petrolium, passed laws forbidding any new "environmental impact" due to drilling and took an adversarial position against the oil companies?. What kind of chaos would happen in this country if in the next year or two the oil supply was cut in half, even the protesters might have a change of heart watching their kids freeze to death, or not being able to drive anywhere or not get anything to eat due to the non transportation and production (tractors, trucks and trains use petrol) of the food supply. Dont get me wrong, Im all for conservation and the development of energy alternatives, (and the gov could push for alternatives much more than they are) but I just dont see what is wrong with preserving a much needed continued supply of oil for the next 50 years or so. So please help me understand what is meant by "Iraq is a war for oil."

Regards

John

bob golding · « **Reply #22 on:** January 02, 2005, 05:14:18 PM »

hi john,

think one of the reasons "they dont just go and kill anyone who gets in the way" is it might upset a few of the other oil producing countries in the region. then they might have to kill everybody. i agree that we are wedded to big oil for the conceivable future as long as we go on consuming at our present rate. sercuring the supply of oil is an a given whatever your politics, what i tend to question is the price. i read somewhere this week that the US is spending 115 million dollars a day in iraq. that would by a lot of useful alternatives to burning oil in internal combustion engines. lets face it burning oil in engines is not a very effiecient use for it. arthur c clarke said back in 1948 or there abouts that using oil to run cars is a crazy waste of of a finite resource. i cant help but think gdubbya might not have our best interests at heart somehow. there are much better ways to use oil than burning it. is not just the oil companies thre global automobile industry is far worse. cant find the link but someone workd out the amount of resources used by the auto industry and i think it was around 20 % of total world production of steel rubber and plastic,and theat before you out your first gallon in the tank. i am no better than anyone else exscept i am at the bottom of the food chain and rescue all mine from the junk yard. darn i could be depriving someone of a new shiny piece of modern consumerism.

bob golding

kell · « **Reply #23 on:** January 02, 2005, 05:33:02 PM »

Take it easy on him, fin. He doesn't need the onus of refuting some secondhand gossip about his home country. Your reasarching abilities are adequate, if you really have the interest.

johnlm · « **Reply #24 on:** January 02, 2005, 09:44:58 PM »

Bob,

I guess I still don't quite see where the Bush guys can be accused of "war for oil" Its easy to make such statements as they sound politically damning and raise the ire of many. I agree with your statements that if they just took over the country it would cause alot of hate from the other oil countries as well as much of the rest of the world. So Is being on the take as many European countries and Russian officials were (and the UN folks ignoring it) on the oil for food debacle a better way? Is it not interesting the number of officials that were on the take getting rich on this program, yet the ones accused of being oil mongers (Bush , Cheney and Haliburton) were not among the ones on the take? You bring up a good point regarding the amount of resources the auto makers use in the production of cars. It is easy to blame the companies (or the government) as being users / wasters of resources, yet who buys the cars....the individual people. Many of the folks who frerquent this board could possibly exist through a major shortage of energy but 80% of the folks in highly developed countries would panic. People are crazy - they tear a town down just because they won or lost a football game. Imagine what would happen if the supply of energy they are accustomed to were cut off. There is another post on this board regarding Germany's efforts to change over to renewable energy. Many good points have been brough up both pro and con as to how it is being implemented and how successful it might be. Regarding the $115 million/day being spent in Iraq, I guess Im not sure it is as easy as saying it could just be spent on alt energy programs. The world trade center could have been powered by windmills yet they would still have fallen due to terriorists. If we purchased no middle east oil would that make all the terriorists love us? I think I believe in the notion that if we sit here in the US, do nothing to stop terriorism and pretend it will all go away, we will be much more vurnable to more attacks. That whole mess over in the middle east cannot be summed up in a simple statement. It is a very complex issue and a lazie-fare (sp?) approach will not resolve it. Thanks for the civilized discussion.

Johnlm

skravlinge · « **Reply #25 on:** January 03, 2005, 07:28:25 AM »

Hard to find on the net as very few think of give birth at home.

<Quote>

" Professor Dunlop: No, it is a totally different system and a totally different population with different ethnic mix and a different history. There are lower perinatal mortality rates in Sweden where there are virtually 100% hospital births. "

</Quote>

From: http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmhealth/796/3061702.htm

You find a lot of webpages which propagate for homebirth which use their figures as the Devil reads the Script. When they claim midwives are attending the birth to almost 80%, thats only means we use well educated midwives instead of nurses, you will never see a doctor absent, its normally a woman . The rest 20 % there the midwives not attend is not vaginal birth and suspected to be problem. It is may be to high percent of not vaginal births in Sweden. It has been critizied for high tech and not high touth

check this link its deal with childcare broader

http://www.childpolicyintl.org/countries/sweden.html

bob golding · « **Reply #26 on:** January 03, 2005, 07:32:44 AM »

john,

thank you for for a civilised disscussion as well. i dont have the answers, just an old cynic with a healthy distrust of people who say they have all the answers. as regards an oil shortage this happened here in the UK about 4 years ago due to industrial action by truckers protesting about the high taxes in diesel.this almost brought the goverment down. supermarkets ran out of food, the health services where stretched to breaking point, and fabricators couldnt make enought storage tanks. it only lasted 2 weeks but just showed how much we rely on the oil supply.

bob golding

skravlinge · « **Reply #27 on:** January 03, 2005, 08:58:37 AM »

I think so, just a search!

I was present at my dauthers birth, the care was super.

Other circumstance have made it is is not more around.

Please let us stop this thread.

skravlinge · « **Reply #28 on:** January 03, 2005, 09:02:39 AM »

I think so, just a search!

I was present at my dauthers birth, the care was super.

Other circumstance have made she is not more around.

Please let us stop this thread.

finnsawyer · « **Reply #29 on:** January 04, 2005, 10:20:52 AM »

I checked the links. I think Sweden's system puts too much emphasis on choice for the mother and not enough on the health of the fetus or baby. The wishes of the mother must be subordinated to the need for a safe delivery. To my mind this means the pregnancy must be supervised by a doctor. At some point an ultrasound and/or other tests should be done to flag potential problems. If the delivery starts at home and proves difficult, the mother should be transferred to hospital immediately.

In the link one complaint was made about resources going to high tech (Ultrasound). Ultrasound is a good way to find out potential problems such as a breech birth or the cord wrapped around the neck. In this country they are routine. That is true even here in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, which has about the same population as Iceland (Michigan's population is about the same as Sweden's).

I do thank you for your input. It has helped put some matters in perspective for me. I do not think I would favor a system using midwives here. I do realize your medical care system arises from your culture and your history.

finnsawyer · « **Reply #30 on:** January 07, 2005, 09:49:16 AM »

Actually it'd be a lot easier to take over Saudi Arabia (and a lot easier to defend too). I don't buy into this idea that we're only into it for the oil. Everyone seems to forget Saddam's slaughter of his own people. At least three WMD's were neutralized by our invasion of Iraq: Saddam and his two sons. I also think the experience our army is having over there shows the true nature of the enemy (going back to 9/11). They have no regard for any kind of civilized values or behavior. The religion they're following appears to be the devil's religion.

richhagen · « **Reply #31 on:** March 13, 2005, 11:30:07 PM »

Because I said I would, Here is an extract of the response I got in the form of a letter from the Congressman: ....In the 109th Congress, I will work to ensure that the United States' Congress provides aid appropriate to the needs of the victims. So far the President has pledged $350 million and the United States military has taken a leeding role in ensuring that aid reaches those in need and preventin looting and chaos in the wake of this tragedy. Additionally Americans and American corporations have opened up their wallets and provided billions of dollars in aid privately. A number of reliable aid organizations welcome all donations great and small. ..... Rich Hagen

News:

Author Topic: Tsuname (Read 497 times)