Well how do you know that their own government or another body wouldn't provide those things? Do you know for sure that we do provide those things and it's our responsibility alone? It's not insulting at all it's a reasonable question. Stop with the veiled insults all the time Withano, it's getting tedius.

Foreign aid is there for those who need it, you take it away and you kill millions. Luckily Britain isnt the only country who supplies this, other countries feel a responsibility to prevent poverty-stricken families dying from preventable diseases. You feeling as if children and mothers dont deserve this because their government has science programmes running is so ugly. But I'm not mad, I honestly dont feel as if there has been much thought into this strange thread from many people in it. Im sure with a bit of empathy or rational thinking, you can come to a more age-appropriate conclusion. Same applies to many others here.

I'm sorry but I think the highlighted statement is melodrama based on your own emotions and no facts whatsoever. :shrug: You don't even know if government aid actually goes to those who need it. Charities are fairly transparent and it can be easily traced with regard what they do with their money but honestly how do you know who ends up with government aid and what it is spent on?

Again with the insults 'it's so ugly' bla bla bla. I've never once said I think children and mothers should be made to suffer, or anything you said in that sentence so don't put words in my mouth thank you all the same. It's not a science project, stop sugar coating it, it's nuclear arms which in reality could kill the millions you claim to care about. Do I think our aid might be being spent on those nuclear weapons? Highly possible.

It is perfectly reasonable to say, if you can afford weapons of mass destruction, why are we paying to feed your people and where is that money going? The very question Jenny is asking.

Would you go through life never asking questions just hand over your money, never ask, never question? :shrug:

Let me also ask you, if you are overdrawn in the bank, would you be working to pay that back, or spending your money buying treats for friends? Because if the answer is buying treats for friends, it's damn irresponsible. This country is overdrawn in the bank. It's completely acceptable to question where we are spending our money.

Well you cant have it both ways.

You cant take it away from the government without killing the citizens. This is the very basic principle of foreign aid and you completely skipped through it. We cant progress with the conversation until you make it clear whether you would prefer to kill the citizens and stop a government being capable of war... Or keep the poverty sticken children alive whilst their government funds a proportion of their wealth on projects that you may or may not agree with.

You can not have both. Until you understand this, your argument is senseless.

If the question really is why is this happening (i dont think anybody is really asking this) then this is the answer..
Each government is responsible in distributing the wealth where they see fit, if there isnt enough for basic human rights then foreign aid can help prevent the unnecessary deaths.

I think we should definitely be looking at where our money is spent with considerable scrutiny. Again you make bald statements killing of thousands with no proof, facts etc. Bizarre.

Define what you meant in your previous comments about my post not having age appropriate conclusions? I was sure I took it right down to your level.

Apologies Naimh, I thought we could all play Withano's game.

It wasn't directed at just you :laugh:

Christ. Limiting foreign aid will limit medication, will limit vaccines. Will kill many people, most specifically children and pregnant mothers. Some things dont need proof, they need twenty seconds of thought.

Making a thread about where our money should go would be fine, making a thread on how governments spend their cash is fine. But thats not what this thread is, this thread is simply implying that foreign aid isnt needed in countries that can afford weapons and that is ugly. You have simply killed off anybody living under a corrupt government with a "its not my bloody job" attitude. Make it your job to care about those struggling to stay alive.

This is possibly one of the most ludicrous statement I have EVER witnessed Withano - Are you REALLY saying that a Government is OK to squander its money on Nuclear Weapons, New Palaces with gold wc's and fleets of top limousines for its ministers, or equipping its armies with latest hi-tech weaponry and equipment, while its poorer citizens go without food, water and shelter, because Foreign Aid will step in and save the day?

Money should never be given blindly or you are in danger of funding the very things you claim to oppose.

The thread is asking why we are giving aid to countries who can afford weapons of mass destruction. It's a fair question.

If you want to make dramatic statements prove it or don't call others stupid for disagreeing with you. :shrug:

Yes, yes he is.

Thats a different issue, but to me, no not personally. Offtopic though.

Oh right, there we were thinking i was the one putting words in your mouth, you gave me a telling off for it too

:laugh:

I don't see Germans bitching about their war reparations...which they are still paying.

If the UK is paying reparation for colonial rule then it is up the the recipients what they spend any monies owed on.
If I owed you £20 I cannot demand to know what you intend to do with it. :/

Do you read German forums then? I always admire people who read other languages.

Oh except that according to several articles and essays on the web they bitched and moaned a lot and never paid that much in reparations.

If they are spending the money on weapons of mass destruction then no, it's really not. I wouldn't want to be responsible for their nukes, would you? :shrug:

Which articles are those?...

Um, are they not as entitled to 'defence' as we are?....

*disclaimer
In an ideal world nobody should need nukes.

Google I'm not being the secretary.

Of course but not if we are paying for it.

Essentially it's their money, they can do what they like with it, I don't like my taxes funding things like arming saudis but .... :shrug:

I don't have time to check every unsubstantiated claim on the forum.... I'd be here forever :laugh:

Stay uninformed then. I was curious.

:laugh2:

Then I can choose not to give it and it won't be their money at all. If I am giving aid of course I should have every right to question what it is spent on, just as I'd have every right to stop giving if I disapproved. I wouldn't fund an alcoholic or drug addicted friend. That wouldn't help them at all.

I am stunned anyone thinks it's OK that aid could be spent on weapons of mass destruction if that is how the recipient wants to spend it.

That is exactly what I meant Kirk. Also especially Pakistan because that is the main culprit for training and arming terrorists. Why give them help, when there are so many other countries worthy of the aid.

Yes, but in countries like Pakistan they are not so much educated as brain washed! And if you are female, forget it.

Withano it seems quite clear to me. If a country can afford to have nuclear weapons, yet the poor are still hungry, then the money is not going to help them, it's going on other things...like nuclear weapons.

...foreign aid (as with charitable aid as well..)...is a complicated thing I always think because both thought processes are equally so sound in their thinking...so much of aid in general is subject to corruption is one thing but there's also the 'trading' bit that is done with foreign aid as well and our (or other country governments..)..not really closely looking at where the aid is going exactly but then if they did and stopped it, not only would certain things that are beneficial to us probably not happen..but those nuclear weapons would still happen I feel and it would only be those in need who would lose out in terms of their health, education, medication etc...nothing makes sense though when it comes to government spending, why are people evicted from their houses and yet cries of homelessness increasing being an issue...it's all pretty screwed up and one democracy that will never happen is us (the taxpayer..)..all having any say in how money is spent...

..I guess it's to think of it as things like large fund-raising things like Band-Aid and such the like/National yearly events..that not all funds raised will possibly be well spent or appropriately spent but for the amount that is and does benefit, it's an essential to so many lives still existing and a positive benefit to lives and education .../rock on Bono and Bob..:love:...

Empathy is good, but gullable naivity isn't. Do you suppose that a government of a country like Pakistan gives two hoots for it's poor and hungry, because I sure as hell don't. If they did they would spend the money they get in foreign aid on them, NOT on nuclear weapons or to arm terrorists.

But can't you see Withano that people who live under a corrupt government are NEVER going to see one penny of that foreign aid. So all we are doing in effect is enabling that corrupt government to prosper. Please tell me you can see that?:shrug:

I mean.. They do though.. The money doesnt get handed over in cash for the government to clap and high five each other before their shopping spree in H&M. Money goes directly into medicines, supporting children through school and making sure the young wont die tomorrow. I think a lot of your argument is just paranoia.
If you wanted to make a thread about how other governments should distribute their cash, I think we'd have similar opinions. But taking foreign aid away from those who need it because their government (which are located close to central war zones) have ways of defending themselves is obviously bat**** crazy. Why punish a child because of their government?

..I think that they do receive though, it's just that they don't receive all of but if they didn't receive at all, if it completely stopped it wouldn't stop governments from arming themselves as a priority, it would only stop vitals and essentials needed of those who need most...

..or similar to what Withano says, jeez you type quickly..:laugh:...

I have work to do.. So naturally, I'm procrastinating haha.

..I have a quick small window in the mornings when my thoughts work and then for the rest of the day, I try not to think too much when I'm working/chill my brain completely..(on work days..)...it pretty much seems to work for me...