In the event of a major disaster, can you imagine...

[austin552]

We couldn't even help ourselves...

[Scuba Steve]

Originally Posted by dd74

...another country coming to our aid?

Can you imagine, as an American, ever being in such a position where you would need to rely on another country for help?

It's already been posted in another thread. After Katrina the Mexican and Canadian armed forces helped out with the refugees.

[daepp]

How much aid is Venezuela or Cuba sending to Haiti?

Or for that matter up above, China or Russia?

[cgibson67]

i'd say our deficit is a major disaster, and China bails us out of that everyday

probably not what you were asking about though....

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by Bill Douglas

We do, New Zealand that is. Each year our fire service come and fight your bush fires in California. Plus we are front line in Afganistan and Iraq. Fought in Somalia and Veitnam. So chances are we'll help if there is a big earthquake.

But.... I suspect it's so if anyone is mean to lil ole us guys we can say "Ah, hold your tonque - we are fiends with AMERICA."

I didn't know that (about the firefighters). Seriously, thanks!

[red-beard]

What am I saying? We should let Kalifornia burn!

[daepp]

Originally Posted by red-beard

What am I saying? We should let Kalifornia burn!

Please let California burn. Please do not send any federal dollars our way. Sacramento needs to crash and burn - there are no incremental fixes.

[TechnoViking]

They do help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina

[audiman08]

Originally Posted by Martin Smith

They do help:

International response to Hurricane Katrina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wow, that was an interesting read. Even Iran jumped on board..it's nice to think politics can be set aside in such a situation. I guess Syria didn't get the memo..

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by dd74

...another country coming to our aid?

Can you imagine, as an American, ever being in such a position where you would need to rely on another country for help?

This is a very American question. I think Americans—more than others—tend to see themselves on one side, and the rest of the world on the other. The "us and them" thing.

Once you begin to think of this planet as "spaceship earth"—the notion of another country coming to your aid in time of need is not particularly radical.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by Dottore

This is a very American question. I think Americans—more than others—tend to see themselves on one side, and the rest of the world on the other. The "us and them" thing.

Once you begin to think of this planet as "spaceship earth"—the notion of another country coming to your aid in time of need is not particularly radical.

Yeah, pretty much

[techweenie]

Haiti sent aid after Katrina.

[Looking_for_911]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

I found it very interesting (and telling) that NYC Politburo Member and Party Chairman Michael Bloomburg actually told people yesterday to NOT send food, water, blankets - only money.

Gee, wonder why?

Draw your own conclusions.

For what it's worth I once heard an appeal such as this - maybe after Katrina - and the answer then was that the relief agencies such as the Red Cross can stretch our dollars further than we can when buying supplies.

May be a bunch of hooey, but that's what I heard.

[Looking_for_911]

Originally Posted by Dottore

This is a very American question. I think Americans—more than others—tend to see themselves on one side, and the rest of the world on the other. The "us and them" thing.

Once you begin to think of this planet as "spaceship earth"—the notion of another country coming to your aid in time of need is not particularly radical.

Isn't this what Birmingham, Ala. native, the late Sonny Blount, better known as intergallactic musician "Sun Ra" said all along?

[jyl]

I've read there's a logistical reason. You can imagine that, in the immediate crisis, it is a lot easier to move, allocate, distribute relief supplies that are selected and packaged a certain way - pallets of high-density nutrition bars, rather than heavy boxes of random canned food, let's say. Since transportation is such a bottleneck in Haiti, with the airport tower destroyed and roads blocked with rubble, little stuff like that probably matters. And maybe in the first critical days or weeks they need to prioritize stuff like plasma, medicine, surgical supplies, body bags, water - not so much the blankets and toys and clothes.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by Tobra

Uh, residents of this planet, like 99% of them.

I don't have to imagine others helping us, it happens all the time. You should maybe pay more attention to what goes on in the world. Just because we need help less than others, does not mean it is not given to us.

I remember a few years ago seeing a Canadian plane in far North end of Cali when like half the state was on fire. Told my bro, "HOLY CRAP, the Canadians are finally attacking us!"

Wow! First off, the ignorance in this thread is boggling. Asking the question doesn't mean I believe the question proposes a fact that other countries would not help us. Some of you guys need to stop jumping to conclusions. Clearly others who answered "barring" certain issues, then "no," understood me.

Secondly, Tobra, just so you know, the Canadians don't offer up the planes free. We are known to pay a hefty lease for them during fire season. So, no, not really is that assistance.

Originally Posted by Tobra

You should maybe pay more attention to what goes on in the world.

Carry on with your own advice.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by Dottore

This is a very American question. I think Americans—more than others—tend to see themselves on one side, and the rest of the world on the other. The "us and them" thing.

Once you begin to think of this planet as "spaceship earth"—the notion of another country coming to your aid in time of need is not particularly radical.

Typical projection. As expected.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by MFAFF

You might not have needed it but international aid was sent to teh US (at least from the UK) after Katrina (and help was sent after 9/11)

It was not 'relying' in the sens that the US could not/ would not have coped without it...but aid is sent to the US as well...

If the US were to ever 'reply' on overseas aid then the issue that affects the US may well be affecting the wider world and so render it impossible for other nations to send aid...

Finally, someone got it. And it takes a UK man to understand. Alright. Now the keyword was "rely."

Can you imagine, as an American, "relying" on another country after a disaster? Not being assisted, but relying.

[jyl]

dd74, you now say the "key word" in your OP was "rely" but the first sentence of that post doesn't say anything about "rely"ing. If you were trying to ask a very narrow question, you certainly could have written more clearly.

...another country coming to our aid?



Can you imagine, as an American, ever being in such a position where you would need to rely on another country for help?

[dd74]

Originally Posted by jyl

dd74, you now say the "key word" in your OP was "rely" but the first sentence of that post doesn't say anything about "rely"ing. If you were trying to ask a very narrow question, you certainly could have written more clearly.

Yeah. I suppose. Rely on another country.

Personally, I can't see us relying on another country if there was a major catastrophe here. We are far too large. Los Angeles alone would need several countries to assist it. 3 million + w/o food, water, utilities...that's a tall order.

The U.S. government surely wouldn't be able to help (for very long).