>>>>Sometimes I just don't agree with you Dragan. I don't doubt the U.S. administration might be trying to use this situation to its advantage to improve the world's view of this country (given the world's current low opinion of this country). Still, that is similar to a man who earns one million a year needing to improve his public image donating 50,000 to a family in poverty and with starving children. If the family refuses the help because they don't want to help improve the man's image then the children are the one's who suffer - all for the parents' pride. Just plain wrong. It is not just the U.S. whose help is being refused - there are many relief organizations standing by waiting for approval to enter the country. the scale of devastation is unbelievable - not anything this bad since 1991.
>>>>
>>>>I am surprised that you focus not on the devastation and that country refusing aid, but rather on any hidden agenda of those willing to offer it. Is everyone there standing on the corner stating 'Don't help me, you might have a hidden agenda - I'd rather suffer and starve?'
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>I agree. The US and other countries and organizations are offering disaster assistance. If the government of Burma doesn't want it, don't blame the US (or Bush). Their people will suffer, but not for lack of ready and available world help.
>>
>>BTW - Is this a sinister US plot? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354677,00.html
>
>
>What food do they have to give? Is it possible to eat oil or sand now? ;-)

They could buy a food producing country. They could buy an airline or navy or truck manufacturer to distribute. They could contribute $$ as the UN and other agencies are asking. They could buy Burma and move the entire country to someplace dry.