Myers (again) on Uganda 'development aid'

thebigbiffo

Yeah yeah yeah - Myers is a troll but sometimes he so hits the nail on the head - and he did it again today.

The column doesn't seem to be on the Indo website as yet but it's from todays edition and I'll simplify it for you...it'll save the tl;dr's anyway.

Uganda have just taken delivery of the first 2 of their 6 brand spanking new supersonic Sukhoi Su-30MK2 jet fighters which specialize and were designed for 'anti-shipping' use - basically naval warfare and sea border protection - total cost €512m. Now, Uganda are landlocked. They share Lake Victoria with Tanzania and Kenya, but I dont think they need worry too much about hostility emerging from either.

This year Irish Aid (that's the mug taxpayer for the uninformed) will contribute €166m over 5 years (€33.2m per year) to Uganda in development aid, 66% goes to the government, 29% to civil society and 4% to other UN organisations - that money's going to have to be borrowed so that means that with interest the real cost to me and you could be €300m (Myers calculations).

Irish Aid say the money is 'ringfenced against corruption' - which I dont buy for a second - but as Myers points out, what we're essentially doing is freeing up Ugandan government resources so they can buy fighter jets they probably wont need.

This sickens my arse for want of a better term. I wont go in to what I would like to see done with the money for fear of seeming selfish but sufffice it to say we certainly have many of our own problems that €300m would cover off nicely. Starving kids is one thing (even though we know half of it is robbed, at least starving kids are getting half the food) but financing the 'development' of a landlocked nation's sea protection capability seems completely and utterly stupid.

Got your goat AH?

First poster to say mention banks or bailouts gets a visit from facekicker.

stovelid

OUTRAGEOUS WEST BRIT.


What is the article about anyway?

CardBordWindow

thebigbiffo wrote: »

Yeah yeah yeah - Myers is a troll but sometimes he so hits the nail on the head - and he did it again today.

The column doesn't seem to be on the Indo website as yet but it's from todays edition and I'll simplify it for you...it'll save the tl;dr's anyway.

Uganda have just taken delivery of the first 2 of their 6 brand spanking new supersonic Sukhoi Su-30MK2 jet fighters which specialize and were designed for 'anti-shipping' use - basically naval warfare and sea border protection - total cost €512m. Now, Uganda are landlocked. They share Lake Victoria with Tanzania and Kenya, but I dont think they need worry too much about hostility emerging from either.

This year Irish Aid (that's the mug taxpayer for the uninformed) will contribute €166m over 5 years (€33.2m per year) to Uganda in development aid, 66% goes to the government, 29% to civil society and 4% to other UN organisations - that money's going to have to be borrowed so that means that with interest the real cost to me and you could be €300m (Myers calculations).

Irish Aid say the money is 'ringfenced against corruption' - which I dont buy for a second - but as Myers points out, what we're essentially doing is freeing up Ugandan government resources so they can buy fighter jets they probably wont need.

This sickens my arse for want of a better term. I wont go in to what I would like to see done with the money for fear of seeming selfish but sufffice it to say we certainly have many of our own problems that €300m would cover off nicely. Starving kids is one thing (even though we know half of it is robbed, at least starving kids are getting half the food) but financing the 'development' of a landlocked nation's sea protection capability seems completely and utterly stupid.

Got your goat AH?

First poster to say mention banks or bailouts gets a visit from facekicker.

Mike Myers was an OGRE in shrek!

sollar

thebigbiffo wrote: »

Yeah yeah yeah - Myers is a troll but sometimes he so hits the nail on the head - and he did it again today.

I don't buy this troll thing with him. He is a journalist, he writes with an interesting perspective and is not a PC whore like so many these days.

I tend to agree with alot of what he says. Sometimes he over eggs it but he is right again on this piece imo.

thebigbiffo

sollar wrote: »

I don't buy this troll thing with him. He is a journalist, he writes with an interesting perspective and is not a PC whore like so many these days.

I tend to agree with alot of what he says. Sometimes he over eggs it but he is right again on this piece imo.

that's pretty accurate and is probably what I meant! sometimes he does go overboard and you can tell when he hasn't found anything juicy - but he hits on stuff like this at times and you wonder why it's not front page news in every paper and causing a complete uproar! why is that!?

pickarooney

Doesn't every country spend silly money on toys while its people starve?

thebigbiffo

pickarooney wrote: »

Doesn't every country spend silly money on toys while its people starve?

possibly - but it's not normally my money.

I was in Uganda a few weeks ago. It is a very corrupt country. Government officials and their cronies live like kings while the average person struggles to survive. It's like a more extreme version of Ireland.

There is no doubt that many of the citizens need aid, but this aid should be delivered through NGOs who work on the ground. Giving money to the Ugandan government (or pretty much any African government) is pointless and serves only to increase the gap between the rich and the poor.

Wibbs

pickarooney wrote: »

Doesn't every country spend silly money on toys while its people starve?

Yea P but it's another level of surreal when another country borrows money to give it to them to do so.

stateofflux

sollar wrote: »

I don't buy this troll thing with him. He is a journalist, he writes with an interesting perspective and is not a PC whore like so many these days.

I tend to agree with alot of what he says. Sometimes he over eggs it but he is right again on this piece imo.

i agree, id rather him than some of the other pro FF lacky journo's in the indo with no backbone.

spank_inferno

So we are borrowing money to give to one of the most corrupt nations in the world allowing them to use other resources to purchase Air-to-sea attack aircraft.... despite that country being landlocked.

Compared to the 22 billion we gave to Anglo... its almost sensible expenditure.

Sooopie

sollar wrote: »

I don't buy this troll thing with him. He is a journalist, he writes with an interesting perspective and is not a PC whore like so many these days.

I tend to agree with alot of what he says. Sometimes he over eggs it but he is right again on this piece imo.

amen!!!

orourkeda

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEeQEYuvvCA

thebigbiffo

spank_inferno wrote: »

So we are borrowing money to give to one of the most corrupt nations in the world allowing them to use other resources to purchase Air-to-sea attack aircraft.... despite that country being landlocked.

Compared to the 22 billion we gave to Anglo... its almost sensible expenditure.

you were warned, PM sent to facekicker so god have mercy on your face...

Irish Aid had a budget of 671m last year and 33m went to Uganda - that's 5% of their total budget gone to help fund an expansion of their military. I'm guessing the vast majority went to African countries where it went straight to the pockets of wealthy politicians and corrupt businessmen - yet, we as a people seem to think hundreds of millions of our money should be pumped in to these places even though it's very clear they do not have the same value about their own people that we do.

Myers talks in the article about Somalis where he says the culture is almost of a complete disregard for human life. Life means nothing. This with reports that up to 50% of aid reaching Somalia is stolen and sold locally makes me think we're simply stupid. If the culture out there is like that, pumping money and commodities at them wont change a thing. maybe education/religion or something will!

This ties in well to something i've been thinking recently too - have you seen the reports of the women who've been leaving their babies on the side of the road because they can't feed them and are trying to reach camps or whatever? In the context of their culture/way of thinking, i think it migtht just show how they do not put the sanme value on life as we do. I dont think anything could make me leave one of my children on the side of the road and walk away - i couldn't do it. i'd collapse myself and die beside them first. just a thought...but are we not trying to teach a fish to climb a tree with all this aid?

pickarooney

thebigbiffo wrote: »

possibly - but it's not normally my money.

Money that was just resting in your account surely. Technically my money.

Dionysus

sollar wrote: »

I don't buy this troll thing with him. He is ... not a PC whore like so many these days.

I tend to agree with alot of what he says. Sometimes he over eggs it but he is right again on this piece imo.

When you grow up, you'll get it. Some of us have been around long enough to be familiar with his record.

Education also helps when it comes to assessing his pro-British/anti-Irish trolling. For example, this is, after all, a (British born and bred) person who in Irish newspapers glorifies the Irish-born people who died fighting for the British Empire and calls those Irish people who fought against that British Empire for the freedom of Ireland "terrorists" (that includes those in Easter 1916). If Myers had his way, we'd still be under British colonial occupation.

Really, do you want to associate yourself with such a person?

FlutterinBantam

stovelid wrote: »

OUTRAGEOUS WEST BRIT.


What is the article about anyway?

Reality, horse, reality, something most of the posters in here know fcuk all about.

:mad:

It BeeMee

So it'll take us just over 15 years to own the whole jet fighter?

FlutterinBantam

Dionysus wrote: »

When you grow up, you'll get it. Some of us have been around long enough to be familiar with his record.

Education also helps when it comes to assessing his pro-British/anti-Irish trolling. For example, this is, after all, a (British born and bred) person who in Irish newspapers glorifies the Irish-born people who died fighting for the British Empire and calls those Irish people who fought against that British Empire for the freedom of Ireland "terrorists" (that includes those in Easter 1916). If Myers had his way, we'd still be under British colonial occupation.

Really, do you want to associate yourself with such a person?

I do actually, lad actually breaks though the crust of leftie agenda and tells it as it is, most of the time.

Cuts through the stuff most people are afraid to say for fear of coming under attack from the left.

The punters like the 'lovable elf' MDH would squirm in their red thigh boots with some of the home truths this lad stands by.

I spent a lot of time in Uganda, the big MO was the main man and I can safely say nothing happened without a major greasing of palms.

So don't tell me what Mr Myers is truthfully saying.

Spot on Kev.

Sooopie

I like the way he winds people up if am honest!

FlutterinBantam

Sooopie wrote: »

I like the way he winds people up if am honest!

How is he winding people up?

sollar

Dionysus wrote: »

When you grow up, you'll get it. Some of us have been around long enough to be familiar with his record.

Education also helps when it comes to assessing his pro-British/anti-Irish trolling. For example, this is, after all, a (British born and bred) person who in Irish newspapers glorifies the Irish-born people who died fighting for the British Empire and calls those Irish people who fought against that British Empire for the freedom of Ireland "terrorists" (that includes those in Easter 1916). If Myers had his way, we'd still be under British colonial occupation.

Really, do you want to associate yourself with such a person?

So is that all you can come up with... some republican tripe about him being pro British. Pull yourself together and maybe do a bit of growing up yourself.

dsmythy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

How is he winding people up?

He has good points but he could soften his words but I suspect deliberately doesn't. Then again why should he when he gets so many outraged people sending hits towards the site

mikemac

Now I'm no General but a landlocked country buying supersonic aircraft for anti-shipping and naval warfare?

FlutterinBantam

dsmythy wrote: »

He has good points but he could soften his words but I suspect deliberately doesn't. Then again why should he when he gets so many outraged people sending hits towards the site

The only 'outraged' people he kicks from under their slates are people who think that they don't need to contribute to survive.

Those, and the coterie who embed themselves in jobs funded by the nation and then use that position to promote left wing rhetoric, safe in the knowledge that they never will have to endure the stalags.

You know who you are:D

Nodin

sollar wrote: »

So is that all you can come up with... some republican tripe about him being pro British. Pull yourself together and maybe do a bit of growing up yourself.

I'm unclear here - are you saying he didn't write those articles?

Do you agree with his other articles, such as his lament for the lack of 'caucasian faces' in london? That Africa contributes nothing to the World except AIDs?

Do you agree with his description of the children of single mothers as "bastards"?

obplayer

thebigbiffo wrote: »

Yeah yeah yeah - Myers is a troll but sometimes he so hits the nail on the head - and he did it again today.

The column doesn't seem to be on the Indo website as yet but it's from todays edition and I'll simplify it for you...it'll save the tl;dr's anyway.

Uganda have just taken delivery of the first 2 of their 6 brand spanking new supersonic Sukhoi Su-30MK2 jet fighters which specialize and were designed for 'anti-shipping' use - basically naval warfare and sea border protection - total cost €512m. Now, Uganda are landlocked. They share Lake Victoria with Tanzania and Kenya, but I dont think they need worry too much about hostility emerging from either.

This year Irish Aid (that's the mug taxpayer for the uninformed) will contribute €166m over 5 years (€33.2m per year) to Uganda in development aid, 66% goes to the government, 29% to civil society and 4% to other UN organisations - that money's going to have to be borrowed so that means that with interest the real cost to me and you could be €300m (Myers calculations).

Irish Aid say the money is 'ringfenced against corruption' - which I dont buy for a second - but as Myers points out, what we're essentially doing is freeing up Ugandan government resources so they can buy fighter jets they probably wont need.

This sickens my arse for want of a better term. I wont go in to what I would like to see done with the money for fear of seeming selfish but sufffice it to say we certainly have many of our own problems that €300m would cover off nicely. Starving kids is one thing (even though we know half of it is robbed, at least starving kids are getting half the food) but financing the 'development' of a landlocked nation's sea protection capability seems completely and utterly stupid.

Got your goat AH?

First poster to say mention banks or bailouts gets a visit from facekicker.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-why-should-we-burden-our-unborn-generations-with-debt-to-finance-fighter-jets-in-uganda-2851161.html

--Kaiser--

Nodin wrote: »

Do you agree with his description of the children of single mothers as "bastards"?

Ummm..... the dictionary definition of a bastard is a child of a single mother

Dionysus

sollar wrote: »

So is that all you can come up with... some republican tripe about him being pro British. Pull yourself together and maybe do a bit of growing up yourself.

hehe. Myers would be among the first to concede he is, in fact, pro-British when it comes to judging people who fight for Irish freedom versus people who fight for the British Empire. You can keep your head in the sand there all you like about the guy's views on Irish people who fought for Irish freedom, and lambast those of us who highlight it. It doesn't really change the reality that is Myers' hatred for the very concept of Irish separatism from the British Empire, and contempt for all Irish people who fought against British rule in this country.

PS: "republican tripe" (ha!), when it's of the Irish variety, is infinitely better any day than the imperialist tripe for which your hero Myers is known.
It's an odd state of affairs that somebody who claims to be Irish, as I presume you do, could think otherwise.

Badgermonkey

Dionysus wrote: »

PS: "republican tripe" (ha!), when it's of the Irish variety, is infinitely better any day than the imperialist tripe for which your hero Myers is known.
It's an odd state of affairs that somebody who claims to be Irish, as I presume you do, could think otherwise.

To paraphrase Mrs. Thatch tripe is tripe is tripe.

A mawkish and uncritical indulgence in the cult of the fallen is oft spouted by Myers and members of Real/Continuity Boards.ie.:D

Wibbs

Dionysus wrote: »

When you grow up, you'll get it.

A phrase almost always associated with those who would be best looking in the mirror when they say it.

Regardless... if a devil tells you the sky is blue, it doesn't detract from the blueness of the sky. I don't agree with myers on many many things and even those areas with some common agreement I find him a low grade troll in the telling.

In this case I agree with him. It's a waste of money. It's a waste of money we are borrowing to waste and it's money that will be wasted on people who it's not aimed at. Hey if what passes for the "left" these days thinking that "it's good we're sending money, it doesn't matter how or where it ends up, it's the thought that counts, because it's going to de black babies after all", then knock yourselves out.

Dionysus

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

lad actually breaks though the crust of leftie agenda and tells it as it is

What, pray tell, is this "leftie agenda"? Yes, I'm aware it has resonance in certain less-than-intelligent sections of society in the United States, but in modern Ireland or Europe what is it?

sollar

Nodin wrote: »

I'm unclear here - are you saying he didn't write those articles?

Do you agree with his other articles, such as his lament for the lack of 'caucasian faces' in london? That Africa contributes nothing to the World except AIDs?

Do you agree with his description of the children of single mothers as "bastards"?

If you look back at my post i said i tend to agree with alot of what he says. But that does not mean all of what he says.

Wibbs

sollar wrote: »

If you look back at my post i said i tend to agree with alot of what he says. But that does not mean all of what he says.

Oh oh you've confused him now.

mackg

Dionysus wrote: »

What, pray tell, is this "leftie agenda"? Yes, I'm aware it has resonance in certain less-than-intelligent sections of society in the United States, but in modern Ireland or Europe what is it?

For all her god and family talk I bet she's a dirty bi*ch in bed

SamHarris

Nodin wrote: »

I'm unclear here - are you saying he didn't write those articles?

Do you agree with his other articles, such as his lament for the lack of 'caucasian faces' in london? That Africa contributes nothing to the World except AIDs?

Do you agree with his description of the children of single mothers as "bastards"?

Bastards is the correct term is it not?

I think the guys point was just because he has opinions you disagree with, or uses terms you do not like does not mean he is wrong.

SamHarris

Dionysus wrote: »

What, pray tell, is this "leftie agenda"? Yes, I'm aware it has resonance in certain less-than-intelligent sections of society in the United States, but in modern Ireland or Europe what is it?

Leftie agenda is a flippant phrase but there certainly is alot of pet issues that the left/right holds in common and certain topics that people will be routinely attacked for if they bring it up, the massive corruption of African countries who get our aid and use it on weapons is one of them.

That Muslim terrorists are moticated by religion is another (its usualy economics or Wesetern Imperialism to the far left). After the riots the "agenda" would be blaming policy and greedy capitalist society for the behaviour was common in left wing publications.

It is common to for them to have the same people they hold in contempt, for example Sarah Palin or George Bush. I think "agenda" may be a bad word for it, but the far left and far right both often have common themes and criticisms running through publications.

mikemac

Nodin wrote: »

Do you agree with his description of the children of single mothers as "bastards"?

Pick up a law book, still used

As is illegitimate

Dionysus

Wibbs wrote: »

It's a waste of money. It's a waste of money we are borrowing to waste and it's money that will be wasted on people who it's not aimed at. Hey if what passes for the "left" these days thinking that "it's good we're sending money, it doesn't matter how or where it ends up, it's the thought that counts, because it's going to de black babies after all", then knock yourselves out.

In fairness, long before Myers jumped on that particular bandwagon many people involved in charity work in Africa - most noticeably John O'Shea - had been saying the same about funding corrupt regimes. It's not rocket science, and Myers is not being some amazing radical with "his" ideas. He's taking a position, ignoring everything which doesn't suit it and is essentially being a polemicist.

Moreover, and this is the rub, I wonder would Mr Myers be keen on, say, Shell pulling out of Nigeria until the régime which they support hugely there reforms itself - or is it OK for "the West" to take billions out of corrupt African regimes for as long as they can get away with it? Does the problem for Myers and his ilk only arise when it is "the West" putting money into African countries which are led by kleptocracies? I have yet to hear him ranting about Western firms ripping off underdeveloped countries.

Behind all the bullshit trotted out by Myers and his ilk, what's the betting that western governments continue to give funding to such states because other areas of the same western economies are benefiting from "investments" in the very same countries which naive Myers-reading, Independent-reading Westerners believe the West is merely helping?

Corkblowin

Dionysus wrote: »

Moreover, and this is the rub, I wonder would Mr Myers be keen on, say, Shell pulling out of Nigeria until the régime which they support hugely there reforms itself - or is it OK for "the West" to take billions out of corrupt African regimes for as long as they can get away with it? Does the problem for Myers and his ilk only arise when it is "the West" putting money into African countries which are led by kleptocracies? I have yet to hear him ranting about Western firms ripping off underdeveloped countries?

Isn't that a different debate. The issue here is taxpayers money going as aid to a country which chooses to spend it's own money on seemingly mismatched military hardware. What private companies do with their money & investments is their own business.

Dionysus

Corkblowin wrote: »

Isn't that a different debate. The issue here is taxpayers money going as aid to a country which chooses to spend it's own money on seemingly mismatched military hardware. What private companies do with their money & investments is their own business.

Would that it were true. In reality governments lobby on behalf of, subsidise and extract enormous sums of tax revenue from what their corporations do abroad, and even go to war if necessary to defend those "national" economic interests. It is very far from a "different debate". It is people like Myers who'd like to separate both and portray corporations as independent actors whose successes or failures have no influence on how national governments shape their policies in the countries in question.

Corkblowin

Dionysus wrote: »

Would that it were true. In reality governments lobby on behalf of, subsidise and extract enormous sums of tax revenue from what their corporations do abroad, and even go to war if necessary to defend those "national" economic interests. It is very far from a "different debate". It is people like Myers who'd like to separate both and portray corporations as independent actors whose successes or failures have no influence on how national governments shape their policies in the countries in question.

I don't think shell have much need for lobbying from the Irish government or that we're going to go to war to defend the interests of guinness. You're arguing on a tangent which has nothing to do with the question. Why should Ireland borrow money to give to a country that's doing non-essential spending? I don't believe we should.

Pace2008

mikemac wrote: »

Pick up a law book, still used

Whether or not it's a legitimate term in law, it still carries serious negative connotations, hence it's frequent use as a pejorative. Myers is no fool and he was not being blunt or forthright, he was deliberately trying to offend a group for whom he feels distaste.

I understand he later issued an apology, whether as a result of his own conscience, a command from higher up, or in fear for his own safety (he claims he was issued death threats over the article), we will never know.

ascanbe

Myers, as usual, dangles the carrot in front of the donkeys and the donkeys set off after it, braying, as usual, about 'lefty, pc-loonies' etc as they go.
Of course there is a kernel of truth in what Myers writes, he's not a dummy; he knows he has to have a string on which to attach the carrot.
Of course, as usual, he knows he can choose to completely ignore the context of the situation, as the donkeys have no interest in this.
And one would have to wonder why, in the context of all that's happening at the moment, why this particular subject exercises him to such a degree.
But, of course, his agenda isn't really about aid to Uganda or Ireland's aid-budget in general; and some of the donkeys are well aware of this.

Yitzhak Rabin

ascanbe wrote: »

Myers, as usual, dangles the carrot in front of the donkeys and the donkeys set off after it, braying, as usual, about 'lefty, pc-loonies' etc as they go.
Of course there is a kernel of truth in what Myers writes, he's not a dummy; he knows he has to have a string on which to attach the carrot.
Of course, as usual, he knows he can choose to completely ignore the context of the situation, as the donkeys have no interest in this.
And one would have to wonder why, in the context of all that's happening at the moment, why this particular subject exercises him to such a degree.
But, of course, his agenda isn't really about aid to Uganda or Ireland's aid-budget in general; and some of the donkeys are well aware of this.

Any opinion on Ireland borrowing money to give it to Uganda while they buy naval fighter jets?

ascanbe

yekahS wrote: »

Any opinion on Ireland borrowing money to give it to Uganda while they buy naval fighter jets?

I think it's wrong.

starbelgrade

Dionysus wrote: »

When you grow up, you'll get it. Some of us have been around long enough to be familiar with his record.

Education also helps when it comes to assessing his pro-British/anti-Irish trolling. For example, this is, after all, a (British born and bred) person who in Irish newspapers glorifies the Irish-born people who died fighting for the British Empire and calls those Irish people who fought against that British Empire for the freedom of Ireland "terrorists" (that includes those in Easter 1916). If Myers had his way, we'd still be under British colonial occupation.

Really, do you want to associate yourself with such a person?

What did you eat this morning when you woke up - a big bowl of smugness?

obplayer

Dionysus wrote: »

hehe. Myers would be among the first to concede he is, in fact, pro-British when it comes to judging people who fight for Irish freedom versus people who fight for the British Empire. You can keep your head in the sand there all you like about the guy's views on Irish people who fought for Irish freedom, and lambast those of us who highlight it. It doesn't really change the reality that is Myers' hatred for the very concept of Irish separatism from the British Empire, and contempt for all Irish people who fought against British rule in this country.

No, Myers is not against Ireland gaining freedom from Britain, he simply believes it was in the process of happening anyway and would have without the bloodshed if the hard lines had allowed it to happen.

Pdfile

i think you ALL need to realise...


Uganda bought these planes, despite being landlocked at a bargain price... they can easily be re-equipped for Any tank purposes and well... Every country needs a military.

Simple as lads... though i know we are paying for it..

could be worse... Their could be no genocides and the world gets over populated.

Richard Hillman

When America gives aid its strings attached to benefit themselves. We and our collection of left wing posing as right governments just seem to give stuff away willy nilly.

Amhran Nua

SamHarris wrote: »

does not mean he is wrong.

This is Myers were talking about, whose face appears beside "fail" in the dictionary.