What does this mean for me? You will always be able to play your favorite games on Kongregate. However, certain site features may suddenly stop working and leave you with a severely degraded experience.
What should I do? We strongly urge all our users to upgrade to modern browsers for a better experience and improved security.
We suggest you install the latest version of one of these browsers:
Kongregate is a community-driven browser games portal with an open platform for all web games.
Get your games in front of thousands of users while monetizing through ads and virtual goods.
Learn more »
I dunno is anyone has heard of this (or likely cares about) but a massive cyclone has hit Myanmar and there is likely 100,000+ people killed in it. The crap part of it: the government regime is not allowing aid for the victims. What shit! What do you kongregate people think?
Oh yeah, Newgrounds got stuff on it too: [http://wadefulp.newgrounds.com/news/post/119275](http://wadefulp.newgrounds.com/news/post/119275)
Situations like these are unfortunate on the most massive of scale. The UN ceased it’s aide because the early supplies were hijacked by military dogs of the government, never reaching the people in need.
Unfortunately, in cases such as Myanmar, the conditions will not improve until the people of the country are able to rise up and improve things for themselves. For these sorts of revolutions to happen, hundreds of thousands or more may die in the process. For each country that must overcome a broken and corrupt concentration of power this is often true. Unfortunately, if we resort to ideas like developed nations deposing of Myanmar’s dictators, we will simply create a different kind of unrest. For a country to truly experience stability, it must change itself — slowly and gradually, and often with much suffering as we have seen this week.
In many cases, all we can do is watch.
[Berlin airlift 2](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7392493.stm) is on the cards.
Governments of one country shouldn’t give money to other governments, since that is not what they were elected to do – unless they have a a humanitarian imperative in their manifesto. However, if a lot of people want to help out another country, their government should try to make it easier for them, even if it is only to get their vote at the next election.
Why air lift food and aid if you are not also airlifting soldiers and guns to ensure it’s delivery? The Myanmar military will seize anything we send in, and keep it for themselves or use it to wield power over the people in desperation.
You do not need to win elections when you are the only one’s with weapons.
> Why air lift food and aid if you are not also airlifting soldiers and guns to ensure it’s delivery? The Myanmar military will seize anything we send in, and keep it for themselves or use it to wield power over the people in desperation.
At worst, all the food and aid sent in will be a waste. I doubt their military can seize everything sent in, so at least it would have some positive effect.
> You do not need to win elections when you are the only one’s with weapons.
I was talking about people in other countries wanting to send aid, and what their politicians should do about it.
The situation in Myanmar is terrible; I have a friend who graduated from Medical School there in 1985 and he was one of the lucky ones who could flee the regime. He is sad now since many of his family and former friends who stayed behind likely died or came close to it. Many in that country are starving already and the cyclone made things worse. If the people aren’t fleeing, then perhaps the government is forcing them to stay. I don’t think it would take very much to overthrow the regime there.
On an additional note, the current president in America really dropped the ball; future jokes that compare his Katrina efforts to Myanmar’s are currently inevitable and unfortunately will be accurate. Of course, the Burma cyclone was far more devastating than Katrina, but the sad question is would Bush have responded better to a bigger storm? The answer is no.
Both websites I’ve been to today [Google](http://www.google.com) and [MSN](http://www.msn.com) have links to where you can donate to Myanmar victims. Though I’m not sure how they’re getting the money there if aid is being refused…
I personally think that if we actually HAD to pay to help them (via our government) it would be really stupid. I really don’t think I would donate because it wouldn’t help them anyway. If you want to, fine with me.
> It is called Hurricaine Katrina. Personally, I thought it was an awful idea to send in government assistance. It led to scandals, more disappointment at the slowness of releif, and a lot of money burned on what should have been paid by insurance either. It was basically the government ensuring people on a large scale.
Wow. Seriously, that’s just absurd. I _might_ see how you could think that we shouldn’t bother ourselves with the problems of other countries (I disagree, but I can see your point). But Katrina was our own country. The government’s primary purpose, like the police, is to protect and serve its citizens. Outside of war-time defense, I can’t think of a much better use of government resources than the relief of a disaster area. Of course, such relief should be as timely as possible, but I can’t see how you can claim that “scandals and disappointment” would justify not sending in our support to Louisiana.
The insurance industry is horrible corrupt; they reneged on 9/11 and Katrina, they will continue to do so in the future. Plus, much outsourcing of Katrina labor and rebuilding occured. Such outsourcing is absurd considering our weakened economy and the real need for jobs. If the private sector won’t employ people in Louisiana, the government should step in. Also, if a Democrat was in the White House, Blackwater wouldn’t have taken to the streets of New Orleans shooting black people. That was a clearly illegal and racist action and I condemn it 100%. Corporate paramilitaries shouldn’t even operate in the USA anyways. Our Congress has 6 investigations into the UN Oil for Food Scandal yet nobody is working on anything bad the Bush Administration has done!
I hate to go OT however I don’t have much to add to what I said earlier. Some aid may be getting in however it is not enough.
While I don’t know the details of how the money was distributed, and you may well be right, I don’t think that’s justification for not helping. Perhaps the system needs to be reworked, and that’s fine. But to claim that we shouldn’t help those in need after a natural disaster, especially in our own country, it just unnecessarily callous and poor policy.