Putting things in perspective...another Guardian UK moment.

[agent_PUNT]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1382932,00.html

Here's the main point:

"The US government has so far pledged $350m to the victims of the tsunami, and the UK government £50m ($96m). The US has spent $148 billion on the Iraq war and the UK £6bn ($11.5bn). The war has been running for 656 days. This means that the money pledged for the tsunami disaster by the United States is the equivalent of one and a half day's spending in Iraq. The money the UK has given equates to five and a half days of our involvement in the war."

http://www.makepovertyhistory.org/

Thanks.

[CptPlanet]

I'm a liberal freedom hater and everything but even I don't take the Guardian fucking seriously. As far as credibility goes, it's about on par with Fox News.

[Pali]

You don't take the Guardian seriously? Even though it's one of the biggest (and well respected) broadsheet newspapers in the UK?

edit: Oh, and I do agree with the core arguement of the article even if it is stating the obvious. It's really interesting thinking about just how much money a government spends on war and international aid. When, logically, these two things are polar opposites and yet our governments try to blur the lines seperating them.

second edit: Oh and just in case you hadn't noticed, that article is in the 'comment section.' Not the 'Indisputable factual news' section.

[CptPlanet]

Do people really respect it over there? It's one of the most blatantly biased and impartial news sources I've ever seen. I agree with most of their rhetoric, but it's still rhetoric, not news.

[yugioh]

Boots, your avatar made me laugh. Thank you very much. I needed that, after tjamick's NOT FUNNY joke.

[Pali]

Originally posted by CptPlanet
Do people really respect it over there? It's one of the most blatantly biased and impartial news sources I've ever seen. I agree with most of their rhetoric, but it's still rhetoric, not news.

As I already pointed out, that was from the 'comment' section. I'll agree that most of the commentaries/editorials are fairly left-leaning, but I'd argue that the news reporting is about as unbiased as possible.

[agent_PUNT]

Originally posted by Pali
As I already pointed out, that was from the 'comment' section. I'll agree that most of the commentaries/editorials are fairly left-leaning, but I'd argue that the news reporting is about as unbiased as possible.

I have to read another countrys' newspaper to find out what's happening in another country that is not the same as that first country that i just mentioned.

That's not right

That shit ain't right.

[apotatojudge]

You think that's weird?! How about the fact that you have to watch television shows about people who don't even live in the same country as you.


I mean, I can't even imagine - Would America ever watch a show about Canadians?

[Pali]

Who said what is weird?

Those insular fucknuts.

[agent_PUNT]

Originally posted by apotatojudge
I mean, I can't even imagine - Would America ever watch a show about Canadians?

No you wouldn't.

Which is exactly why you must be American to get on the show Survivor.

But AD doesn't really harp on the family being American though... it's a side effect really... I mean other than the whole Iraq thing.... but it's not crucial to the plot is it?

Is it?

[apotatojudge]

No.


I just wanted to talk about Arrested Development.

I love your icon, Pali.

"They're laughing with me, Michael! With me!"