There has been much improvement in Africa in the last decade. Many dictaroships are now gone, and new (still weak, but there) democracies formed. There are also less wars and civil wars in Africa now than 10 yearsago. Sadly, this is not reported as often

AH

__________________
After climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb.
For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.
I detest racialism, because I regard it as a barbaric thing, whether it comes from a black man or a white man. - Nelson Mandela

That is good.

Bush's income for 2007 was $719,000 and even if he gave all of it to Africa it wouldn't make much of a difference.

Oh, I guess you meant that Bush should give MY MONEY to Africa. Hey, if I want to give my money to Africa then there are charities that I can donate it to. If I decide I don't want to give MY MONEY to Africa then Bush doesn't have the right to give it to Africa. It is MY MONEY you know.

Now if you want to give your money to African charities here is one worthy of your support:

Home*-*African charities

Or you can pick your own to donate to.

Not much but some. I am not forcing you. Then if you want to than you should donate to a charity.

Yes and no. More pragmatic and fair than anything. America cannot possibly solve the world's problems, let alone by throwing money and troops at them. So the American government should serve its own citizens just as any other government should.

Picking and choosing conflicts hasn't seemed to work either. Sometimes we try to help and it doesn't work and sometimes our "generosity" is merely looked at as favoritism (Israel).

An analogy would be this. Lets compare the American government to the head of a household, and lets further assume that the head of the household manages the finances of the house, but is not the sole breadwinner. So the bills for the people in the household are equal to or greater than the income of the residents, but these problems pale in comparison to some of the other houses on the block.

It would be selfish for the head of the household to only look after his own interests, but he has the other people in his house to look after. His allegiance is to his family, not to the other houses on the block. It would in fact be unfair if he took money from other income-earners in his house and spent it to help other households.

Yes they should look after their people, that is what is wrong with Africa. Bush doesn't need to but the African government does.

Gvernents Cange, There is no sucthing as United SAfrica, Tehre are 53 governments in the AU. So certain African governments shoulddo this (some are quiteallright).

Also, there are problems Africa can not solve onm its own. Again, like Free Trade. Like debt incurred by dictators, that did not use the money for the good of their people, and now the people got rid of those dictators, but the west still expects payment.


AH

__________________
After climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb.
For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.
I detest racialism, because I regard it as a barbaric thing, whether it comes from a black man or a white man. - Nelson Mandela

An that is where the other countries come in

This touches on most of what the US has done with Africa during President Bush's time in office:

Africa Policy

This next link provides charts that really put things into perspective. The US only spent .17% of it's gross national income on foreign aid in 2006, which is substantially less than the top five contributors. However, the US gave almost twice as much in dollars than the next country.

US and Foreign Aid Assistance - Global Issues

The ammount we spend on foreign aid is not even felt in the US. Seriously, put the IPOD down, and be thankful that at least one child may not die tonight because a very small portion of your tax dollars allowed him/her to eat.

US contributions to Africa provides aid for malaria and HIV patients. THIS is a world problem, not an Africa problem. In some of these countries, HIV is transmitted by rebel soldiers raping multiple women, further spreading this disease. This brings me to the US military part of my post.

AFRICOM, it's not just there for terrorism. The US military lost focus in Africa after 9/11. As an example, prior to that we used to make numerous trips to several countries in Africa, where we would train and equip peace keepers that were sent to various troubled regions. Some of our teams kept going to Africa after 9/11, but because we were on rotations to Afghanistan and later Iraq the JCETs were less frequently conducted. 2000 was the last time I went to Africa, I kept getting sent to Afghanistan after that.

AFRICOM and Special Operations Command Africa will bring mil to mil relations back to Africa, which will allow the JCETs to return in record numbers, which will put better trained soldiers on the ground during PKOs. The US military has also been responsible for many relief operations in the past. With a command directly focused on Africa, military aid will be easier to coordinate and faster to react in a crisis.

Anyhow, I still don't think we do enough. I seriously think we should look into debt relief for a lot of African countries as well. Some of these countries pay more in interest on their debts than what they make from exports.

Even a conversation with one of their leaders could make a difference.