First world governments giving financial aid to third world countries.

I would now like to provide some refutation and present some of my own contentions. Foreign aid is given to the governments of these 3rd world countries. That is correct; the money is given to the government. Firstly, if you look at my uncontested definition, in no part does it say that the money must go to the people. A government’s responsibility is to its people. The fact that money goes into expanding a military is still foreign aid, no one would deny that a strong military is important. The fact that the US provided money to various countries is a strong example of how financial aid has improved a country. Financial aid doesn’t always have to be for building schools, or purifying water, financial aid to improve a military is justifiable and acceptable. Another example is in 2002 the king of Swaziland used the foreign aid that he received to buy a royal jet. As I have already said, foreign aid doesn’t have to go to the people. If you look at the definition I put forth (which went uncontested by my opponent) the royal jet may have actually increased the growth of the country. The king then had a royal jet, thus he was happier. A happier king is a better king. Furthermore, a single example cannot be used to condemn foreign aid. Other countries receiving foreign aid have benefitted greatly: Germany to Ghana – Free primary education for all Italy to Mozambique – Increased health care UK to Nepal – Free health care and maternal health [1] Foreign aid hasn’t changed a countries status. Foreign aid has helped millions of people, as I have shown above. The fact that the country hasn’t changed in status means nothing as the point of foreign aid is to help the country get through rough times. For example, would my opponent not give foreign aid to Haiti after the massive earthquake and thus condemn a country to death? Another example is the UN have put 25 billion dollars to fight AIDS/HIV in Africa, yet AIDS prevalence in Africa has nearly doubled in the past 10 years. I don’t know where my opponent is getting his statistics as AIDS/HIV in Africa has steadily been dropping, in fact, coffin makers in Southern Africa are going out of business because not enough people are dying of AIDS. [2] Foreign aid is extremely effective in increasing the standards of life in these developing countries. The system we use now is entirely inefficient. My opponent is suggesting this, instead of changing up our system of transporting the aid we should give up aid entirely. Instead of shipping on American carriers, ship on European. Convoys containing these supplies can be guarded, free food not left out in the open for anyone to take, but to be rationed out appropriately. This is easily refuted. Foreign aid enables dictators to depend on foreign aid to feed the people, while diverting domestic money to buying weapons and maintaining an army that enhances dictatorship. But the country benefits. Any form of government is superior to no form, a dictatorship is not necessarily wrong, but in this case the foreign aid maintains a government in the countries. C1: FOREIGN AID SAVES LIVES American aid to African countries have saved countless people from dying from AIDS/HIV. Foreign aid provides medications to extend the lifespan, food to stave famine, and stability to counteract chaos. None of this is deniable, without food to Haiti would the population have survived? No. Without foreign aid, there would be far more deaths, far more famines, and far more chaos. My opponent is a proponent of the second option. C2: FOREIGN AID GETS COUNTRIES ONTO THEIR FEET Without intervention in Haiti, the country would have been cut off at the knees. With foreign aid, Haiti looks like it’s on its way to recovery. Without foreign aid, the county and it’s people would have been condemned to death. This is not acceptable. Foreign aid has been the life vest keeping drowning countries afloat, the fortunate giving to the less fortunate. Cutting foreign aid is puncturing that life vest, countries around the world will sink. I have refuted my opponent’s arguments and brought forth some of my own. Thus, it is clear for VOTERS TO VOTE PRO. SOURCES . http://www.oxfam.org... . http://www.nytimes.com...