I see that many Iranians are unhappy with US aid to Bam. Was it inappropriate for us to send them aid? Should we just ignore problems in countries where we are not wanted? Was it possibly even a case of throwing pearls before swine?

I wouldn't mind seeing us step back in cases where we are not wanted. Let them fend for themselves once in a while and see if they are so cocky. They hate us so bad, but they always accept the $$ and aid.

I know there are times when it is necessary for us to step in, but would like to see us actually step back every now and again.

I think it's good to put politics aside and show compassion for our fellow man, no matter where they are.

Aid should extend past the political bounaries... if we ignored their need we be no better than they thought of us already.

But aid them or ignore them, they will still dislike you. Very sad but I think it's the case.

And can we as fellow humans live with that? I can, I'd sleep better at night knowing we helped those in need.

True, but IMHO it goes to show that some motivations are not truly based on a countries' actions.

While I do agree with what you guys are saying, I would just once like to see us not jump in right away. I would like to see the reaction. Not so much to a disaster situation, maybe more a political one.

Then lets see all the anti-American people bitching that we are not there. We cannot win either way and that is the point. We are putting our noses where they don't belong or we are ignoring and not helping people.

That is the part that gets me.

Valid points on both sides here.
One point that stands out: Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
That's the way it will always be. If you go in to help, you have a hidden agenda. If you don't go in, you are rich heartless bass turds with no empathy. There will always be detractors of the country that has the best economy and a democratic process.

Therefore:
1). Wait and see doesn't work. Why? Because it affects the people that are the least political for the most part.
2). You cannot change the minds of subjugated or fearful people, and certainly not overnight or with a one time aid package.
3). Continuous aid is useless. And has been proven to be so. Setting up schools and educating people as to their choices is a better option. Not perfect, but better.
4). No one program will be the solution to every problem. It takes analysis and savvy to devise the best programs and modes/methods of initiation.
5). The best program is one that is controlled by a neutral body. That way the possibility of "corruption" by the giver is removed and the political opportunists are deprived of a target.
6). Accountability in all operational phases is a must. From stem to stern and top to bottom. The money/aid/program must be delivered to its intended target at the proposed level for the proposed duration without skimming, bakseesh being in operation.
7). Any interference by politicals in the host country wrt the process must be dealt with immediately and without discrimination. A codicil and contract for aid should so stipulate that any interference for the sake of meeting a political objective of the host country will void said aid/program and jepordize any future aid. Something for the political monkeys in power to chew on.
8.) Inclusion of indigenous peoples and locals with said aid project is a must and has to be realistic.
9). Timely progress reports must be made available asap to continue the flow of aid and help in fine tuning the "product" for not only the current project but for future refernce and analysis.
10). Ask three times if you help is wanted. If you receive 3 answers of no, it is then up to the individuals in charge to determine the best route to take. As with all things on a compressed timeline, secondary and tertiary plans should be available.
Overall, in essence this aid is not a gov't to gov't issue but a people to people issue. We should never forget that.

I'm not surprised.
Had we just dropped a package of aide off, saying in effect "You need not ask, I know you need help" so here", we would have been remiss in our duty to try to open up a dialog further. We tried. Missed opportunity.
I guess we didn't read the situation right, they didn't buy it. Yet.
Considering our past relations with Iran it's no surprise.
All things considered though, I almost have more faith in Iran turning around on their own, than I do the approach that we've taken in Iraq.

I think we should have been quicker to offer rescue help, but the aid offer was more a political move, rather than humanitarian gesture.
I don't believe Iran needs our money and certainly not a public/publisized visit from our senators. Given that bush designated Iran part of the "axis of evil" only a couple years ago, I can see why the offer, along with the strongly implied obligation to be show public gratitude, was refused.
The moderate political groups in Iran are slowly returning to power and certainly do not need to be seen as friends of the US.
The Red crescent/red cross are perfectly capable of handling the situation without offical US help.

All I wanted was for us to "leave the package at the door" and go on. No strings attached guys, you needed help - here it is, have a nice day.

Just offer the help and if they say 'no' then fair enough as you had already asked them if they want help....

High ideals and good ideas there Burner.

Unfortunately human and political nature would take whatever approach and twist it to their personal & political gain. Maybe I'm just a wizened cynic?

The heartless ba$tard in me would take the continually expressed wish that the west not interfere in other region's affairs at face value and spend the aid money on our own internal problems. There are certainly plenty of those to go at.

Perhaps foreign aid should come from individual's charitable donations and government money spent only on the country that paid the taxes?

High heels and good round rears???? WTF are you on about Gaz????

<rubs sleep from eyes>

Oh, my bad - sorry. Yeah, let Bill Gates or that jerk from Tyco spill some bling-bling to their fa-zizzle.

Burner made a good point, problem is the the people who really need the help generaly dont give a rats ass about politics or worry about wheather they like or dislike Americans. They are hungry, homeless, and in many cases in need of medical care. If we hold back cause of our polictical views, they are the ones that suffer....not the true trouble makers.

Thank you bigness. That IS the whole point, unfortunatley all the other shizzle wades in and muddies the proverbial waters. We, N.A., as a loving, giving group have to rise above those petty politics and the knee jerk hatred that we receive for some of our efforts. Isn't it heartbreaking how countries can and do act like jealous 3 year olds to the detriment of their own people??? Some politiicos real need a swift kick up the backside. And the sooner the better.