100,000 Dead in Burma?

[PM Thor]

I know we will never know the real count of dead, but this is simply horrific. The military junta in charge of Myanmar (I type Burma, it's easier) is not making it easy to help in any way either.

And to top it off, the estimates are saying 1,000,000 people are possibly homeless. The aftermath and deaths of this cyclone are just going to increase, sadly. This is just truly a disaster of epic size.http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/05/07/myanmar.aidcyclone/index.html

[Juice]

The worst part is that the Burmese government could care less. This is probably viewed as a blessing in their eyes.

[Billy]

The worst part is that the Burmese government could care less. This is probably viewed as a blessing in their eyes.

You base that on what?

[ATL Muskie]

The worst part is that the Burmese government could care less. This is probably viewed as a blessing in their eyes.

Kind of like after Katrina?

Oh snap! Oh no he di' n't!

[Kahns Krazy]

I always find it fascinating when the media pumps up casualty numbers. Remember early on when they were reporting 50,000 dead in the WTC attacks?

The current fatality estimates in Burma are 23,000, but the headline says 100,000. I hate that.

[Billy]

I always find it fascinating when the media pumps up casualty numbers. Remember early on when they were reporting 50,000 dead in the WTC attacks?

The current fatality estimates in Burma are 23,000, but the headline says 100,000. I hate that.

Good point. There's been a pretty good string of these disasters where the death toll manages to go down after a few days...which seems, well, impossible.

[Juice]

You base that on what?

This is from Wikipedia so take it for what it is worth:

- Several human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have reported on human rights abuses by the military government.[47][48] They have claimed that there is no independent judiciary in Burma. The military government restricts Internet access through software-based censorship that limits the material citizens can access on-line.[49][50] Forced labour, human trafficking, and child labour are common.[51] The military is also notorious for rampant use of sexual violence as an instrument of control, including systematic rapes and taking of sex slaves as porters for the military.

- The August 2007 demonstrations were led by well-known dissidents, such as Min Ko Naing (with the nom de guerre Conqueror of Kings), Su Su Nway (now in hiding) and others. The military quickly cracked down and still has not allowed the International Red Cross to visit Min Ko Naing and others who are reportedly in Insein Prison after being severely tortured.

- Evidence has been gathered suggesting that the Burmese regime has marked certain ethnic minorities such as the Karen for extermination or 'Burmisation'.[95] This has received little attention from the international community, however, since it has been more subtle and indirect than the mass killings in places like Rwanda.

- On September 25, 2,000 people defied threats from Burma's junta and marched to Shwedagon Pagoda amid army trucks and warning of Brigadier-General Thura Myint Maung not to violate Buddhist "rules and regulations."[115] The following morning, various prominent protesters were arrested and troops barricaded Shwedagon Pagoda and attacked the 700 people within. Despite this, 5,000 monks continued to protest in Yangon. At least four deaths were reported after security forces fired on the crowds in Yangon. The junta announced that ten people had died in the crackdown on 27 September 2007 but foreign diplomatic sources in Yangon said more than ten Buddhist monks and demonstrators were dead. Later a badly-beaten Buddhist monk's body was found in Rangoon River.

- Internet access within the nation has been suspended, reportedly in an attempt to dampen international awareness of the situation.

- Many religions are practiced in Burma and religious edifices and religious orders have been in existence for many years and religious festivals can be held on a grand scale. The Christian populations do, however, face religious persecution and it is hard, if not impossible, for non-Buddhists to join the army or get government jobs, the main route to success in the country.[148] Such persecution and targeting of civilians is particularly notable in Eastern Burma, where over 3000 villages have been destroyed in the past ten years.

- A 2002 report by The Shan Human Rights Foundation and The Shan Women's Action Network, Licence to rape, details 173 incidents of rape and other forms of sexual violence, involving 625 girls and women, committed by Burmese army troops in Shan State, mostly between 1996 and 2001. The authors note that the figures are likely to be far lower than the reality. According to the report, "the Burmese military regime is allowing its troops systematically and on a widespread scale to commit rape with impunity in order to terrorize and subjugate the ethnic peoples of Shan State. The report illustrates there is a strong case that war crimes and crimes against humanity, in the form of sexual violence, have occurred and continue to occur in Shan State. The report gives clear evidence that rape is officially condoned as a 'weapon of war' against the civilian populations in Shan State." Furthermore, the report states that "25% of the rapes resulted in death, in some incidences with bodies being deliberately displayed to local communities. 61% were gang-rapes; women were raped within military bases, and in some cases women were detained and raped repeatedly for periods of up to 4 months."

- An estimated 70,000 of the country’s 350,000-400,000 soldiers are children. There are also multiple reports of widespread child labour.



Anyways, there are some tidbits on why Burma is a crappy place and the government could care less about its "citizens."

[Billy]

None of that explains why they'd "care less". The reason there is friction over there, is because there is some level of passion about the land.

I'm not here to say their government is fantastic on any level...but I'm pretty sure the general welfare of the citizenry is of interest to them.

[Juice]

And the fact that these people were pushed off any available land and forced to live on a flood plane had nothing to do with their death? India knew about this thing days before and what did the Burmese government do? Nothing. Lots of concern was shown.

[Billy]

And the fact that these people were pushed off any available land and forced to live on a flood plane had nothing to do with their death? India knew about this thing days before and what did the Burmese government do? Nothing. Lots of concern was shown.

Honestly, I don't know what their government did last week as this thing approached. But there's not a Superdome, and plenty of emergency infrastructure I'm guessing.

It's Myanmar...which on the scale of standards of living is lagging behind India. I'm not trying to carry their water here, Juice. I just think it's over-the-top to state that the government didn't care and the result is just A-Ok with them. In fact, I'll argue the opposite. Something like this does nothing good for a government who was in dire need of credibility based on what we saw there last year. This might have been the worst possible result.

This column points this out:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-myanmar-cyclone_goeringmay07,0,2336843.story

[Juice]

I agree that this could change the course of events there, but it is not because of any remorse, feelings of guilt, or just empanthy for those affected. The military government is only going to change based on their fear of outside pressure from outside countries like India, China, the US, Britain, and whoever else will involve themselves. They will also fear a uprising from the poorer people who they have ignored. If it was not from the poor people within and the attention this has received in other countries, I do not think the government in Burma would change much.

[PM Thor]

The Bush administration really isn't helping the situation either.

Yes, the military junta in Burma is bad. But from their perspective, would you accept help from a country that says things like this from the First Lady....

"It’s troubling that many of the Burmese people learned of this impending disaster only when foreign outlets ... sounded the alarm,"

"Although they were aware of the threat, Burma’s state-run media failed to issue a timely warning to citizens in the storm’s path. The response to this cyclone is just the most recent example of the junta’s failures to meet its people’s basic needs."

Uhhh, these kinds of statements don't help the people on the ground, and in fact, it alienates the Burmese junta even more. This reaction by the current administration is being handled poorly. You don't interject politics into a human catastrophe, you just offer assistance, with no political commentary.

Seriously, why would this leadership accept help from a government that is so openly against them? Yes, I know, the people there are suffering and need help. But the military leadership could care less about that, so every country that is offering help needs to tread lightly in that vein. There is a reason why Burma has only accepted help from their top three trading partners by the way, and from their perspective, would you want US relief efforts on the ground if it undercut their control of the country?

(I am in no way saying that their response is correct or justified, just saying that an animal cornered will fight hard)

[XUglow]

"You may know it as Myanmar, but it will always be Burma to me." - Mr. Peterman