UN food chief: Billions needed to avert unrest, starvation

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By EDITH M. LEDERER today

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Without billions of dollars more to feed millions of hungry people, the world will see mass migration, destabilized countries, and starving children and adults in the next 12 to 18 months, the head of the Nobel prize-winning U.N. World Food Program warned Friday.

David Beasley praised increased funding from the United States and Germany last year, and urged China, Gulf nations, billionaires and other countries “to step up big time.”

In an interview before he hands the reins of the world’s largest humanitarian organization to U.S. ambassador Cindy McCain next week, the former South Carolina governor said he’s “extremely worried” that WFP won’t raise about $23 billion it needs this year to help millions of needy people

“Right at this stage, I’ll be surprised if we get 40% of it, quite frankly,” he said.



Read more: https://apnews.com/article/world-food-beasley-migration-starving-a88ae85e6fc5c2ecf7ddd6a9a6249aff

[TeamProg]

1. Oh shit. nt

[Marcus IM]

2. Meanwhile, the US continues to deliberately starve Cubans in Cuba.

Hurting people who have done NOTHING to harm the US as a way to coerce them into abandoning their chosen socialist system.

This is the result of US political pandering by both parties to an extremist minority in S Florida.

[Hekate]

12. Since when is the US deliberately starving Cubans in Cuba? This is extreme bothsiderism.

[Judi Lynn]

13. Since 1897, formally, when stated in the Breckenridge Memorandum by the Undersecretary of War,

J. C. Breckenridge on Christmas Eve, 1897.

Will be happy to provide a reference.

Shameful, vicious, and of course generally approved by Washington continually since then.

Here's a quick google grab:

Chapter 8 US Sanctions Cuba ‘to Bring About Hunger, Desperation and the Overthrow of the Government’
In: Sanctions as War
Author: Helen Yaffe

chapter 8
US Sanctions Cuba ‘to Bring About Hunger,
Desperation and the Overthrow of the
Government’
Helen Yaffe

1 Introduction
The United States ‘embargo’ of Cuba, officially imposed since 1962, constitutes
the longest and most extensive system of unliteral sanctions applied against
any country in modern history. It is not merely a legal or a bilateral issue, as
many of its proponents have claimed. It is a key instrument in the US toolkit
to pursue regime change on the island. It is an act of war, a violation of human
rights, designed to obstruct Cuban development, to undermine its example
as a revolutionary alternative, and to intentionally cause suffering among the
Cuban people. While the pretext for US actions against Cuba has changed over
the last six decades, the objectives have not.

The driving motivations of the United States’ post-1959 Cuba policy are
established in the secret one-page memorandum written by Lester Mallory, US
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, on 6 April 1960.
Under the subject title, ‘The Decline and Fall of Castro’, Mallory wrote:
Salient considerations respecting the life of the present Government of
Cuba are: 1. The majority of Cubans support Castro...2. There is no effec-
tive political opposition. 3. Fidel Castro and other members of the Cuban
Government espouse or condone communist influence. 4. Communist
influence is pervading the Government and the body politic at an amaz-
ingly fast rate. 5. Militant opposition to Castro from without Cuba would
only serve his and the communist cause. 6. The only foreseeable means
of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffec-
tion based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship.
mallory 1960

The cia had already launched operations against Cuba’s revolutionary gov-
ernment, in the second half of 1959, orchestrating acts of terrorism and sab-
otage and recruiting Cubans on the island as agents. But clearly, they were
© Helen Yaffe, 2022 | DOI:10.1163/9789004501201_009
130 Yaffe
considered ineffective. How would the population be turned against the
Cuban Revolution? Mallory proposed: ‘that every possible means should be
undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba...denying money
and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about
hunger, desperation and overthrow of government” (Mallory 1960). The human
rights of the Cuban population were not on the radar. Furthermore, although
Cuba’s revolutionary government had already carried out the Agrarian Reform
in 1959, confiscating unproductive plantations over 1,000 acres, and in January
1960, expropriated 70,000 acres from US sugar companies, Mallory does not
frame sanctions as retaliation for nationalisation, or to pressure the govern-
ment over the issue compensation; a claim subsequently made to justify the
US ‘embargo’ in international law (White 2019). The concern expressed is over
communist influence, not nationalisations.

. . .

https://brill.com/display/book/9789004501201/BP000010.xml

Will be right back with the Breckenridge Memorandum content.....

[Judi Lynn]

14. Here's the content of the Breckenridge Memorandum:

The Breckenridge Memorandum
J.C. Breckenridge, U.S. Undersecretary of War in 1897, sent the following memo to the Commander of the U.S. Army, Lieutenant General Nelson A. Miles. The memo explains what is to be U.S. policy towards the Hawaiian islands, Puerto Rico and Cuba.


Department of War
Office of the Undersecretary
Washington D.C.

December 24, 1897

This department, in accordance with the departments of foreign trade and the Navy, feels obligated to complete the instructions on the military organization of the upcoming campaign in the Antilles with certain observations on the political mission that will fall to you as general in charge of our troops. Until now the annexation of territories to our Republic has been that of vast, sparsely populated regions, and such annexation has always been preceded by our immigrants’ peaceful settlement, so the absorption of the existing population has been simple and swift.

In relation to the Hawaiian Islands, the problem is more complex and dangerous, given the diversity of races and the fact that the Japanese interests there are on the same footing as ours. But taking into account their meager population, our flow of immigrants will render those problems illusory.

The Antillean problem has two aspects: one related to the island of Cuba and the other to Puerto Rico; as well, our aspirations and policies differ in each case.

Puerto Rico is a very fertile island, strategically located to the extreme east of the Antilles, and within reach for the nation that possesses it to rule over the most important communications route in the Gulf of Mexico, the day (which will not tarry, thanks to us) the opening is made in the Isthmus of Darien. This acquisition which we must make and preserve will be easy for us, because in my mind they have more to gain than to lose by changing their sovereignty since the interest there are more cosmopolitan than peninsular.

Conquest will only require relatively mild measures. Our occupation of the territory must be carried out with extreme care and respect for all the laws between civilized and Christian nations, only resorting in extreme cases to bombing certain of their strongholds.

In order to avoid conflict, the landing troops will take advantage of uninhabited points on the southern coast. Peace loving inhabitants will be rigorously respected, as will their properties.

I particularly recommend that you try to gain the sympathy of the colored race with the double objective of first obtaining its support for the annexation plebiscite, and second, furthering the main motive and goal of the U.S. expansion in the Antilles, which is to efficiently and rapidly solve our internal race conflict, a conflict which is escalating daily due to the growth of the black population. Given the well-known advantages that exist for them in the western islands, there is no doubt that once these fall into our hands they will be flooded by an overflow of black immigrants.

The island of Cuba, a larger territory, has a greater population density than Puerto Rico, although it is unevenly distributed. This population is made up of whites, blacks, Asians and people who are a mixture of these races. The inhabitants are generally indolent and apathetic. As for their learning, they range from the most refined to the most vulgar and abject. Its people are indifferent to religion, and the majority are therefore immoral and simultaneously they have strong passions and are very sensual. Since they only possess a vague notion of what is right and wrong, the people tend to seek pleasure not through work, but through violence. As a logical consequence of this lack of morality, there is a great disregard for life.

It is obvious that the immediate annexation of these disturbing elements into our own federation in such large numbers would be sheer madness, so before we do that we must clean up the country, even if this means using the methods Divine Providence used on the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

We must destroy everything within our cannons’ range of fire. We must impose a harsh blockade so that hunger and its constant companion, disease, undermine the peaceful population and decimate the Cuban army. The allied army must be constantly engaged in reconnaissance and vanguard actions so that the Cuban army is irreparably caught between two fronts and is forced to undertake dangerous and desperate measures.

. . .

When this moment arrives, we must create conflicts for the independent government. That government will be faced with these difficulties, in addition to the lack of means to meet our demands and the commitments made to us, war expenses and the need to organize a new country. These difficulties must coincide with the unrest and violence among the aforementioned elements, to whom we must give our backing.

To sum up, our policy must always be to support the weaker against the stronger, until we have obtained the extermination of them both, in order to annex the Pearl of the Antilles.

More:
http://www.historyofcuba.com/history/bmemo.htm

[Marcus IM]

16. You are aware of at least some of the myriad of US extraterritorial sanctions on Cuba, yes?

The result is severe shortages in a wide range of items, including availability of food.

No, not saying that Biden and dems are right wing, as you seem to have taken from a post of mine that has been removed.

I question (not bashing, as the post removal suggests) why Biden and Dems pander to a demographic that will never vote for them.

[Judi Lynn]

17. Truly sad that there has been starvation right in the US: truth starvation!

Every bit of real information was drained from public news coverage so long ago, and replaced by disinformation. Only those US citizens who bother to think things over, actually take time to start asking questions, and focusing, start looking for the actual missing elements long enough to find them.

It seems most people swallow the story sold and never questioned at the beginning of the not-really-so-covert "Cold" war on Cuba, and assume everyone who doesn't support the fairy story is a "commie" or a "pinko."

Once you discover the truth you can never become the ignorant person you were before. You cannot unlearn it.

Thank you for daring to challenge people to look for the truth behind and under the mountain of total trash which has gone in place of real information about a very real, painful, and shameful situation.

Best wishes, and thank you, Marcus IM.

[Judi Lynn]

15. Your point was mentioned long ago by Jimmy Carter's Interests Section Head, Wayne Smith:

Wayne Smith: time to end 'utterly stupid' embargo.

- snip -

In 1958, the year before Castro came to power, Smith got his first foreign-service assignment as third secretary at the U.S. Embassy in Havana. He stayed until 1961, when President Kennedy broke diplomatic relations with Castro. Smith was transferred to Brazil, and later was posted to the Soviet Union and Argentina. He eventually returned to Washington, where he became director of Cuban affairs at the State Department.

In 1979, Carter--who two years earlier had lifted travel controls as an initial step towards improving relations with Cuba--appointed Smith to head the new U.S. Interests Section in Havana.

Smith kept that job until 1982, when he quit in disgust over the Reagan administration's hostile Cuba policy.

. . .

When it finally came, he said, "the answer was `no' to negotiations, that even though there was no evidence [that Cuba was still sending weapons to Central America], they weren't interested in negotiations with the Cubans. Shortly thereafter, the Reagan administration reimposed travel controls, they said, because of Cuba's increasing arms shipments to Central America, and because Cuba refused to address our agenda of foreign concerns. Both things were untrue.

"With that," he said, "I gave it some thought and then sent in my cable asking to be removed from the post."

Today, Smith is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, a Washington think tank. He says he has no doubt that the U.S. embargo against Cuba will eventually be lifted--but not as long as George W. Bush occupies the White House.

"U.S. policy is dictated by the hardline exiles in Florida. It has almost nothing to do with what happens in Cuba," he said. "We used to tell Castro during the 80s that if he would get his troops out of Africa, stop giving arms to guerrillas in Central America and reduce his military relationship with the Soviets, then we could move ahead and improve relations in a significant way. By 1992, all those conditions had been met, so suddenly we made new conditions.

"Now they say Cuba hasn't moved as far ahead as China. That's total bullshit," he says, with typical bluntness. "Cuba's human-rights record is better than China's. The real reason is, if Cuba had a population of 100 million people, there wouldn't have been an embargo."

Perhaps Smith's views on U.S. policy toward Cuba can best be summed up by the defiant "Hands Off Cuba!" placard given to him by a student during a 1967 demonstration in Moscow marking the death of Cuban revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Guevarra. The sign now occupies a prominent place on the wall of Smith's Washington office. "The embargo gives Castro the perfect excuse to rally his people," he says. "So why are we doing him a favor by keeping it in place?"

More:
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Wayne+Smith%3A+time+to+end+%27utterly+stupid%27+embargo.-a092048156

[Marcus IM]

22. The US was almost there, but dark forces prevailed

More of that invisible hand of the market where success lies in profits not people one could guess.

Thanks for the info on Wayne Smith.

[Judi Lynn]

30. That invisible hand moved the US Gov't to slaughter the native people, take and keep slaves,

and treat any of their survivors with shameful, criminal contempt.

It's a vile history, and it's startling whenever one sees people posing as Democrats who refuse to acknowledge it. It's far too late to be that ignorant.

Thank you for standing up for the truth. It's always expensive to the person who does, unfortunately. It attracts hatred.

[ancianita]

3. This is not just a "short term crisis." Climate change is about to wipe out food supply for

millions to billions.

Beasley and the UN World Food Program know this situation is not just about sending foodstuffs, but about investing in WOMEN, who produce 60%-80% of the world's food. It's about investing in agricultural systems that help those women to produce their food, while not taking up their whole existence trying to do that, or while men end up in daily food lines.

And if Beasley is only getting 40% of what's donated, where the hell is the rest of it going??

[area51]

8. Perhaps he meant being only able to raise 40% of the $23 billion that they need. n/t

[ancianita]

9. You're right. I misread the statement.

Then I'll shift my ire to the world that has $400 TRILLION in wealth and won't spend the remaining 60% for humans.

These rich depopulationists passively solve world problems the immoral way.

[msongs]

4. free condoms and birth control pills available for anyone nt

[roamer65]

5. Abortion on demand as well, via medications and procedure.

During ANY time of the pregnancy.

We have to start population reduction ASAP.

[jimfields33]

10. United States and Europe are doing ok.

Other areas should consider two children each. How to do that? It won’t be easy.

[friend of a friend]

21. Climate Change is already reducing population but in a horrible way and it will keep getting worse.

[JCMach1]

11. How about we preserve basic human rights when it comes to people's bodies and not push Malthus as a

solution (it's really not) to the world's problems...

It's the flipside of preserving abortion rights... Your body, your choice...

[NickB79]

25. How does free birth control morph to "push Malthus" in your mind?

Would you care to explain how giving people free condoms and pills becomes a violation of human rights?

And fyi, Malthus was right. Just look how we've turned the global biosphere into almost nothing but humans, livestock and pets. If that doesn't tell you we're vastly overpopulated, I don't know what does.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/18/a-wake-up-call-total-weight-of-wild-mammals-less-than-10-of-humanitys

[dalton99a]

6. Notwithstanding climate change, there are more mouths to feed

needing more acreage to feed them

[sakabatou]

7. Meanwhile, one billionaire wasted billions to eventually ruin what he bought.

[live love laugh]

18. "... 12 to 18 months .." ‼️. That's alarming.

[EndlessWire]

19. Not wishing to minimize

the dire need for food, but:

I would like to mention that Russia has f*cked up food production in Ukraine, and the UN is having to bargain for them to allow food shipments through the Black Sea area.

Russia started a horrific war, where a lot of money has to, of necessity, be spent on armaments instead of taking care of one another. And what does the UN do? They allow Russia to be in charge of the Security Council, even when the ICC itself has declared Putin an international war criminal.

How's that for irony? Russia can now control exports even more than they already do. I suppose the position is kind of ceremonial, but we really won't be seeing the UN taking up arms to secure food with Russia in charge. Russia should be kicked out of the Security Council, because Putin is a wanted war criminal.

[ancianita]

20. You're not.

You're recognizing the politics of appeasement by the UN.

Russia invaded Ukraine to get more to survive the future with besides its own oil -- Ukraine's food and mined resources. By hiding that purpose, and using "NATO threat" as public pretext, it has set up its own collapse.

Pretty sure you recognize that the world still must move on to secure food for those most vulnerable to cascading climate disaster -- an important reason why Harris has been in Africa.

[The Jungle 1]

23. Climate change mass migration is the part so many people refuse to understand.

How will Christians deal with this migration???

[dembotoz]

24. going into holy week we would rather do easter egg hunts

and notice i used the term we.......

Marching orders of the new testament is pretty much feed the hungry, heal the sick, house the homeless.
None of this fetus fetish crap.

The church i attend has as its reason for being a meal program for the homeless in Milwaukee. Big problem with fewer and fewer resources ...Anyone got a few extra bucks?????
As a nation we do not care for the folks we already have...More folks??? Yah that is not going to go well.

And yet we must.....Our faith....or should i just say....my faith .....demands it.

Yes buy an electric car, install a heat pump, but realize people are going to want to move to avoid starvation. As they did in the times in the Bible,they will do today.

So how will christians deal with this migration? lol Probably not very well......

[The Jungle 1]

27. Christian teaching knew there would always be refugees.

Leviticus 19:33-34
“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Could be the refugees will not come to the USA. We may be the refugees!

[NickB79]

26. Border walls and military patrols

I'm not sure even Democrats will oppose a border wall in 10-15 years, when waves of climate refugees will dwarf what we see today and our economy will be straining under the weight of increasing natural disasters.

[The Jungle 1]

28. There might be no need for a border wall. Could be no one will come the the USA.

Could be we will be the refugees seeking shelter and food!

[NickB79]

29. The northern half of the US will be the sweet spot

Last edited Sun Apr 2, 2023, 06:18 PM - Edit history (2)

The Great Lakes and New England in particular. Americans will be refugees streaming up here, unfortunately.

If the climate goes so bad that not even these areas are habitable, Mexico and Central America will be apocalyptic hellscapes.