Aid flights are arriving in Burma to help the survivors of the cyclone.

I've been surprised by how little comment there has been so far on the story. There are very few emails and texts on the subject and not many comments added to the story or blogs.

So does your lack of comment equate to a lack of concern? Is it down to:

:: Burma's military junta (the attitude of the nation's rulers means you feel sorry for the people but not the country)?

:: Concerns over whether the money donated will get through to the people in need (based on previous disasters)?

:: Fatigue (there are so many demands for money for good causes)?

I'd be interested to have your comments on why you don't want to comment!

Paul

Comments

[Michael Hardman, South Africa 11 May 2008 08:22:49]

I agree, what the fuss over Burma? Let then get on with it. The world is over populated anyway.

The West goes on about human rights this and human rights that. When it is about to hurt their economy, my god they go in guns blazing.

[darren ireland 10 May 2008 22:13:57]

I'm totally sick at the whole Burma tragedy. America and England go in to help in other countries whether it's needed or wanted, always oil though.

[Karen 10 May 2008 10:54:05]

I really am quite shocked by your journalists use of the phrase 'smug and self satisfying generals' with the Burma report (even if they are). As a mature and impartial news station, I believe it is your position to present the facts - not pass judgement or put words into the mouths of those watching..

From a jounalistic point of view, could those generals be under threat of having their families murdered if the do not tow the line? How have the been deemed to be smug and self satisfying exactly?

You are a trusted station, please do not form peoples opinions for them.

I hope this message is accepted with the constructive critisism intended, though if there are more facts that have not been presented to the public, I'm happy to stand corrected.

[James Katambo, Zambia 10 May 2008 10:52:32]

It is saddening to learn about the Burma junta's continued restriction of the acceptance of aid and assistance emmanating from international aid agencies

Is there anything the international community can immediately do to avert more loss of lives?

The doors to allow food and water get to the affected people need to open NOW and not LATER.

It is unbelievable how inhuman the junta is.

[Matt Wales 10 May 2008 10:50:54]

Can anyone explain why we are so quick to send aid to a totalitarian regime which shuns all contact with the outside world, and yet we can't/won't give money to British charities to aid the homeless/disabled/abused in Britain.

Surely charity should begin at home.

[NormachristineC 9 May 2008 21:33:01]

Its a combination of all three of your stated reasons. I, personally, though will only give money to charities and organisations that receive no Government funding, such as those which help distressed animals and birds, which are often made no mention of in the media when disasters like this occur in the world. When Katrina happened, it was the non-government funded animal charities/organisations which rely entirely on donations from the public which went to the rescue of hundreds of abandoned family pets in that flooding disaster.

[Ian, Lancashire 9 May 2008 19:31:47]

I gave a lot to the Asian Tsunami appeal but I will not be giving to aid Burma.
I have to agree that cruel as
it may sound Burma should be left to the Chinese to sort out. The junta would only confiscate any aid and make sure its toading lackeys got first dibs and the rest would be trickled down to the needy as they see fit.
It will sure make good press for the Chinese in an Olympic year to have one of its poodles in such a state. Mind you not many over there will read about it as it will all be censored anyway which is why they do not want foreign aid workers over there.
Over here our armed forces are trained to aid the public in times of crisis, the Burmese army it appears are better suited to beating civilians up and protecting their leaders assets, pretty much like the Chinese army's main talents.

[Clair in Spain 9 May 2008 09:34:09]

Ditto to both the comments received so far. I'm surprised that Sky News bothered with an appeal, I certainly wouldn't send money to Burma knowing that it will end up in the pockets of "those in charge." Let China help and then we'll see if they have any compassion at all.

[venus 8 May 2008 19:57:52]

I suggest all your quoted reasons play a part, as well as charities have grown like mushrooms, not too sure where all the money goes and Brown has ****ed us all to the ground, except for those at the top, so we don't have anything left.

Plus thousands of pounds and dollars are paid to the third world every year - where does it go?

[ben wilfield 8 May 2008 16:49:04]

Sod Burma. I'm sick of seeing countries shun and slag off the West, then when they need help they start crying.

If they are not willing to talk and comunicate to the West on any normal day, why should we spend our taxes helping them out?

Spend the money on our hospitals and schools.

[Terry Davies 8 May 2008 14:01:25]

Why don't we just leave it to the Chineses to sort out?

They are supposed to have some influence in that area, they have the same sort of regime, and they certainly have the money. Then the nasty old (West) need not intervene.

Save millions in misdirected funds and everyone is happy.

China is always sabre rattling, but don't seem too eager to give a helping hand to anyone.