It is argued that developing nations undergoing some forms of natural catastrophe ought to be lifted by the developed states who can render help with human resources.
essay agrees with
statement because it is morally justifiable for them to assist the
world nations and to
reduce the number of casualties during those periods.
The highly developed and richer nations are morally justified when they give assistance to the
. These underdeveloped nations that are struck by an act God
as flooding, hurricane, earthquake and fires does not have the technical know-how to combat these issues.
, it is the duty of some morally standing richer states to come to their aid with their knowledge and other resources like food, shelter and clothing.
, the people form these developing countries will be forced to immigrate illegally to the developed nations in
of refugee which might be a stress on their economy. A recent study showed that there is an increasing number of European countries sending relief materials to the poverty-stricken states during unexpected occurrences.
Another vital reason for giving support to the less privileged nations is to prevent an increasing number of fatalities
of the calamity. There would be an escalation of these issues if these developing countries experiencing a natural occurrence
aid from powerful and highly developed nations. During a period like
, the health care facilities would have been over-stretched thereby requiring
from wealthier nations which will decrease the rate of mortality. It was reported in a popular newspaper that the United States of America supplied one of the East African countries with a formidable health care services when the nation was attacked by the deadly Ebola disease.
In conclusion, when
states are in distress, the richer nations are to be blamed because it is ethical for them to render basic amenities of life and
to minimize the effect of the tragedy.
Leave a Reply