It is true, it was a quite impressive gesture to Germans after the war to receive such a package from ordinary Americans because Germans were afraid of the occupying allied forces that had destroyed almost all housing in the cities and people were rather afraid of all the invading soldiers, although it were mostly the Russians who were really aggressive towards ordinary German citizens in the Eastern part of Germany they had occupied. Millions of German soldiers were in captivity then. The last ones kept in Russia were released only about ten years after the war. So the cruelty and the horror Germany had brought to the world had finally returned home and hit the Germans back there. Most people had absolutely nothing left, then.

I’m not quite sure whether you can compare this situation with what we find in Iraq today. I think Iraq is much better off as far as food supply is concerned than Germany was then. The culture is quite different too from what we find in Europe and America. This division will remain whatever Americans would do for the Iraqi people.

I’m afraid the CARE package wouldn’t work today because after World War II there were still many family links between the US and Germany that lay the groundwork for the whole idea. A lot of Germans had emigrated to America, either a long time ago, or before and during the war due to Nazi persecution. There were a lot of Germans (compared to Americans of German decent) living in America at the time. So the Americans taking part in the program knew who they were sending their CARE package to from their own experience.

Of course, the CARE program was supported by the Marshall plan investing really a lot of money into restructuring the German economy. And Germans were not fighting their infrastructure being re-built.

No reason, though, not to think about it…

It is worth noting that there is a key difference between the situation in Iraq and the situations in Germany and Japan after WWII. As soon as Japan and Germany went to war with the rest of the world, it was inevitable that they would be defeated and occupied. The only question was who would be doing the occupation. Germany had a choice between being occupied by the Soviet Union or the USA and Japan had a choice between being occupied by China or the USA. Germany and Japan had actually invaded the Soviet Union and China, respectively, and they had killed millions of people in those countries and caused massive destruction. The choice was whether to be occupied by a country that was very angry and wanted rettribution or whether to be occupied by a country that was more interested in long term stability. Given this choice, a desire in Germany and Japan to be occupied by the USA and to cooperate with the USA is not really surprising.

In the case of Iraq, the choice was not which country would occupy Iraq, the choice was whether Iraq would be occupied at all. Given this choice, it is not really surprising that people in Iraq resent the occupation and are very angry with the USA.

If they are part of a structural change in policy to focus on empowering local people and to provide resources for Iraq to rebuild then that is something different.

Unfortunately often even the reconstruction phases of these wars are structured so that they generate crippling debt for the recipient, making the nation dependent. ie a Larger scale version of beads and blankets for sovereignty.

Check out Perkins, Confessions of an economic hitman.
While it is a bit strong on conspiracy I think that the underlying patterns will be familiar.

Perkins writes that his economic projections cooked the books Enron-style to convince foreign governments to accept billions of dollars of loans from the World Bank and other institutions to build dams, airports, electric grids, and other infrastructure he knew they couldn’t afford. The loans were given on condition that construction and engineering contracts went to U.S. companies. Often, the money would simply be transferred from one bank account in Washington, D.C., to another one in New York or San Francisco. The deals were smoothed over with bribes for foreign officials, but it was the taxpayers in the foreign countries who had to pay back the loans. When their governments couldn’t do so, as was often the case, the U.S. or its henchmen at the World Bank or International Monetary Fund would step in and essentially place the country in trusteeship, dictating everything from its spending budget to security agreements and even its United Nations votes. It was, Perkins writes, a clever way for the U.S. to expand its “empire” at the expense of Third World citizens. While at times he seems a little overly focused on conspiracies, perhaps that’s not surprising considering the life he’s led. –Alex Roslin

however, is there some way that we as americans can expand this giving in some proper way to both the iraqi & afghani people. are there legitimate charities that we may donate cash to so that they may forward local specific foodstuffs to any and all that need it in these countries?
occupation of a country is one thing, but feeding people what they prefer to eat may lessen the negative feelings about americans that persist. medcaps by the military are always crowded by those in need, so those would be a likely venue for foodstuffs. any ideas, dear hearts and gentle people?