There's a pretty lively discussion going on at KOS about the fact that,
relatively speaking, little aid is flowing to Pakistan to help with that
country's disaster relief.

Several posters have opined thoughts similar to the following:

"A lot of commentators are saying that Pakistan is a country that spends
billions on its military and has enough money to fund nuclear weapons,
and therefore it should reassess its spending priorities rather than
expect foreign countries to save its people from cholera and starvation
while it continues to spend 40% of its GDP on weapons and less than 1%
on public health.

UNICEF has been saying the same thing for years and years: Pakistan lets
hundreds of thousands of its children die of diarrhoea every year
(floods or no floods) in favour of playing expensive and dangerous war
games. The difficulty in getting people to pony up financial aid
reflects ordinary human disgust at the idea of rewarding this."

A reasonable thought?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/8/22/895204/-Why

Oh...boating related...lack of boats, flooded rivers, et cetera.