Wealthy Nations should assists poorer countries with Humanitarian relief during natural disasters. Do you agree or diagree?

It is argued that during natural calamities rich

states

should help the poor and unfortunate with humanitarian aids. I strongly agree with the statement because

this

will show the friendship of affluent

states

and it is an ethical thing to do. A true friend never leaves you alone when you are in a trouble. At the disaster life savings, materials are must be needed and at the emergency, most of the communications are broken; friendly neighbours could send food, medicine, clothes to the victim society, and

this

will build up friendship.

Moreover

, that friend might pay you back when you are in trouble.

For example

, during the tsunami in 2004, Bangladesh gave ten million dollars to Sri Lanka though Bangladesh was a poor nation compared to Sri Lanka during that point.

however

, in 2010 Sri Lanka Government gave two helicopters and a fighter plane as a gift.

Thus

, it is obvious that disaster can bring two friendly neighbours together and it is the perfect stage to show care. Another reason why rich nations should help the poor during an emergency is that it is a moral obligation. Wealthy communities like Australia, Germany, American, and England have enough reserved money

that is

much higher than other needy nations yearly budgets. Spending a minuscule amount from that massive dollar will give joy to the rich people and it has been happening for a long time. Affluent

states

are giving intensives

for instance

, during the hurricane Ya Landa in 2015, the Philippines was devastated and all the neighbour countries, American and European countries send relief to the Philippines and it is hard to say any country did not participate. In conclusion, I am in favour of rich

states

should help the poor in emergencies because real friend comes forward at diaster time as well as it is good ethics.