@soup_reviews why do some people want to? retribution and assigning blame. what's a good reason? understanding how it became the problem it did. you're right though that how it became a problem has more to do with the response...and there's definitely some errors to be discussed there.
@soup_reviews
analysis of the crisis should reveal, and in some cases already has shown, the systemic issues that left certain countries unprepared from a public health standpoint. I think framing the analysis from decisions made in the initial stages of the response is powerful for decision-makers: that gives them these stories about "what those guys did right/wrong" and ties that to industry, the political situation, and public health infrastructure in a way that, hopefully, leads to a deeper understanding of which actions are advisable.
Again, I don't think the "blame game" is useful, and would likely be really damaging: The logical next step after assigning blame is extracting retribution, but historically I don't think that kind of action has worked well for modifying behavior of sovereign nations.
@2ck it just feels a lot like blaming some random person or state for a forest fire when in reality the issue is so much bigger and systemic