 |
| United Nations "Fight For Freedom" poster (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
While the U.S. doles out trillions in military aid, our government borrows like amounts from other countries like China, a country that unlikely is hoping that the U.S. will stay at the top of the heap as a world power. The United States has tons of economic problems as we see large roles of unemployed and underemployed, small businesses struggling, and cities going bankrupt. Is it prudent for our country to be borrowing so heavily so we can dish out money elsewhere?
Shouldn't the United States government be thinking more like a business and looking for bigger returns for the questionable investments of aid? Or maybe they are thinking like the mega corporations which are eating up the world's economy and soul. Who is really in charge here and do they know what they are doing?
Personally I think we need to start keeping more dollars at home. I'm not a fan of powering the military machines of most of these countries. Not unless we start getting more back from them to make it worth it for us and I don't see that happening any time soon. And not ever maybe. Let's face it, we have different interests at heart for the time being at least. Rather than nations of dependency, I'm a believer in creating cooperative capitalistic ventures who are interested in developing and sustaining their own economies while productively interacting with others. Or are there some other agendas that governments have in mind?
Should countries like the U.S. be funding the military machines of potentially dangerous governments? How does aid from the United States government benefit anyone in the long run? Can we truly consider countries like Egypt, Pakistan, and others friends and allies? Or are they just taking what they can get with an intent on eventually stabbing us in the back?
No, we shouldn't be giving such massive aid to anyone. Bring all that back home and we might even make a dent in the deficit.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, we're caught in a diplomatic dance with the governments of the world. We could reduce what we spend, but the web is so tight, we can never pull out.
I agree with your assessment of our foreign funding and borrowing policies. You raise good questions, Arlee.
ReplyDeleteI'd say it's more of a bribe than anything else. One we've been duped into giving. Remember the days of Teddy Roosevelt and "Speak softly and carry a big stick?" How times have changed.
ReplyDeleteHey Lee, great to see you back!
ReplyDeletee can't police the world. Unfortunately, there will always be poverty and suffering and human rights violations somewhere in the world. We do need to take care of business at home and stop borrowing from countries like China.
Of course we shouldn't give borrowed money to other countries who do not have our best interest in their hearts. But there is a master plan out there, and the U.S. is just a pawn being used.
ReplyDeleteAlex -- Powers and principalities?
ReplyDeletePam -- We will not maintain our position in the world at the rate we are going.
L.Diane -- Our leaders have fallen into bad and dangerous habits and they don't seem to learn from past mistakes.
Stephen Tremp -- Private entities do better at helping the poor. Funding the governments often heightens the oppression and adds to the poverty. Our government should be for us and not other countries.
Em-- I think you're right about the master plan.
Lee
Hi Arlee,
ReplyDeleteGood to see you back with a thought provoking and serious subject, I think America is having a hidden agenda in backing such countries. For example its supports to Pakistan is very clear that to create trouble in the Indian boarders subsequently India's fast economic growth will be diminished....
And I fully agree with your concluding paragraph, and especially the closing sentence ie. Or are they just taking what they can get with an intent on eventually stabbing us in the back?
I am sure US must be more alert to avoid/prevent such a stab at the back. LOL
Best Regards
Phil
If the government would call a coup a coup, a lot of that aid would have to stop. They've danced around that since the military took over.
ReplyDeleteI guess we're still working on the domino theory. If we keep losing "democracies" over there we won't have any allies--even the back-stabbing kind.
That's some expensive insurance, Lee, no matter how you look at it.
ReplyDeleteHumanitarian aid--food, shelter needs, medicines--those I can see contributing to, but giving military aid funding weapons? Hell no. Help not but support these countries. They need to learn self-sufficiency instead of having someone rescue them.
Personally, I think most of the money given out by the United States should be cut in half and used within our own country and benefiting our citizens.
Sia McKye Over Coffee
I have simply never understood why there's all this 'giving' and then borrowing going on. I grew up in manipulation central and believe me, this all stinks of MANIPULATION in the worst way. I wonder what would happen if someone who wasn't power hungry became president and just stopped all this nonsense!
ReplyDeleteThere are a couple of ways to look at this Lee.
ReplyDeleteOne is that if you polled most citizens and asked if they thought it made any sense to borrow from China in order to give money to the countries you mentioned, the majority of people would say, "No." Yet OUR REPRESENTATIVES do it anyway. So, who are they representing? It is time that someone asked the question.
Obama has made it clear since he took office that one of his main goals is Redistributing The Wealth. If you look at this situation from that viewpoint, isn't that exactly what is going on? The US is weakening it's place in the World Picture by redistributing our wealth (as a nation) to these other countries. And we are going so far into debt with China that we will never be able to dig our way out. If the goal of the President is to Redistribute the Wealth of this country around the world, he is the best president ever. He is doing the job with the utmost success. And no one in Congress or the Senate is stopping him.
So, the question isn't if it is a good idea? (Obviously no.) The better questions are who are these "Representatives" actually representing??? And why aren't people recognizing this for what it is? This is Redistributing The Wealth on steroids in order to make this country equal in power and economics to the countries we are "helping." Doesn't that bother anyone????
BTW, you aren't in Kansas anymore.
PV-- I guess if we get more sensible leaders running things we will be okay, but I don't know if there is such a thing.
ReplyDeleteC.Lee -- The problem is that I don't think we've been getting any actual democracies in that part of the world. A change in mindset is what they need before democracy can actually work.
Sia - And most of the aid should come from private sources and not government. When we just hand money to other government it mostly goes to line pockets and not get used in the way that it is supposed to.
Yellow Rose -- I'm waiting for it to happen. As individuals we are always advised not to do what the government does. Maybe the example set by government is part of the reason that so many Americans are in financial trouble.
Robin --And when you get down to it, the question of representation is the real one that I'm asking here. There are agendas at play and they are not intended to benefit the citizens of this country or most of the citizens of the world for that matter. We are losing vision as we grapple under the dark clouds of power that will eventually become our oppressor.
Lee
Oh dear, another political question and I just said not to take sides. :) Honestly, though, I wish they, the government was more up front about what those dollars are for over there, but no, I don't believe in the weaponry part of it. But the idea that our fellow countrymen suffer so, and they want to cut more and more here at home. Makes no sense whatsoever. Humanitarian aid yes, but here at home too!
ReplyDeleteI think the USA should stay out of Egypt so long as there's no risk to the USA or countries outside of Egypt. That might be an ill informed and naive way to look at things but generally USA interference causes more problems and resentment from both sides so for now at least I'd let events take whatever course they do, it's very scary the events though, I hope a resolve occurs quickly, sooner rather than later.
ReplyDeleteEach country needs to learn to fend for themselves. America needs to slowly cut the cord with Egypt, that's my opinion.
ReplyDeleteThere are SO many needs here in the states, hm like maybe funding continuing education for our children (instead of raising the cost of a college education), investing in police and fire (rather than cutting), oh, and what about infrastructure? No prob, let's just send all of our $$$$ to foreign countries. Sure.
ReplyDeleteI probably should not leave a comment.
ReplyDeleteMany have said what I would say about keeping money in the country to fund our own infrastructures....
And Robin NAILED what is really going on behind the curtain...
When the show "Firefly" aired, I wondered why Joss Whedon had the characters fluent in Chinese.
After meeting several ASU MBA grads who immediately left for positions in China, I wonder no longer.
Whenever you see some jingoistic fool chanting that America is number one, ask him what he is using as a unit of measure.
LC
Yolanda -- Charity begins at home. Military aid does not qualify as charity in my thinking.
ReplyDeleteYeamie -- I vote for letting things take their course even though Russia, China, or some other power may step in to edge things to their advantage.
Sheena -- Our country needs to consider how our help to others benefits us.
Tami -- We are setting ourselves up for ruin.
Disconnected -- If we want to be number one then better watch out for number one and then take care of our truest allies next. But there is a man behind the curtain issue and that may the telling factor when the secrets of the agendas are put out in the open.
Lee
To begin with, there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that grants the federal government the right to send American taxpayers' money to foreign governments (and yes, in the final analysis, it is ALL American taxpayer dollars). Therefore, not only is foreign aid a bad idea, it is technically illegal.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, Robin is correct. But, of course, the U.S.A. has been in the business of foreign aid since before any of us were born, and the real purpose for it is the same today as it ever was: to siphon off American wealth.
It's not so much about bribing foreign countries; it's not even about enriching foreign countries. There are multiple purposes for foreign aid, but the primary one is siphoning off American wealth to "level the global playing field".
Now the real question is: Why would our "representatives" want to drag our economy down to "level the global playing field"?
Well, some of these commenters already know the answer to that question.
~ D-FensDogg
'Loyal American Underground'
It's not just the US. Canada and Britain do the same thing. I thought it was wrong when I lived in England, I think it is wrong now I live in Canada and I am sure it is wrong for the States to do this too. When you hear the stories of schools being underfunded and people out of work, just to name a couple of things, one wonders about the logic behind what our governments are doling out to other countries.
ReplyDeleteYes, as Jo says, Canada does this too. It's called the 'war machine' for a reason. It enables money to be diverted for national security, and military efforts. Then, when our military personnel comes home - do they get the support they need? Very often, they do not.
ReplyDeleteFrance and Germany gave us a micro look with the EU by showing how countries who don't use intelligent economic policies drag down those who try to manage their populations.
I don't see conspiracy here. In 1978, Israeli tanks lined one side of the Suez Canal, and Egyptian tanks lined the other. You wouldn't have wanted to book a cruise ship thru the canal then, past sunken warships, with bored tank-gunners looking at you from each side and ticked-off because their weekend leaves were refused. So, the involved cruise lines, plus all the shipping industries, big oil, export-import industries, et al wanted a peaceful canal. So, we agreed to subsidize Egypt and Israel 3 billion a year each to get Israel out of the Sinai Peninsula and the Egyptian Army back to their barracks. So, all the above sources plus the American Jewish Committee and probably the Israeli and Egyptian governments expressed their gratitude over the next 30+ years by heavy donations to presidential and congressional election campaigns.
ReplyDeleteWhere's the conspiracy?
StMc -- Once we go from welfare states to welfare world we have a population that is dependent on a human government. It's all about control by the entity who wants to be in the drivers seat.
ReplyDeleteJo -- Is there any logic behind what governments do?
DG -- War has always been the way of the world. People get bored with peace.
Jack --It's all part of the bigger conspiracy that goes back far beyond 1978. I think it's there, and there may be more than one conspiracy battling to win the final prize. And we the people will win the booby prize--poverty, oppression, and government control.
Lee
I'm leaving this 'love the hat, love the bag, my aren't you cute' comment, because I want you to know that I did stop by and read what you and everyone else had to say.
ReplyDeleteYour always interesting and thought provoking. I'm almost always on a soap box, so for today... Thanks for making us think. Thanks for bringing some of the world into this part of the blogosphere and I'm grateful for the flu yesterday that kept me from leaping back up and shouting.
Conspiracies may exist, Lee, but you can't do anything about them until they're exposed. The annual subsidy to Egypt and Israel is a specific problem and you identified the obvious solution: stop paying them. Carter, Reagan, two Bushes, a Clinton and an Obama haven't done it nor have any of the Congresses since 1978 told them to stop the payments. I think we can assume that none of us, as citizens would have voted for either subsidy. So, how do we stop them?
ReplyDeleteI submit that our politicians all serve two masters. Their election requires them to tell us what we want to hear and to perform as their wealthiest campaign donors instruct. I identified, in my previous comment, the most obvious donors supporting continuation of the subsidies.
McCain was considered a maverick when he pushed campaign financing reform. He gave it up when he ran for President. This is the issue we have to address if we are to regain control of our government, on subsidies or anything else.
Faraway -- I appreciate your stopping by at least. Hope you beat that flu bug quickly. The effects of mine linger on--whatever I had really knocked me out for a while.
ReplyDeleteJack -- I think the conspiracies have been exposed, but few people care to do anything about it. Also so many other diversions are thrown into the mix that it's sometimes difficult to tell which conspiracy is the one we should be concerning ourselves with. And in the end we as individuals and special interest groups can only chip away at the powers that be unless we get the power we support into place. And even at that power corrupts. You can't depend on any of the politicians as far as I've seen so far.
Lee
LEE ~
ReplyDelete>>... I think the conspiracies have been exposed, but few people care to do anything about it.
Not only have the primary conspiracies been exposed, but for decades a number of the conspirators have actually confessed.
Americans are too apathetic, too disinterested, too addicted to mindless TV programs and idiotic fiction to speak up and act.
As Gary Allen wrote in his book 'NONE DARE CALL IT CONSPIRACY': "The Insiders don't care how much you know about their conspiracy so long as you don't do anything about it."
They have nothing to worry about. The Americonned Sheeple won't do anything about it.
~ D-FensDogg
'Loyal American Underground'
StMc -- And sadly as history progresses the more this becomes true. The population is under mind control of the media.
ReplyDeleteLee
Out of respect for the strength of your and Stephen's convictions as to massive conspiracies, this will be my final comment.
ReplyDeleteIf we who disagree are all sheep, how do you propose to change our minds or even converse with us? Is your blog only for the convinced reading the convinced?
Jack --I would disagree with labeling those who disagree using rational arguments that are presented with an openness to listen and consider equally rational responses as sheep or any other derogatory epithet. Dialog is important but it must be a level exchange from both sides with equal respect.
ReplyDeleteThe problem that I think has been indicated by some here is those who blindly accept one side without any rational defense to back them up and are willing to attack one side without solid evidence to tell us why.
As Mr. McCarthy points out, "Americans are too apathetic, too disinterested, too addicted to mindless TV programs and idiotic fiction to speak up and act." I would preface that statement with the word "most" as I think that this is a truth of what the status of America is for the most part. At least those who participate in forums such as mine are saying what they think and hopefully trying to reason the information out to come to reasonable conclusions.
Those who attach labels to themselves and align themselves to parties or factions without questioning and exposing the falsehoods or understanding the truth become more like the "sheeple" who merely follow the crowds just because.
On this blog I try to encourage all sides to make their presentations with a respect toward others. However, I am not going to attempt to tell people how they can respond or what type of words they can use as long as they don't get into the realm of profanity or the extremely obvious offensive. Some may be offended by the opinions of others but vicious personal attacks are frowned up and if over the top, censored by me.
I have come to understand certain natures of some readers who leave comments and appreciate the diversity of personalities and styles. We can spar and cajole or whatever and hopefully in the end someone has learned something new about someone else to understand where they are coming from and respect them as such.
I want and welcome diverse opinions. As I stated months ago at the outset of my series on controversies, I'm trying to add to my knowledge because there's a lot I don't know or don't totally understand. And I think there are others like me.
Thanks for your comments, Jack. And thanks to everyone else for theirs.
Lee
I pay considerably more attention to local politics, as it's where I can see (and make) a real, noticeable difference. While I can have opinions on international politics, there's not really anything I can do about it. Poke me when the apocalypse is here, I guess.
ReplyDeleteKelly -- It is easier to do something locally. On the world scale things are so massive that not many can do very much. Not even our U.S. president.
ReplyDeleteLee
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete