ErricoMalatesta 0 #1 July 13, 2009 http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon2/world.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #2 July 13, 2009 Yes mistakes have been made and crimes committed but you only see one side of US intevention overseas. I see from example that you fail to mention the aid that the USA donates every year. Of the countless lives the US millitary saved during the Tsumami. The list is a lot longer than the map your link directs to. But you're not interested in what the Americans do right are you? Only what they get wrong. Try the website below: http://www.usaid.gov/When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #3 July 13, 2009 Perhaps the world would be better off with governments and behaviors modeled after that used in say Somalia, or Afghanistan, or North Korea, or . . . . Yes, some of the behaviors are not very healthy long-term; and perhaps it is a sad statement on current affairs; but when looking at both sides of the balance sheet, we appear to stack up on the positive side. It would be nice to have a perfect record and not play situational ethics with foreign policy while continuing to give away 10's of billions to other countries. Know any country that has pulled that off?" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdamLanes 1 #4 July 13, 2009 USAID is a joke. They say their mission is twofold, "furthering America's foreign policy interests in expanding democracy and free markets while improving the lives of the citizens of the developing world." I guess you didn't read the map from the OP, but America's foreign policy is actually rife with overthrowing and undermining democratically elected governments! The policy of the US Federal Government is the antithesis of free markets; that is why we have a central banking system, a progressive income tax, public education, the FCC, tariffs, subsidies, and tons of regulations, etc, etc. And how do they get the money to do what they do? The government takes it from people by the threat of force and coercion. And who are those citizens in the developing world whose lives are improved? Not the ones who are oppressed, but rather the favored few. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #5 July 13, 2009 Sick joke? I think the approximately 3 billion people in 150 countries who would otherwise have been starving would disagree with you.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #6 July 13, 2009 QuoteI think thousands of otherwise starving people in the developing world would disagree. Not to mention the petty dictators and strongmen who have impoverished them, and now grow rich off the "aid" they are subverting. I'm sure they'd disagree, too.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdamLanes 1 #7 July 13, 2009 QuoteSick joke? I think the approximately 3 billion people in 150 countries who would otherwise have been starving would disagree with you. According to usaId's website, their budget is "less than one-half of 1 percent of the federal budget". So less than $15 billion, and somehow you think $5 per person per year is keeping 3,000,000,000 people from starving?!? And because of this blind faith, you just look past and defend the USA federal government's lying, stealing, and overthrowing democratically elected governments? Tom Aiello is correct. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #8 July 14, 2009 QuoteQuoteSick joke? I think the approximately 3 billion people in 150 countries who would otherwise have been starving would disagree with you. According to usaId's website, their budget is "less than one-half of 1 percent of the federal budget". So less than $15 billion, and somehow you think $5 per person per year is keeping 3,000,000,000 people from starving?!? And because of this blind faith, you just look past and defend the USA federal government's lying, stealing, and overthrowing democratically elected governments? Tom Aiello is correct. I didn't realize that they had only been around for 1 year. It was my impression that they had been around a LOT longer than that - but why let facts get in the way of your point.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdamLanes 1 #9 July 14, 2009 QuoteI didn't realize that they had only been around for 1 year. It was my impression that they had been around a LOT longer than that - but why let facts get in the way of your point. Your "fact" is not in the way of my point. Besides, who said that they had only been around for one year? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #10 July 14, 2009 Nothing wrong with his fact http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #11 July 14, 2009 QuoteNothing wrong with his fact Aside from it's total irrelevance to Adam's point, you mean? Adam calculated the budget for USAID, then divided by the number of people you had said it saved from starvation, to come to the result that it spent $5 per person per year. He implied that this was obviously not enough to be solely responsible for their not starving. Turtle replied that USAID had been around for longer than 1 year. That's factually correct, but a total non sequiter. It has nothing to do with the budget calculation that Adam had made.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #12 July 14, 2009 QuoteAccording to usaId's website, their budget is "less than one-half of 1 percent of the federal budget". So less than $15 billion, and somehow you think $5 per person per year is keeping 3,000,000,000 people from starving?!? And because of this blind faith, you just look past and defend the USA federal government's lying, stealing, and overthrowing democratically elected governments? Tom Aiello is correct. My take on their statements is that they are not claiming to have helped 3 billion people in one year with their $15 billion annual budget. The logistics of helping half the world's population just do not fit. Maybe they've helped 3 billion different people (many of them multiple times?) over 50 years. At any rate, what other country gives more than the U.S.? And I'm not interested in percentages; people do not deposit (or eat) percentages. It's absolute dollars (or other denominations) and the food it buys that count. Who gives more than the U.S.?" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jammindave 0 #13 July 14, 2009 here's a good idea, why don't you and adam go start your own country and report back in a few years about all the great things YOUR country has accomplished. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #14 July 14, 2009 Quote here's a good idea, why don't you and adam go start your own country and report back in a few years about all the great things YOUR country has accomplished. Actually, knowing Adam, I bet he'd love to do that. He just doesn't want the government (any government) to come into his country, take his things, and then say it's all for the "greater good." You seem to be under the mistaken impression that this is some kind of nationalistic pissing contest about who's country is "better." That's just not so. I have no idea what Errico's point is (honestly, I have trouble deciphering the point in the vast majority of his postings). But I think Adam is making the point that government "aid" is often a double edged sword which is used to subjugate people and reward petty dictators for doing things that "we" want. It's rarely actually simply a desire to help.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #15 July 14, 2009 QuoteBut I think Adam is making the point that government "aid" is often a double edged sword which is used to subjugate people and reward petty dictators for doing things that "we" want. It's rarely actually simply a desire to help. Markets. You forgot creating new markets to sell stuff. In his inaugural speech and the speech in which the foundation of NATO was announced, President Harry S Truman spoke about the foreign aid in very idealistic rhetoric: “… In addition, we will provide military advice and equipment to free nations which will cooperate with us in the maintenance of peace and security. “Fourth, we must embark on a bold new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas. “The United States is pre-eminent among nations in the development of industrial and scientific techniques. The material resources which we can afford to use for the assistance of other peoples are limited. But our imponderable resources in technical knowledge are constantly growing and are inexhaustible. “With the cooperation of business, private capital, agriculture, and labor in this country, this program can greatly increase the industrial activity in other nations and can raise substantially their standards of living.” Sounds idealistic, eh? Underlying the idealistic motivations of which President Truman spoke was also a reality of recognition of foreign aid as a means to create new markets. New markets of populations where people could buy things. New markets where people would buy American goods (predominantly in January 1949) and services. Sixty years ago President Truman recognized the connections between foreign aid and American economic growth. The double-edged sword not recognized then was the globalization would eventually elevate other nation-states to the point of being (potential) competitors. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jammindave 0 #16 July 14, 2009 well, there's no question what country is better, so no, it's not a pissing contest, do you want the aid or not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #17 July 14, 2009 Quote... do you want the aid or not? I'd prefer not to have to pay for it.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jammindave 0 #18 July 14, 2009 as i recall, most things in life have a price, marriage, car loans, life in general. the goverments who accept aid know there is a cost. once again, do you want the aid? do you want to get married?, do you want that car?, do you want that house?, do you want that job? if not, then don't, nobody is making you but yourself? and that goes for countries, we are just trying to help, yes, there is a cost, as well as a choice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jammindave 0 #19 July 14, 2009 in addition, are cost always justified? that's a tough one, i think not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #20 July 14, 2009 Quote...do you want the aid? Did you miss my last post? I, a taxpayer of the United States of America, would prefer not to be forced to pay for the "aid" being given out to third world strongmen and petty dictators. Your repeated "do you want the aid?" makes absolutely no sense in this context. I am not eligible for the aid, I don't want the aid, and I am never going to get the aid. Regardless, I will still be paying for the aid (or rather, my children will, when they try to pay off the loans taken out to provide it).-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #21 July 14, 2009 Quotein addition, are cost always justified? that's a tough one, i think not. Do you mean, are the benefits of the aid to me (a US taxpayer) worth the cost (in my tax dollars)? Or, do you mean, are the benefits of the aid (to the beneficiaries) worth the cost (to me, in my tax dollars)? In either case, I'm going to have to say no. I'm not getting my money's worth from this purchase. Quoteif not, then don't, nobody is making you but yourself? I am not given a choice (like getting married, or buying a car) about giving out this aid. If I don't pay my taxes, men with guns show up and take me to jail. Where's the choice?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #22 July 14, 2009 Quote I, a taxpayer of the United States of America, would prefer not to be forced to pay for the "aid" being given out to third world strongmen and petty dictators. I'm genuinely curious -- what about foreign aid to Israel, the historical single largest recipient of US foreign aid? Are you opposed to that as well? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jammindave 0 #23 July 14, 2009 what if i did? i'm refering to countries, i'm in the same boat as you are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #24 July 14, 2009 Quote...what about foreign aid to Israel, the historical single largest recipient of US foreign aid? Are you opposed to that as well? Yes. We're so far in debt that we can't afford to pay the rent--why are we giving money out to people halfway around the world?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #25 July 14, 2009 Quotei'm refering to countries, i'm in the same boat as you are. The real debate is not between the donors and the recipients. It's between the "donors" and the people who finance it. I'm tired of paying for this crap. Why must I continue to do so?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
