What would happen if the U.S completely stopped giving foreign aid? (middle east, generation)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Say, theoretically, the U.S completely stopped giving foreign aide to anyone, regardless of who it was and regardless of the circumstances, no more foreign aide to Israel, to Europe, to any 2nd or 3rd world countries.
If the U.S completely stopped giving foreign aid there would be people in the world who would lose the benefit of American assistance. It would have no affect on Americans since is a relatively small portion of our annual budget. According to this article, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.9486a3fcd9db, foreign aid is approximately 1.2% of the proposed federal budget for 2017.
To those who think we shouldn't be giving aid to countries who are not "our friend", I didn't hear any word or phrase in Donnie's inaugural blather than had ANYTHING whatsoever to do with international friendship.
So let's stop pretending these things are based on friendship.
Foreign aid can also come with proviso's, that they spend X amount of the money on U.S. goods, so we can get a return on our "big-hearted generosity". As with countries like Egypt, Israel, a certain percentage of that money must be spent benefiting our defense industries.
If you look through history, we never give away foreign aid without us benefiting, or our corporations, in some way or another.
True generosity/giving, results in not expecting anything back in return!
The article is simly useless without some minimal understanding of the history and current political structure of Ethiopia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
The second article, however, is an opinion piece, as it is labeled.
And the opinion is that of a right-leaning "expert" who in the past has railed against the "dictatorship of experts." The actual problem here is that the US does not have a magic wand with which to shape the world. We are constrained simply to confront the world and must make do with the best we can make of all that. Despite its Leninist history and overlay of political party structure in place of civil government structure, Ethiopia has been a valuable ally to the US in opposing regional forces far more abusive than they are. Friends do not always need to agree on averhything, but starving people always do need help, whoever and wherever they are.
The article is simly useless without some minimal understanding of the history and current political structure of Ethiopia.
And the opinion is that of a right-leaning "expert" who in the past has railed against the "dictatorship of experts." The actual problem here is that the US does not have a magic wand with which to shape the world. We are constrained simply to confront the world and must make do with the best we can make of all that. Despite its Leninist history and overlay of political party structure in place of civil government structure, Ethiopia has been a valuable ally to the US in opposing regional forces far more abusive than they are. Friends do not always need to agree on averhything, but starving people always do need help, whoever and wherever they are.
I didn't think anyone would mind if I expressed appreciation for someone providing an article for me to read. I also didn't think anyone would mind if I pointed out the difference between a factual article and an opinion piece.
It is not necessary to argue with everyone, including those who typically agree with you.
It is not necessary to argue with everyone, including those who typically agree with you.
It was not my intention to argue with anyone -- only to point out notable flaws in the links that had been posted. The delay between the original post and my ultimate reply was occasioned in part by research into the nature and depth of such flaws. Those are in the end quite significant.
I'm not going to read that article because I've read a number of articles along the same vein. But the title says it all. Foreign aid is not about being pals with another country. It's about buying "favors", and it seems to me to be a lot cheaper than military excursions, some of which are prevented through the aid.
$35 Billion! Really though, I fail to see how this would be different than parents cutting off the money train from their children. It's hilarious how much they talk bad about the U.S yet simultaneously love to suck on its teet.
Apart from Afghanistan and Pakistan, much of our economic aid goes to Sub-Saharan countries: Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Uganda, Zambia, Mozambique, etc. Eliminating that aid would only intensify the current refugee and illegal-immigration crisis that is impacting Europe and the U.S. A better argument would be to increase the, in reality, paltry amount of foreign aid we give out. Cutting off Afghanistan and Pakistan (the latter with nuclear arms) could mean handing those countries to the Talibin/Al-Qaida/Isis.
So, would we have to triple or quadruple our military (a.k.a. "security") aid, in order to deal with increased terrorism, drug smuggling, political/economic instability? Largest recipients: Israel ($3.1B), Egypt ($1.31B), Jordan ($.367B), Pakistan ($.319B), Afghanistan ($.223B), Iraq ($.178B), Colombia ($.203B), Somalia ($.117B), Mexico ($.086B), etc. Note: Military aid is one way we subsidize our defense industry, in that recipients must spend the money on US defense contracts, except for Israel, which can spend 26% on its own defense industry.
When the USA stops bribing foreign governments, you can expect a swift reprisal in the form of a rejection of all our bases located in their territory.
Best be ready to repatriate all that material and personnel ASAP. . . just sayin'.
Most of our overseas bases are in allied nations who for the most part want them there. They are part of NATO defense strategy in Europe. In Japan we provide for thier defense, same situation. The only region I can think of where that is true is the gulf states, and right now they likely want them too as insurance against the trouble ISIS has brought to the region.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
