Maybe I'm just a cruel bastard

[Guest FrigidSoul]

I think its high time we pull all the remaining troops(that aren't there to guar an embassy) out of Bosnia, Sommalia, etc. The only exception being Iraq and Afghanistan because we have unfinished bussiness there.

Thing is the government is spending so much money on helping out other countries that for a long time now it has been hurting Americans. I mean ask your average Joe if he gives a flying fuck whether or not some random person in a 3rd world country is starving. Most will tell you no.

See I can't see money going to other countries when ours is kinda fucked right now. Its like having a hungry family but feeding the neighbors because they're starving. Is it a shame they're starving? Sure. Is it our problem or responsability to feed them? I don't think so.

The world doesn't like the U.S. to act as Global Police so why should we continue acting like a Global Soup kitchen?

Spend U.S. tax dollars on THE UNITED STATES

[Guest Plushy Al Logan]

Spend U.S. tax dollars on THE UNITED STATES

Sure, the Politicians will listen to you.

 

::Signs petition if there is one::

 

Fuck Foreign aid! Not to be mean either, but I believe our support of Isreal is what lead to 9/11!

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Our support of Israel was a thinly vieled excuse for why it happened from some.

 

And really the rest of the Middle East should be glad we keep Israel from destroying the rest of them. We're the reason they haven't just blown the rest of them up.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

And really the rest of the Middle East should be glad we keep Israel from destroying the rest of them.  We're the reason they haven't just blown the rest of them up.

That really won't be a factor if we get another four years of the current road.

 

[Dr. Tom 0]

I believe our support of Isreal is what lead to 9/11!

I believe you're a fuckhead of the first division.

[MrRant 0]

I believe our support of Isreal is what lead to 9/11!

I believe you're a fuckhead of the first division.

There's more than one division?

[Guest Cerebus]

Anyone care to wager what % of the budget actually goes to foeign aid? (No googling...be fair!)

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I believe our support of Isreal is what lead to 9/11!

I believe you're a fuckhead of the first division.

But didn't you get that e-mail, Tom, that said all those Jews didn't go in to work at the WTC on 9/11?

 

It's all a conspiracy I tell you...

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

You guys tried doing that in the early 1900s and it didn't work.

[Guest MikeSC]

That really won't be a factor if we get another four years of the current road.

 

What, we'll get even worse cartoons that will make the terrorists blow themselves up rather than see them again?

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

Anyone care to wager what % of the budget actually goes to foeign aid? (No googling...be fair!)

Not sure --- but I think it's less than 1%.

-=Mike

[Ace309 0]

I mean ask your average Joe if he gives a flying fuck whether or not some random person in a 3rd world country is starving. Most will tell you no.

 

So now the Man on the Street's gut reaction constitutes a valid basis for national policy? I don't even want to get into the problems that would cause. Average Joe's opinion doesn't matter because he's uninformed and rarely has any interest other than his own in mind. If we acted in the interest of that man on the street, we'd be in a lot more trouble than we are now.

 

See I can't see money going to other countries when ours is kinda fucked right now.

 

How, specifically? Most Americans are eating, and there are accomodations available all over for them (city missions, soup kitchens, shelters, etc). They may not be eating steak, but they're eating. Please explain the deficiencies you're talking about.

 

Its like having a hungry family but feeding the neighbors because they're starving.

 

Not really. It's a bit like inviting those starving neighbors over for a couple of bowls of ramen. There's a negligible cost to the host, and the food isn't really high-quality, but it's nourishing. Besides, when the starving neighbors leave, you still have that meat loaf in the fridge.

 

Is it a shame they're starving? Sure. Is it our problem or responsability to feed them? I don't think so.

 

Of course, the moral imperative to feed the hungry isn't the only justification offered for foreign aid. Often, it's used as a carrot to encourage other nations to comply with the US's requests (North Korea), or as a diplomatic move in order to ensure good will (Afghanistan during the initial bombings).

[Ace309 0]

Not to be mean either, but I believe our support of Isreal is what lead to 9/11!

Oh, sweet jesus...

[Guest Sagrada3099]

Gong from the nation we are now to a purely isolationist state would be disasterous at the LEAST. Like it or not, we're involved and we will be for a while.

[Guest JMA]

What, we'll get even worse cartoons that will make the terrorists blow themselves up rather than see them again?-=Mike

Not unless they're Jack Chick cartoons...

 

[Guest FrigidSoul]

So now the Man on the Street's gut reaction constitutes a valid basis for national policy? I don't even want to get into the problems that would cause. Average Joe's opinion doesn't matter because he's uninformed and rarely has any interest other than his own in mind. If we acted in the interest of that man on the street, we'd be in a lot more trouble than we are now.

 

Last I checked Democracy was all about listening to those average Joes and what they want.

 

How, specifically? Most Americans are eating, and there are accomodations available all over for them (city missions, soup kitchens, shelters, etc). They may not be eating steak, but they're eating. Please explain the deficiencies you're talking about.

 

There's still a shitty job market. Alot of those shelters are occupied by homeless Veterans that you would think would be compensated for serving their country, not the case.

 

Not really. It's a bit like inviting those starving neighbors over for a couple of bowls of ramen. There's a negligible cost to the host, and the food isn't really high-quality, but it's nourishing. Besides, when the starving neighbors leave, you still have that meat loaf in the fridge.

 

I don't think its fair that when money for steak is earned we get stuck with meatloaf because the head of the household on the neighbors side can't do shit right. If they want changes let them do it.

 

Of course, the moral imperative to feed the hungry isn't the only justification offered for foreign aid. Often, it's used as a carrot to encourage other nations to comply with the US's requests (North Korea), or as a diplomatic move in order to ensure good will (Afghanistan during the initial bombings).

 

That's worked out great too hasn't it? North Korea still wants to nuke the world (U.S. included) and the only thing holding them back is China and their massive army. Last I checked giving the people of Afghanistan food didn't end their anger for having loved ones blown the fuck up, also didn't stop them from further suicide bombings. What's going to stop that is a new regime...one that we help control, which is why I said keep troops over there cause we have unfinished bussiness.

 

I'm not saying don't donate money to funds that help people, all I'm saying is I don't want my government forcing me to donate when I don't give a shit. Let Red Cross and Feed the Children worry about feeding the 3rd world nations, that's what they were created to do.

[Justice 0]

So now the Man on the Street's gut reaction constitutes a valid basis for national policy? I don't even want to get into the problems that would cause. Average Joe's opinion doesn't matter because he's uninformed and rarely has any interest other than his own in mind. If we acted in the interest of that man on the street, we'd be in a lot more trouble than we are now.

 

Last I checked Democracy was all about listening to those average Joes and what they want.

You see, this is a REPUBLIC. Democracy on this scale would be impossible unless we voted on EVERY FRICKEN ISSUE and FORCED PEOPLE TO VOTE. We elect people to make democracy workable, and running everything through polls is a shitty job. Public opinion can changes often and can do so in an instant. To try and base a long term policy on something that constantly changes is moronic, which is why we elect officials to decide issues for us. They need not be completely bound to public opinion, which allows them to do the right thing even if the public doesn't agree with it at the time while still having to be reelected, which makes it so that he does still have to represent his constituency sometimes.

 

There's still a shitty job market. Alot of those shelters are occupied by homeless Veterans that you would think would be compensated for serving their country, not the case.

 

No shit there's a shitty job market. It looks as though that will change, so those veterans will get a chance to be employed again. They are still being fucking fed in shelters. That's not the case in other countries where you can't get food, let alone a job.

 

I don't think its fair that when money for steak is earned we get stuck with meatloaf because the head of the household on the neighbors side can't do shit right. If they want changes let them do it.

 

Then cry about it while eating the fucking meat loaf. You act as though the public over there has any control over their government. With your logic, I shouldn't fucking give food to those hungry veterans in the shelters because they are fucking lazy and deserve what they get.

 

If we want to claim moral superiority to the World when it comes to Iraq, we have to live that moral superiority. If that includes eating meat loaf so that someone else might even HAVE food, that's a sacrifice we must make to be that beacon of light that we claim to be. You can't run all over the World without rebuilding it.

 

That's worked out great too hasn't it? North Korea still wants to nuke the world (U.S. included) and the only thing holding them back is China and their massive army. Last I checked giving the people of Afghanistan food didn't end their anger for having loved ones blown the fuck up, also didn't stop them from further suicide bombings. What's going to stop that is a new regime...one that we help control, which is why I said keep troops over there cause we have unfinished bussiness.

 

Don't forget to include the fact that we could EASILY cut off their food supply because they are literally eating the stuff we are getting right off the boats. They bitch all about nuking the world because they want more food because their population is starving to death due to their insane leader. But if you want to blame the poor people of that country on the failures of its leader, hey, go ahead.

 

Afganistan Suicide Bombings? Got an article, because I've been searching all around CNN and I can't any of the shit you are talking about. Of course, since you seem to be shoveling enough BS at the time, I shouldn't be surprised. Besides, because there is a small minority that wants us out, we should suddenly pull all aid to everyone there? Oh boy, maybe we should occupy the South and rescind white voting rights down there because OMG there are still KKK members around! Hurting the majority because of a small minority is idiotic and obscene.

 

And I love the "Don't feed them but keep troops over there" remark. So basically starve them while occupying them and claiming a moral high ground? Jesus, you are fucking nuts. You are the reason we don't let the Average Joe decide foreign policy.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

I'm nuts because I don't give a damn about feeding another country and want all of the tax money to go to American services whilst bringing troops home from countries we don't need them in? Like I said, maybe I'm a cruel bastard but I don't give a fuck if people in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc are eating...fuck'em. Not my problem.

[Justice 0]

I think you are fucking nuts because you want to keep troops there to insert a US-Friendly regieme while starving them to fucking death. It doesn't work, which is why we don't let people like you decide foreign policy: You oversimplify complex problems to one massive solution that lacks any possibility of being workable in reality without creating the image that our enemies want us to have: Of empire-building selfish fucks who only intervene when it is at their advantage to take control. That's why you are nuts.

 

Oh, and not much tax money goes into foreign aid, man. Just so you know.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

$15.7 billion isn't alot of money? I'm sorry but I'd like to see that go to U.S. Schools, medicare, hospitals, social security, etc.

 

At the very least we can stop it for 3 years and show those countries that harbor and breed terrorism how much of a help we were. They said they don't want us over there, so hell...give'em what they want and see if they like it.

 

I mean you're not going to sway me on this, I don't give a fuck about other countries that will forever spit on us and curse us no matter what we do.

[Ace309 0]

That's worked out great too hasn't it? North Korea still wants to nuke the world (U.S. included) and the only thing holding them back is China and their massive army. Last I checked giving the people of Afghanistan food didn't end their anger for having loved ones blown the fuck up, also didn't stop them from further suicide bombings. What's going to stop that is a new regime...one that we help control, which is why I said keep troops over there cause we have unfinished bussiness.

 

So, what you're saying is that based on a faulty understanding of world politics, we should end all foreign aid except in countries where we have loosely defined "unfinished business," using the working definition of "Affairs that Plunderin thinks we should take part in."

 

You can't say that we have "unfinished business" in Iraq and Afghanistan but not other countries that we've put a significant investment into. I'm also dumbstruck that you think the best way to handle these cases is an occupation of indeterminate length (which I'm guessing is what you meant by "a regime we help control").

 

So what it comes back to is that you need to refine your criteria for what constitutes "unfinished business." Otherwise, your posts are just incoherent babbling.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

To make it easy I'm sick of the U.S. being the world's crutch. All of this has also spread our troops too thin which doesn't make me pleased either. "Unfinished bussiness" constitutes in finishing up the jobs with countries we went to war with, something they didn't do with Desert Storm. If you're going to go in there to stop somebody from fucking with us don't do it half-assed.

[Gert T 0]

I think America is the alpha male of the countries, and according to that theory although we vanquish "perceived threats", we also have to take care of the rest of the pack.

[Firestarter 0]

To make it easy I'm sick of the U.S. being the world's crutch

"I wanna know if you're blind, Jo'anna

If you wanna hear de sound of drum

Can't you see dat de tide is turnin', oh

Don't make me wait 'til de mornin' come"

[Guest BobbyWhioux]

I'm nuts because I don't give a damn about feeding another country and want all of the tax money to go to American services whilst bringing troops home from countries we don't need them in? Like I said, maybe I'm a cruel bastard but I don't give a fuck if people in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc are eating...fuck'em. Not my problem.

No. You're nuts because you don't recognize that it IS your problem, and mine too, because if they don't eat, and they see us living the high life, we're gonna make a real damn convenient scapegoat for their problems when the Dictator De Jour fills the power vaccuum.

 

Right or wrong, it'll be seen as "our fault" they're starving, in their eyes, and it'll be relatively easy for the Bin Ladens and Mullahs of tommorow to get them to give their lives to take some of ours.

 

It's in our best interests to feed these people. They can either be our Rottweiler, or the Rottweiler that belongs to the redneck idiot down the street that breeds it for attack.

 

Think of it as an INVESTMENT in our own future well-being.

 

We don't pay shit in terms of foreign aid. We're too busy bailing out inefficient corporations who don't know how to manage their money but their CEOs are old college buddies with a key senator. if we kick those deadbeat freeloaders off welfare, we'll have plenty enough money for OUR schools, roads, etc, and to feed other people. And we wouldn't have to even cut our big Linus Security Blanket of a Defense Budget, either (and imagine all the improvments we could finance if we scaled that back just a tad)

[Firestarter 0]

This is, of course, exactly wrong.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

I'd also like to see us just back away and let all the mid-east countries blow themselves away since most want to go to war with one another. Fuck'em, let Darwin take over.

 

I really am a cruel and insensitive bastard when it comes to all of those countries. I'll never see it as our problem, and if they do think "Hey, they aren't feeding us...lets crash large vehicles into their buildings" then feed'em mortar.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Sheer brilliance, Saddam, er, Khomeini, er..Darwin? Wait a minute..

[Anorak 0]

I believe our support of Isreal is what lead to 9/11!

I believe you're a fuckhead of the first division.

Don't spit your dummy man, i'm sure he didn't mean to offend you or anyone else. By responding in that uneccessary tone anybody would think you were in denial of that perfectly valid statement.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Well I'M OFFENDED by his witless conspiracy theories.

 

If only America would have taken a page out of my Xenophobic book and turn its back toward Israel, we might have been spared 9/11...