Our way or the highway-The end of U.S. aid to 35 nations

[Chewbacca]

http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle....toryID=3021721

The Irony here is we originally signed this treaty but Bush and Co. decide to sully our good word and trump internatonal opinion once again.

Plus we stopped aid to Columbia, who really needs it to stop alot of Coke from getting sent from there to here.

We'll see how many of theses nations give into bullying from the big dog on the block. Some examples from this article:

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/07/usa070103.htm

The letter cites several examples of U.S. hardball tactics: * U.S. Ambassador Richard Blankenship publicly warned the Bahamas that if it did not support the U.S. position on the ICC, a significant amount of U.S. aid would be withheld, including funds for paving and lighting an airport runway. * An Assistant Secretary of State informed foreign ministers of Caribbean states that they would lose the benefits for hurricane relief and rural dentistry and veterinary programs if their governments did not sign.

[ 07-01-2003, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Plus we stopped aid to Columbia, who really needs it to stop alot of Coke from getting sent from there to here.

Maybe Bush feels he supported Columbia enough in his collage days? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Rokenn: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: Plus we stopped aid to Columbia, who really needs it to stop alot of Coke from getting sent from there to here.

Maybe Bush feels he supported Columbia enough in his collage days? [img]tongue.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]LOL!!! [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Timber Loftis]

Without reading the article, I note that there can be no quid without pro quo.

C'mon, who in this world ever took handouts without knowing they were expected to return the favor? What, they want free money? They gonna guilt us into giving it to them when they oppose us?

Waaaah, bo hooo hooo frikkin hooo. [img]graemlins/crying.gif[/img]

[Ar-Cunin]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Without reading the article, I note that there can be no quid without pro quo. C'mon, who in this world ever took handouts without knowing they were expected to return the favor? What, they want free money? They gonna guilt us into giving it to them when they oppose us? Waaaah, bo hooo hooo frikkin hooo. [img]graemlins/crying.gif[/img]

Eh TL - The whole idea of aid (or handouts as you so nicely put it) is that you give something to someone less well off. Otherwise it's trade.

And Is this the way USA plans to do international buisness in the future - "if you do as we say, then......."

Arc, there is no such thing as a handoput of military aid. You accept it, then you are expected to use it in a way acceptable to those who give it to you. Abuse it or screw the donor over and you should expect to loose the handout.

Chewie, last count I heard of how many would go along wiht the US was 50, some of which were not publicly announcing it but going with it under the table.

There is absolutley nothing wrong with the USA stopping Aid to countries who implement policy that goes against our best interest or goals. I don't see any one here who pays people to do things that aren't in their best interest, that would be considered sort of moronic and counter productive.


On top of all that We the US populace NEED to see government cut spending from all sectors, foreign aid included.

I am sure Brussels will protect them and help them when and if they need military might.

[ 07-01-2003, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Gammit]

Originally posted by MagiK: Arc, there is no such thing as a handoput of military aid. You accept it, then you are expected to use it in a way acceptable to those who give it to you. Abuse it or screw the donor over and you should expect to loose the handout. Chewie, last count I heard of how many would go along wiht the US was 50, some of which were not publicly announcing it but going with it under the table. There is absolutley nothing wrong with the USA stopping Aid to countries who implement policy that goes against our best interest or goals. I don't see any one here who pays people to do things that aren't in their best interest, that would be considered sort of moronic and counter productive. On top of all that We the US populace NEED to see government cut spending from all sectors, foreign aid included. I am sure Brussels will protect them and help them when and if they need military might.

Dang, I actually agree with you, MagiK!

[John D Harris]

It always has and always WILL be that the ones giving aid decide why and to whom they give aid. Anybody that doesn't like the new policy write your Congressman & Senators. Personnaly I thunk its about time, that's what I'm going to tell my Congressman & Senators.

[Azred]

I could never figure out why we ever gave money to nations who don't really like us. Would you give money to someone who doesn't like you personally? Besides, isn't it better to motivate other nations by withholding money rather than the threat of military action? [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img]

There are many nations who aren't going to like us no matter what we do (they're so jealous [img]tongue.gif[/img] ) so we might as well exert some influence to make the world better for us.

[Chewbacca]

Since I get the feeling few people actually read up on the issue before posting, here is a different article on the topic with some more facts:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/02/in...partner=GOOGLE

It appears that 90 countries have signed on to this court of law and big rich countries are generally exempt from losing the aid they recieve from the U.S. if they did.

Only the poor countries we could try to extort to see it our way are effected. Is that what being fair, flexible and equitable is all about?

This kind of so-called "diplomacy" would have Benjamin Franklin rolling over in his grave, IMO. So much for creative foriegn policy, compromise, and humility.

[ 07-02-2003, 02:14 AM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]