4
   

Who thinks US Aid is given with nothing expected in return?

 
 
Reply Fri 22 Nov, 2019 11:58 pm
Who amongst you believe that the US gives away money in any form with nothing expected in return?

Do you believe our military aid or humanitarian aid is just given away?

All this talk about quid pro quo in relation to military aid... Why do you think we give out aid?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 4 • Views: 381 • Replies: 19

 
glitterbag
 
  4  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 12:26 am
@McGentrix,
As a retired DOD person, unlike you, no!! The US provides financial aid to countries to encourage the recipients to cooperate in the peace process, to rebuild their economy so they don't unnecessarily drain money from other countries.....that sort of stuff. What we are not supposed to do is prop up a hostile regime like RUSSIA, and sabotage the Ukraine (the wedge between the free world and the wanna-be return to the Soviet Union)........thats what it's all about.....don't be a sap McG....do you really want the democrats or republicans to sell us down the river when political fortunes turn? You need to decide if you want the Constitution nullified in favor of a fat crybaby, whining, greedy rapacious bottomless pit of need......and now.....I'm not willing to accept a King, maybe you are? If you want a royal family ruling America.....please renounce your tenuous claim to be a United States of America citizen....and just fold like a weak willed non-entity or Communist/Bund Member fascist.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  7  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 07:08 am
@McGentrix,
Of course military and humanitarian aid is given with the expectation of receiving something in return. This doesn't necessarily mean a direct payback, especially with humanitarian aid — sometimes it's just a drop in a bucket to ease our collective conscience. And there are times when military aid is given more for domestic political reasons, i.e. wanting to "look tough on terrorists". But if you're trying to defend Trump's actions in Ukraine the quid pro quo had nothing to do with the reason we promised the aid to begin with — to help an ally defend itself in a hot war with Russia. The expected quid pro quo would be that as the US further cements Ukraine's position as an ally, Ukraine will support our diplomatic and policy positions and use the military aid to halt Russian expansionism. But the idea of holding this aid up so that Trump can extort a personal political favor from a weak and dependent ally is totally outside the normal expectations of international diplomacy. If Trump wants to find damaging information on an opponent and is willing to pay for it he should use his own money or dip into his campaign war chest, not offer congressionally authorized military aid conditioned on a personal favor. And this completely leaves out the sliming of our ambassador and using Giuliani to run shady operations independent of the State Department.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 07:40 am
@hightor,
Thanks for explaining the flaming obvious in such a straight forward manner that even McGentrix should be able to understand it.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 10:52 am
@hightor,
Quote:
Of course military and humanitarian aid is given with the expectation of receiving something in return.


Ok then. We are in agreement.
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 11:06 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
We are in agreement.

Within the limitations of that one sentence, yes. That doesn't mean that every foreign aid quid pro quo is legal; the arrangement must still conform to the law. Trump's defenders can't just write off attempted extortion by claiming, "It's a quid pro quo; everyone does it."
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 01:05 pm
@hightor,
According to the liberal press, they act as though the US, or anyone really, has never asked for something in return for aid given. Like it's a giant surprise.
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 01:09 pm
@McGentrix,
No, their criticism is specifically aimed at the utter venality of Trump's self-serving attempt to compel an aid recipient to help him in his re-election campaign.
izzythepush
 
  4  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 01:18 pm
@hightor,
I'm sorry, I appear to have been mistaken.

For some the flaming obvious remains just out of reach.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 01:25 pm
@McGentrix,
What ******* liberal press? In America? You're having a laugh.

You've got a very conservative press in America, but even it can't stomach the activities of the cretinous, Nazi criminal slug. Only other Nazis and assorted **** eaters fall for that old bollocks.

Most people understand that America's interests are not the same as Trump's. In fact a lot of Trump's personal interests are contrary to America's which is why traditional allies despise him and dictators use him.

0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 10:28 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

No, their criticism is specifically aimed at the utter venality of Trump's self-serving attempt to compel an aid recipient to help him in his re-election campaign.


Nonsense. It's mostly about the election he had already won... Trump is looking into how the Democrats tried really hard to cheat in 2016 and still couldn't get HRC elected.
maxdancona
 
  4  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 11:01 pm
@McGentrix,
I am someone who has no problem calling bullshit on liberals when the argument they are making is bogus.

This time it is the Trump supporters who are making the bogus argument. The issue is that Trump used his presidential power for personal gain rather than for the good of the country.

If a president uses their power, in cooperation with the other parts of government, for the good of the American people, then it is good. If the president uses their power for their own benefit, then it is a abuse of power.

Before you argue that "investigating corruption" is good for the American people... that is bullshit. What Trump did has no logical basis and no unbiased observer, including the intelligence experts, thinks that Trump was acting in anyone's interest but his own.

Your argument is bogus.
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 11:04 pm
The best argument that the Trump side could make is that what Trump did was unethical, but that it doesn't rise to the level of impeachable. This is a difficult argument to counter because the founding fathers in their inestimable wisdom gave us only the vaguest idea of what an "impeachable" offense is.

The blustering argument that Trump supporters are making instead is devoid of facts.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 12:35 am
@maxdancona,
What personal gain can he get from investigating the 2016 election meddling.

He won already despite the best efforts of the Dems and their various agents.

You guys, ok not you guys as this is responding to Maxdancona and I understand you all don't see him as a mouthpiece. But, why don't you want the 2016 election meddling investigated? I thought you guys cared about that stuff?
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 01:20 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
What personal gain can he get from investigating the 2016 election meddling.


1. Donald Trump pressuring, bribing, extorting, and shaking down Ukraine to create or find dirt on Trump's potential 2020 political opponent is appalling and impeachable.


2. The personal gain is for Trump's re-election campaign against a likely 2020 opponent.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 04:09 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

I am someone who has no problem calling bullshit on liberals when the argument they are making is bogus.


That is true, and I think this is the only time I've seen you criticise a conservative poster.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  4  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 04:13 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

What personal gain can he get from investigating the 2016 election meddling.



Are you really that stupid?

Russia interfered in the last election, that's a fact. Whether or not Trump was complicit is disputed, the main argument his supporters have is that he was too stupid to be complicit.

Ukraine was not involved, that's another fact. By spreading a load of falsehoods Trump is muddying the water, and giving the cretins who support him another load of crap to sput.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  7  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 04:51 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
What personal gain can he get from investigating the 2016 election meddling.

It would satisfy his ego if he could say that Putin wasn't involved and Hillary was. But the bigger prize is the "corruption" investigation and the chance to smear the (very smear-able) Bidens.
Quote:
But, why don't you want the 2016 election meddling investigated?

It was investigated. A bunch of people went to jail and sixteen Russians were indicted. The alleged Ukrainian involvement was looked into and determined to be misinformation planted by Russia to divert attention from its actions.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 06:16 pm
@hightor,
No it wasn't. That is why the current Justice Dept is investigating it. We'll see what comes of it Dec 9th.
0 Replies
 
ascribbler
 
  0  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 06:50 pm
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/how-does-us-spend-its-foreign-aid
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Who thinks US Aid is given with nothing expected in return?
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/23/2020 at 02:38:42