Rand Paul calls for stopping ALL foreign aid

[Ben]

[Ben]

U.S. Democrats and pro-Israel lobbies slam Republican Senator's call to halt Israel aid

Tea Party representative Rand Paul tells CNN’s Wolf Blitzer he has a lot of respect for Israel but he doesn't believe the U.S. should be funding the Mideast arms race during financial crisis.

By Natasha Mozgovaya

U.S. Democrats and pro-Israel lobbies slammed on Thursday comments made by newly elected Republican Senator and Tea Party representative Rand Paul who suggested that the United States should halt all foreign aid including its financial aid to Israel.
In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday Paul said that “Reuters did a poll, and 71 percent of American people agree with me that when we're short of money, where we can't do the things we need to do in our country, we certainly shouldn't be shipping the money overseas.”
When asked by Blitzer if he wanted to halt an annual $3 billion that go to Israel, Paul replied affirmatively, explaining that Egypt recieves almost the same amount .
"You have to ask yourself, are we funding an arms race on both sides? I have a lot of sympathy and respect for Israel as a democratic nation, as, you know, a fountain of peace and a fountain of democracy within the Middle East. But at the same time, I don't think funding both sides of the arm race, particularly when we have to borrow the money from China to send it to someone else. We just can't do it anymore. The debt is all- consuming and it threatens our well-being as a country,” Paul said.
Pro-Israel Jewish lobby J Street issued a statement in response to Paul's comments saying it was “alarmed” by his suggestion.
“Senator Paul’s proposal would undermine the decades-long bipartisan consensus on U.S. support for Israel. Any erosion of support should concern Israel’s friends on both sides of the political aisle, and we call in particular on leaders and donors in Senator Paul’s party to repudiate his comments and ensure that American leadership around the world is not threatened by this irresponsible proposal," the statement issued by J Street read.
National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) President and CEO David Harris also condemned his statement saying that “Paul's suggestion is negligent, shortsighted, and just plain wrong,” adding that “foreign aid in general, and aid to Israel in particular, is crucial to Israel's security and its pursuit of peace. Senator Paul's statement is yet another illustration of how the Republican Party continues to grow increasingly out of touch with the values of the vast majority of the American Jewish community."
Congresswoman Nita Lowey, Ranking member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations, called the initiative “shocking”.
“Israel is the only democratic nation in the Middle East and one of our most stalwart allies”, Lowey said. “A stable and secure Israel is in our national security interest and has been a staple of our foreign policy for more than sixty years. Using our budget deficit as a reason to abandon Israel is inexcusable. It is unclear to me whether Rand Paul speaks for the Tea Party, the Republican Party, or simply himself”.
Meanwhile, Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matthew Brooks issued a statement saying "we share Senator Paul's commitment to restraining the growth of federal spending, but we reject his misguided proposal to end U.S. assistance to our ally, Israel."
"Moreover, based on his comments in an interview with CNN, we are concerned that Senator Paul may not grasp the fundamentals of our alliance with Israel. In 2007, the U.S. and Israel signed a ten-year 'Memorandum of Understanding' (MoU) to govern U.S. assistance going forward. A critical aim of the MoU was to preserve Israel's qualitative military advantage. Accordingly, any concern that U.S. assistance might undermine Israel's security is groundless," Brooks said.

[BeardedOne]

I'm missing something here. How does stopping =ALL= foreign aid during a fiscal crisis somehow translate to "You're always so mean to =ME=!"?

Where are the statements of condemnation of this suggestion from the dozens (Hundreds) of other nations that recieve US Aid?

In recent years I used my successes to help friends and neighbors in need. This altruism brought me to the brink of bankruptcy and I almost lost my house. Lesson learned: Charity begins at home. I can't be much help to others if my own ship is foundering.

How much water are we expected to share when the well runs dry?

[Ben]

Much like his dad, well, I've mixed feelings about Rand Paul. He's very good on certain issues.
He, like his dad, wouldn't have voted for the bank bailout. It goes against the tenets of capitalism. When the lender lends, well, he/she assumes that risk. And if he/she loses, well, they take that loss. (We've no-risk capitalism [it's really state capitalism] whereby if the lender lends and takes a loss, well, the taxpayers hand them TRILLIONS of dollars. No-risk capitalism is great -- ha! ha! ha!)
And he's very good here:

[onmyknees]

I'm missing something here. How does stopping =ALL= foreign aid during a fiscal crisis somehow translate to "You're always so mean to =ME=!"?

Where are the statements of condemnation of this suggestion from the dozens (Hundreds) of other nations that recieve US Aid?

In recent years I used my successes to help friends and neighbors in need. This altruism brought me to the brink of bankruptcy and I almost lost my house. Lesson learned: Charity begins at home. I can't be much help to others if my own ship is foundering.

How much water are we expected to share when the well runs dry?

Profound words indeed. While I'm certainly in favor of aid to Isreal, how can we take it from all other nations and continue giving it to Isreal ? At least Paul is consistant, and I'm guessing Isreal could manage without our 3 billion.

[russtafa]

I think fuck the world policy is a good policy

[thombergeron]

What an awesome idea. If the U.S. canceled every penny of its foreign aid, we could actually reduce the deficit by almost 4%!

Of course, with no development or military aid from the U.S., the government of Iraq would last about 36 hours, which is probably going to get you $150/barrel for oil, in addition to other headaches. The Pakistani government wouldn't last much longer. So after Pakistan descends into chaos, India will invade; hopefully, nobody will get nuked in the process. Without DEA and USAID money, Santos in Colombia is going to have a hard time consolidating recent gains against the FARC, because Hugo Chavez sure as hell isn't going to cancel his foreign aid programs. Et cetera, et cetera...

But hey, what's a little global chaos if we can manage to reduce the deficit by 4%?

[russtafa]

What an awesome idea. If the U.S. canceled every penny of its foreign aid, we could actually reduce the deficit by almost 4%!

Of course, with no development or military aid from the U.S., the government of Iraq would last about 36 hours, which is probably going to get you $150/barrel for oil, in addition to other headaches. The Pakistani government wouldn't last much longer. So after Pakistan descends into chaos, India will invade; hopefully, nobody will get nuked in the process. Without DEA and USAID money, Santos in Colombia is going to have a hard time consolidating recent gains against the FARC, because Hugo Chavez sure as hell isn't going to cancel his foreign aid programs. Et cetera, et cetera...

But hey, what's a little global chaos if we can manage to reduce the deficit by 4%?

great idea fuck the tea towel heads and their dirty camels

[trish]

I'm not big on foreign aid myself since most of it is in the form of weapons and military advisers. Laura Bush, however, was on the air tonight explaining just how important the three hundred million odd dollars is for the advancement and freedom of woman around the globe. It made me think of the small sum that we pay in foreign aid to Africa to buy mosquito netting that prevents the spread of malaria. G.W.Bush extended the hand of U.S. aid to bring modern treatment for aids to the continent of Africa. All seem like worthy goals, and so cheap that trimming them from the budget will do nothing to curtail spending. Of course, the anti-spending crowd isn't at all concerned about the debt, otherwise they would be after the huge non-defense military budget. Wall Street and two wars in the Middle East are the cause of our budgetary woes. If you're really serious about the "economic crisis" you will want to regulate the former, pull out of the latter, terminate the tax loopholes for corporations and end the tax breaks for the multi-millionaires.

[onmyknees]

Sigh....you simply can't help yourself it appears. Fiscal conservatives have indeed laid out plans to cut defense spending, but you won't get that off the Huff Post. Read Paul Ryan's plan. Your stab at irony about the fiscal conservatives cutting the budget is laughable. I'm guessing you were 4 square behind the Stimulus and Obama's omnibus budgets> Now that most of the money has been pissed away with minimal affect, it has to be repaid and with interest. Fine mess we're in now !!!!!!!!

I'm not saying Wall St. didn't have a hand in the current financial woes, but until you fully understand the role Andrew Cumo and Janet Reno had in strong arming banks into making loans even Cumo admitted himself , for the most part couldn't be paid back, then you're whistling past the graveyard. Given a pile of shit, smart Wall Streeters will figure out a way to make money on it, and that's what they did. Blame Fannie and Freddie and Franklin Raines, Trish they started the ball rolling ....to do otherwise is selective outrage, but then again it suits your ajenda, so have at it.

Surely 2 wars have put us in a difficult position, but the real money is in entitlements , but you wouldn't dare engage in conversations about how to reform them. Blame it on Bush Trish...that worked well last November.