D
dijetlo
Guest
Iraq was not full of insurgents, unless your refferring to the Kurds, who we were arming and training (still are). As for terrorists, Ansar Al-Islam moved into the area under Kurdish control, so the only part of Iraq that had a terrorist problem was the part we controlled through kurdish proxy.Originally posted by jimnyc
Again, it all depends on how you define "invade". The USA launched air and sea attacks on Libya in 1986. Their country wasn't filled with insurgents and terrorists, so there was no need for occupation. Problem was solved, and effectively.
Aid from the US is used as a carrot for a third world countries leadership. The three biggest recipients of US Foreign Aid, Isreal, Pakistan, Egypt, are not poor countries when compared to Belize, the Dominican Republic, and Honduras which all lie within 500 miles of our own border. This is kind of the elephant in the room for those who want to argue that our motivation for foriegn aid is altruistic.Billions of dollars have been going in aid to various countries over the years to help stop human suffering.
No, we primarily help countries who are key to us for strategic reasons. To argue that the bulk of our aide is based on need is the argument that flies in the face of the facts.Talk about ignorant, to imply that we only help countries that have resources for us is pretty lame.