How Does the American Presence in the Middle East Benefit Americans?

[healthmyths]

Maybe rather then complaining about what the Constitution calls for i.e. "National Defense"... why not stop funding these absolutely wasteful with no value to the USA projects with OUR TAX MONEY!!!
The USA Federal government spent:
- $2.6 million to make sure prostitutes in China drink less on the job.

- $1.44 million in federal funds estimating the size of the population and examining the “social milieu” of male prostitutes in Hanoi & Ho Chi Minh City,

- Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties

- Studying pig poop. The EPA awarded a $141,450 grant under the Clean Air Act to fund a Chinese study on swine manure

- a $1.2 million grant to the United Nations for clean fuel promotion.

- Conferences for government employees. In 2008 & 2009 alone, the Department of Justice spent $121 million to host or participate in 1,832 conferences.

- U.S. government has spent $1.5 million to preserve some artifacts left during the hostile Indian occupation of Alcatraz Island more than four decades go.
While the State Department saved money on security in Libya, it somehow managed to find $5.6 million in 2011 to support “pressing cultural preservation needs” in dozens of foreign countries.
Here are some of the dire projects funded by U.S. tax dollars that perhaps could be better spent on securing U.S. embassies in hostile Arab countries.
- Uncle Sam doled out
$750,000 to restore a 16th-century tomb complex in India,
$700,000 to conserve ruins in Tanzania,
$600,000 for the “temple of the winged lions” in Jordan and
$450,000 for the conservation of a 10th century temple in Cambodia. Those were just the big ticket projects.
Hundreds of thousands more went to smaller causes throughout the world.

I mean do you REALLY think spending $2.6 million IN CHINA studying drinking habits of Chinese prostitutes is essential??

 

[BallsBrunswick]

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

With the debt that our country has accumulated I think it's past time to come home. Leave a few aircraft carriers and a few quick strike forces behind to deal with imminent threats and bring the rest home. Stop policing everyone elses shit.

You are right! Seal the borders! NO more international trade and that will keep all nasty varmints found in containers from overseas!
Won't have to worry about inspections. And then while we are at it.. let's as you say retrench and tell all Americans traveling abroad,
"good luck charley" USA won't be there to help when you get hauled into jail for smoking some weed in a country you thought you could so you called who..NO ambassador any more!

YEA .. simplest trick just withdraw the reason most of the world is able to do things, sleep better..
Knowing the mightiest forces are there to protect!

You are right! SEAL the boarders! Stop the oil from Canada..(under an agreement..)!

If there was an award for hyperbole you would take first.

You should be proud

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Maybe rather then complaining about what the Constitution calls for i.e. "National Defense"... why not stop funding these absolutely wasteful with no value to the USA projects with OUR TAX MONEY!!!
The USA Federal government spent:
- $2.6 million to make sure prostitutes in China drink less on the job.

- $1.44 million in federal funds estimating the size of the population and examining the “social milieu” of male prostitutes in Hanoi & Ho Chi Minh City,

- Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties

- Studying pig poop. The EPA awarded a $141,450 grant under the Clean Air Act to fund a Chinese study on swine manure

- a $1.2 million grant to the United Nations for clean fuel promotion.

- Conferences for government employees. In 2008 & 2009 alone, the Department of Justice spent $121 million to host or participate in 1,832 conferences.

- U.S. government has spent $1.5 million to preserve some artifacts left during the hostile Indian occupation of Alcatraz Island more than four decades go.
While the State Department saved money on security in Libya, it somehow managed to find $5.6 million in 2011 to support “pressing cultural preservation needs” in dozens of foreign countries.
Here are some of the dire projects funded by U.S. tax dollars that perhaps could be better spent on securing U.S. embassies in hostile Arab countries.
- Uncle Sam doled out
$750,000 to restore a 16th-century tomb complex in India,
$700,000 to conserve ruins in Tanzania,
$600,000 for the “temple of the winged lions” in Jordan and
$450,000 for the conservation of a 10th century temple in Cambodia. Those were just the big ticket projects.
Hundreds of thousands more went to smaller causes throughout the world.

I mean do you REALLY think spending $2.6 million IN CHINA studying drinking habits of Chinese prostitutes is essential??

National defense and militarily occupying the rest of the world are two different things.

 

[georgephillip]

Kindly reference you assertions with certified and vetted sources where those drones are intentionally targeting civilians together with the plans clearly state such.

"Asked what the standard is for who could be hit (by signature drone strike), former Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter recently told an interviewer: 'The definition is a male between the ages of 20 and 40. My feeling is one man’s combatant is another man’s – well, a chump who went to a meeting.'”

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

You see this is the bullshit I want to avoid, "ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them."

About Us - ProPublica

Can you name any sources you regard as credible when it comes to the number of Muslims killed by US drones?

Any numbers here you would care to contest?

"Consider: while four American citizens are known to have been killed by drones in the past decade, the strikes have killed an estimated total of 2,600 to 4,700 people over the same period."

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

 

[tinydancer]

Bullshit we are your number one.

Why do want terrorists oil? We are so cool and we are your number one supplier.

Why are you in the middle east? Blood oil. Not us. We don't want to behead you either.

 

[BallsBrunswick]

Bullshit we are your number one.

Why do want terrorists oil? We are so cool and we are your number one supplier.

Why are you in the middle east? Blood oil. Not us. We don't want to behead you either.

 

[tinydancer]

"Asked what the standard is for who could be hit (by signature drone strike), former Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter recently told an interviewer: 'The definition is a male between the ages of 20 and 40. My feeling is one man’s combatant is another man’s – well, a chump who went to a meeting.'”

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

You see this is the bullshit I want to avoid, "ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them."

About Us - ProPublica

Can you name any sources you regard as credible when it comes to the number of Muslims killed by US drones?

Any numbers here you would care to contest?

"Consider: while four American citizens are known to have been killed by drones in the past decade, the strikes have killed an estimated total of 2,600 to 4,700 people over the same period."

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

Telegraph has some serious numbers. Obama's like killing 50 to 60 to one terrorist. I think the last drone strike they took out a whole wedding party. Over 30 dead and a whole batch hurt.

Hey its a Democrat killing people. Not a worry right?

 

[Connery]

"Asked what the standard is for who could be hit (by signature drone strike), former Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter recently told an interviewer: 'The definition is a male between the ages of 20 and 40. My feeling is one man’s combatant is another man’s – well, a chump who went to a meeting.'”

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

You see this is the bullshit I want to avoid, "ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them."

About Us - ProPublica

Can you name any sources you regard as credible when it comes to the number of Muslims killed by US drones?

Any numbers here you would care to contest?

"Consider: while four American citizens are known to have been killed by drones in the past decade, the strikes have killed an estimated total of 2,600 to 4,700 people over the same period."

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

Primary sources

 

[Flopper]

I can't think of one single reason for the US government to be involved in the Middle East.

Why do we have troops over there?

Can anyone tell me?

We are involved today because we were involved yesterday and the day before and the day before and the day before................
Nations like individuals form relationships and alliances which are not easily broken.

 

[tinydancer]

Bullshit we are your number one.

Why do want terrorists oil? We are so cool and we are your number one supplier.

Why are you in the middle east? Blood oil. Not us. We don't want to behead you either.

We are your number one supplier. If you stopped messing around in the middle east we could give you every drop of oil you need.

And you wouldn't have to shed any blood for it.

But no you have the Rockefellers and Soros trying to block the Keystone.

Not bullshit either. Financial documents to prove it. But it appears you libs want blood oil.

 

[tinydancer]

Why on earth do you want blood oil? I don't get this at all.

 

[georgephillip]

You see this is the bullshit I want to avoid, "ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them."

About Us - ProPublica

Can you name any sources you regard as credible when it comes to the number of Muslims killed by US drones?

Any numbers here you would care to contest?

"Consider: while four American citizens are known to have been killed by drones in the past decade, the strikes have killed an estimated total of 2,600 to 4,700 people over the same period."

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

Telegraph has some serious numbers. Obama's like killing 50 to 60 to one terrorist. I think the last drone strike they took out a whole wedding party. Over 30 dead and a whole batch hurt.

Hey its a Democrat killing people. Not a worry right?

Personally, I think Chomsky's right (again) when he claims every living US President is a suitable candidate for war crimes prosecution. Some Canadian politicians seem to be catching on fast.

 

[georgephillip]

You see this is the bullshit I want to avoid, "ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them."

About Us - ProPublica

Can you name any sources you regard as credible when it comes to the number of Muslims killed by US drones?

Any numbers here you would care to contest?

"Consider: while four American citizens are known to have been killed by drones in the past decade, the strikes have killed an estimated total of 2,600 to 4,700 people over the same period."

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

Primary sources

"A journal article reporting NEW research or findings."

Primary vs Secondary Sources

 

[rdean]

I can't think of one single reason for the US government to be involved in the Middle East.

Why do we have troops over there?

Can anyone tell me?

So the friends of Bush and Cheney could make billions of dollars. And it worked.

 

[tinydancer]

Can you name any sources you regard as credible when it comes to the number of Muslims killed by US drones?

Any numbers here you would care to contest?

"Consider: while four American citizens are known to have been killed by drones in the past decade, the strikes have killed an estimated total of 2,600 to 4,700 people over the same period."

The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About - ProPublica

Telegraph has some serious numbers. Obama's like killing 50 to 60 to one terrorist. I think the last drone strike they took out a whole wedding party. Over 30 dead and a whole batch hurt.

Hey its a Democrat killing people. Not a worry right?

Personally, I think Chomsky's right (again) when he claims every living US President is a suitable candidate for war crimes prosecution. Some Canadian politicians seem to be catching on fast.

Martin? Cretien? Oh yeah.....

 

[Londoner]

1. Building American bases on muslim holy Land increases terrorism

2. Reagan selling weapons to Iraq increases terrorism

3. Reagan pouring weapons and money into Hussein's Iraq increases terrorism

4. The USA removing the wildly popular Mossadeq and installing the brutal Shah increases terrorism

5. Clinton bombing Iraq for 6 years increases terrorism

6. Bush bombing Iraq and turning the country into mess increases terrorism

7. Funding the corrupt Saudi Royals for over 30 years increases terrorism

But there is a method to the madness...

Terrorism creates instability and a national security threat

A national security threat creates a context for military and political intervention, so that the US can protect its considerable energy assets in the region.

We don't want the middle east to be stable and capable of waging full control over its own resources. We need to maintain considerable control over the region.

Back story...

Carter wanted to slowly transition away from maximum-petroleum-use in order to get out of the middle east. Reagan, who was heavily funded by big oil, wanted to sustain maximum energy use.

Reagan won the argument over oil... and America vastly increased its presence in the Middle East.

As a consequence, we have built the most oil dependent economy in World History. Therefore: when oil is cheap, the economy thrives. When oil is expensive, the economy dies.

Given the choices we have made - specifically given our unwillingness to make sacrifices in the 70s when an alternative path was possible - we now need to be in the middle east. Carter asked us to create a "Moon Shot" around using less oil. He said that if we didn't diminish our dependency on petroleum, our economy would some day be destroyed by the $4 gallon. Reagan said he was crazy, and he lead America into a multi-decade orgy of oil profligacy. It was a great ride until the oil started to run out. Once China/India modernized and began rapidly diminishing global supplies, the reality of our terribly corrupt and wrongheaded energy policy blossomed.

We swallowed poison in 1980 . . . and now we are slowly dying.

 

[freedombecki]

1. Building American bases on muslim holy Land increases terrorism

2. Reagan selling weapons to Iraq increases terrorism

3. Reagan pouring weapons and money into Hussein's Iraq increases terrorism

4. The USA removing the wildly popular Mossadeq and installing the brutal Shah increases terrorism

5. Clinton bombing Iraq for 10 years increases terrorism

6. Bush bombing Iraq and turning the country into mess increases terrorism

7. Funding the corrupt Saudi Royals for over 30 years increases terrorism

8. Terrorism creates instability and a national security threat

9. A national security threat creates a context for military and political intervention, so that the US can protect its considerable energy assets in the region.

Carter wanted to slowly transition away from maximum-petroleum-use in order to get out of the middle east. Reagan, who was heavily funded by big oil, wanted to sustain maximum energy use.

Reagan won and America vastly increased its presence in the Middle East.

We have built the most oil dependent economy in World History. When oil is cheap, the economy thrives. When oil is expensive, the economy dies. Meaning: we need to be in the middle east. Carter asked us to create "Moon Shot" around using less oil. He said that if we didn't diminish our dependency on petroleum, our economy would some day be destroyed by the $4 gallon. Reagan said he was crazy, and he lead America into a multi-decade orgy of oil profligacy. It was a great ride until the oil started to run out. Once China/India modernized and began rapidly diminishing global supplies, the game ended.

We swallowed poison in 1980 . . . and now we are slowly dying.

Too bad Londoners decided to snub the colonists from having political representation. YOU blew it.

 

[Seawytch]

I can't think of one single reason for the US government to be involved in the Middle East.

Why do we have troops over there?

Can anyone tell me?

I can give you dozens...

 

[georgephillip]

Telegraph has some serious numbers. Obama's like killing 50 to 60 to one terrorist. I think the last drone strike they took out a whole wedding party. Over 30 dead and a whole batch hurt.

Hey its a Democrat killing people. Not a worry right?

Personally, I think Chomsky's right (again) when he claims every living US President is a suitable candidate for war crimes prosecution. Some Canadian politicians seem to be catching on fast.

Martin? Cretien? Oh yeah.....

Does the Canadian government sponsor its 1% to the same extent as their US counterparts?