What?! How could I say such a thing? Support foreign aid - a system in which taxpayers of one country are used to both support foreign dictators and subsidize their domestic exporters?
But, in Pakistan's case, it could be a good idea.
Why?
They would be the biggest impediment to the growth of American Empire. Here's how.
Every dollar that could have gone into killing foreigners for democracy or starting wars covert military operations abroad instead goes into the hands of the Pakistani government or military.
Every Pakistani general and bureaucrat then raids and takes away every penny of that dollar except for the last one. As is already the case. With only the last penny of the dollar sent used in a half-assed faux military "operation" by Pakistani soldiers, the results remain far worse than they would have been if US troops handled the matter. As is already the case.
And then the Pakistani government can tell the American government they didn't send enough money. And then US sends more money. And corrupt Pakistanis chew all that money down to the bone. Repeat over and over.
The Pakistanis would do themselves and the rest of us a great favour by taking more money away from the American military establishment and keeping more of it in their own pockets than blocked into destructive military expansion.
They should also give away more of that money as bribes to the "good" part of Taliban, so that they can build their local water and electrical supplies in Afghani villages, increase their rural tribal authority, and ensure that American control of Afghanistan falls apart even faster once US troops leave.
The more Pentagon shoots itself in the foot, the better.
This reminds me of the logic that says we should open the borders so that immigrants can come and drain the welfare system, and thereby collapse the whole system.
Prateek Sanjay: What?! How could I say such a thing? Support foreign aid - a system in which taxpayers of one country are used to both support foreign dictators and subsidize their domestic exporters? But, in Pakistan's case, it could be a good idea. Why? They would be the biggest impediment to the growth of American Empire. Here's how. Every dollar that could have gone into killing foreigners for democracy or starting wars covert military operations abroad instead goes into the hands of the Pakistani government or military. Every Pakistani general and bureaucrat then raids and takes away every penny of that dollar except for the last one. As is already the case. With only the last penny of the dollar sent used in a half-assed faux military "operation" by Pakistani soldiers, the results remain far worse than they would have been if US troops handled the matter. As is already the case. And then the Pakistani government can tell the American government they didn't send enough money. And then US sends more money. And corrupt Pakistanis chew all that money down to the bone. Repeat over and over. The Pakistanis would do themselves and the rest of us a great favour by taking more money away from the American military establishment and keeping more of it in their own pockets than blocked into destructive military expansion. They should also give away more of that money as bribes to the "good" part of Taliban, so that they can build their local water and electrical supplies in Afghani villages, increase their rural tribal authority, and ensure that American control of Afghanistan falls apart even faster once US troops leave. The more Pentagon shoots itself in the foot, the better.
Why expedite the inevitable? The federal government will spend the money regardless, trust me.
"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" -Patrick Henry
It's not exactly that, Sukrit.
The alternative is that US take complete charge in Pakistan in a way that instead of sending that billion dollars to Pakistan, it will use that billion dollars directly and run all its operations in Pakistan exactly the way it pleases through its own resources.
However, that would anger and alienate the Pakistani public even more and they would further demand withdrawal from Pakistan.
Currently, the US prefers to avoid bad PR, and thus it handles its Pakistani military operations through a very bad intermediary that will never get them their money's worth.
Were US aid to Pakistan ended, US may possibly revert to the former option - the cost of its bad PR notwithstanding. And then they would be truly brutal.
That is a fair point. Better to pay Pakistanis to pretend to be waging a war, than to actually wage it by yourself. Much less people get hurt this way, Americans included.
Do you really think that any Pakistani leader could cut funds and action for the army and still retain power? Cut all aid, let Pakistan become even more of a military dictatorship. There is no other way.
Not now, not in Pakistan, and never in the history of the human race has violence (Forcing a person to give up property through the threat of loss of property, loss of freedom, and if found resisting, loss of life.) begotten peace.
Perhaps the mission statement is "Pretend"- but the war itself is anything but fake. Over 3000+ Pakistani soldiers died not to mention the amount of civilians and rebels.
As the forum's favorite politician said at CPAC," foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country and giving it to the rich people of a poor country. "
My Blog: http://www.anarchico.net/
Production is 'anarchistic' - Ludwig von Mises