• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rand Paul: End 'welfare' to Israel

jamesrage said:
If you look at the article in the OP Rand Paul says all foreign aid. Politco focused on the end aid to Israel in their title to deliberately paint Rand Paul as hating jews.
Click to expand...

I'm not an isolationist. I'm against turning our backs on our allies.


Rand Paul, like his father, is an isolationist.
 
I'd rather we cut our foreign aid to Africa than Israel.
 
Completely agree with you dana. Israel has more than enough firepower to defend itself from even all its enemies at the same time. They don't need more monetary help.
 
MrVicchio said:
I'm not an isolationist. I'm against turning our backs on our allies.


Rand Paul, like his father, is an isolationist.
Click to expand...

Allies is a two-way street. We started supporting israel for really no reason at all and our oil crisis in the 70's was due in no small part due to our support of them.
 
VanceMack said:
Personally...Id end ALL foreign aid. reinvest those dollars in American farms and manufacturing via lease, grow crops and food supplies, build tents and generators (putting people to work in the process) taking care of our own truly needy, and when someone needs assistance, they get goods...not a few billion in a leaders bank account.
Click to expand...

I would go along with you on cutting foreign military aid, but still provide humanitarian aid where needed. It never did make sense to me to take money from poor people in one country and give it to the rich people in another country.
 
washunut said:
At the same time it would be a good idea for the EU to stop the welfare bailouts of countries like Spain.
Click to expand...

What welfare bail-outs are those? Perhaps you'd like to quotes the EU budget lines where Spain receives payments that are not available to other EU states.
 
iamitter said:
Allies is a two-way street. We started supporting israel for really no reason at all and our oil crisis in the 70's was due in no small part due to our support of them.
Click to expand...
This is revisionism. The US began supporting Israel in earnest after the 1967 War in which Soviet ME client states got their clocks cleaned. Shortly thereafter, Anwar Sadat booted the Russians out of Egypt and the US stepped in with aid to secure Egypt and the invaluable Suez Canal.
 
America didn't really provide arms to Israel in any significant quantity until after the Seven Day War. I remember the IDF flying Mirages into combat against the Egyptians, Jordanians and Syrians in 1967.
 
If we're going to stop paying foreign aid money, we need to START with countries that hate us and are uncooperative or downright against us. THEN we can cut funds for dubious allies like Egypt and Saudi.

Israel is way far down the list. STARTING with Israel smacks of anti-Izzy-ism to me.
 
Goshin said:
If we're going to stop paying foreign aid money, we need to START with countries that hate us and are uncooperative or downright against us. THEN we can cut funds for dubious allies like Egypt and Saudi.

Israel is way far down the list. STARTING with Israel smacks of anti-Izzy-ism to me.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid the "Starting with Israel" idea is one that has been invented by posters in this thread. If you read the original article, Israel is not the target, not the first to be cut, not the focus of Paul's musings at all. It's just that Israel has a lot of people watching their back.
 
Is it advisable for us to continue to provide military aid to countries that commit human rights violations, even though they support our interest in ME oil?
 
All well in good, but that will take care of approximately .2% of the deficit. Average annual foreign aid is about $25 Billion to all nations. Deficit is 1.4 Trillion.

So how we gonna fix the other 99.8%?

This is honestly what bothers me about these things. We have glaring problems in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security and a MASSIVELY bloated defense budget. But instead of taking care of those things; which would actually have impact, the current Congress will pretend they're doing things by going after programs that amount to .2% or in some cases (Corporation for Public Broadcasting), .01%.

So, if we eliminate foreign aid and the CPB, that would take care of .21% of the deficit.

If you were a person and you were spending more than you made would you first cut iceberg lettuce out of your budget or would you get rid of your second home?
 
Saudi Arabia would be nothing without us.

We just picked one of their random tribal warlords and gave him tanks, that's why they like us now.
 
iamitter said:
Saudi Arabia would be nothing without us.

We just picked one of their random tribal warlords and gave him tanks, that's why they like us now.
Click to expand...

The House of Saud existed before the US was a nation. We didn't pick anything. Ibn Wahhab picked the House of Saud.
 
All foreign aid should be cut and enough of the military welfare we give to Europe, Parts of Asia, Latin America and Africa. If people want to give money to these nations they should be free to do so via private charities, not tax payer theft.
 
MrVicchio said:
I'm not an isolationist. I'm against turning our backs on our allies.
Click to expand...
I never said we should turn our backs on our allies. Just stop giving them money,especially when we are debt.

Rand Paul, like his father, is an isolationist.
Click to expand...

Even a isolationist can be right once or twice. However politco wasn't trying to paint Rand Paul as a isolationist.
 
jamesrage said:
I never said we should turn our backs on our allies. Just stop giving them money,especially when we are debt.



Even a isolationist can be right once or twice. However politco wasn't trying to paint Rand Paul as a isolationist.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and I see the accusations of being anti-Israel, and isolationist, dishonest as hell. I will state exactly what I believe, so that it cannot be taken out of context again:

1) Cut ALL foreign aid. This includes Israel, Europe, Africa, and everywhere else. America should aid it's own first. America first. Period.

2) The cold war is over. We need to cut our military bases by at least half. There is no excuse to bust the budget, whether by excessive welfare programs for our citizens, or welfare to the military-industrial complex. Let's also include welfare for the banksters in this.

Budget cuts doesn't mean cut all programs which I don't like, but give the programs I like a pass. It means making hard choices over the whole spectrum, and trimming what we need to trim, in order to get to a point where we are once again fiscally responsible. THIS is what Rand Paul was talking about. We can't give away money that we desperately need ourselves. Did you know that, during the winter storm we just had, Texas ended up receiving foreign aid from Mexico, in the form of electricity? This is totally unacceptable. We need to take care of our own first, before we even begin to think about taking care of other nations. Foreign aid in better times? Sure. But these are not better times. It is time to trim the fat, and look after our own first, and as a voting citizen, this is what I demand from Barack O'Bummer and Joe Bite Me.
 
Last edited:
iamitter said:
Saudi Arabia would be nothing without us.

We just picked one of their random tribal warlords and gave him tanks, that's why they like us now.
Click to expand...

Might wanna consider reading a little history there...how they came to power, alliances with Bedouins, etc...
 
FilmFestGuy said:
All well in good, but that will take care of approximately .2% of the deficit. Average annual foreign aid is about $25 Billion to all nations. Deficit is 1.4 Trillion.

So how we gonna fix the other 99.8%?

This is honestly what bothers me about these things. We have glaring problems in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security and a MASSIVELY bloated defense budget. But instead of taking care of those things; which would actually have impact, the current Congress will pretend they're doing things by going after programs that amount to .2% or in some cases (Corporation for Public Broadcasting), .01%.

So, if we eliminate foreign aid and the CPB, that would take care of .21% of the deficit.

If you were a person and you were spending more than you made would you first cut iceberg lettuce out of your budget or would you get rid of your second home?
Click to expand...

I guess I missed the part wher he said "and that will solve EVERYTHING!"

Its a beginning, not an end
 
VanceMack said:
I guess I missed the part wher he said "and that will solve EVERYTHING!"

Its a beginning, not an end
Click to expand...

It is still like getting a manicure while both legs and the under-body is rotting away with gangrene..
 
PeteEU said:
It is still like getting a manicure while both legs and the under-body is rotting away with gangrene..
Click to expand...

We are less than a month into the new congress. Chill. Besides he also has suggested other cuts. And Rand Paul isnt going to be the budget savior...so lets start seeing others engage and propose massive cuts. Hell they do that I will even embrace tax increases on the wealthy to pay down the debt.
 
VanceMack said:
We are less than a month into the new congress. Chill. Besides he also has suggested other cuts. And Rand Paul isnt going to be the budget savior...so lets start seeing others engage and propose massive cuts. Hell they do that I will even embrace tax increases on the wealthy to pay down the debt.
Click to expand...

Considering the Tea Party/GOP mantra of cutting 100 billion as fast as possible, has now gone down to 32 billion.. then... not optimistic at all.
 
PeteEU said:
Considering the Tea Party/GOP mantra of cutting 100 billion as fast as possible, has now gone down to 32 billion.. then... not optimistic at all.
Click to expand...

Oh dont worry...I understand your mindset...any way at all to bash the Tea Party goals...ohmigid...its not been a full month, theres only 4 of them affiliated int he senate and they havent managed to undo 40-50 years of democrat and republican spending that has put us in a 14 trillion dollar hole...imagine that.

How much cuts are others proposing? FM...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom