• 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

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Tea party-backed Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) isn’t sure that congressional Republicans have the guts to make the big budget cuts they’ve promised and, he said, members of the movement are becoming frustrated.

This thread may be somewhat controversial, but this isn't about abandoning Israel. If they are attacked, we have the capability to turn the nation that does so into a radioactive wasteland. But face it. Israel is a rich nation. Right now, we need the money more than they do. And beyond Israel, I like Paul's notion that we should be giving to America before giving to foreign nations. It's the American thing to do. We need to balance the budget, and as far as I am concerned, EVERYTHING is on the table, including money to nations that frankly don't need it.

Article is here.
 
Rand Paul is one ballsy mother****er. That's all I'll say.
 
Why stop with Israel? The U.S. supports/funds many dictators throughout the world and then overthrows Saddam Hussein to spread democracy. Our foreign policy seriously needs to change. We can't sustain our current policy.

As for Paul, at least some in Congress aren't bought and paid for...
 
It's incorrect to describe it as welfare, as as of 2007 it has been entirely military aid. But Israel has the capabilities to look after itself, it's a big country now.
 
This thread may be somewhat controversial, but this isn't about abandoning Israel. If they are attacked, we have the capability to turn the nation that does so into a radioactive wasteland. But face it. Israel is a rich nation. Right now, we need the money more than they do. And beyond Israel, I like Paul's notion that we should be giving to America before giving to foreign nations. It's the American thing to do. We need to balance the budget, and as far as I am concerned, EVERYTHING is on the table, including money to nations that frankly don't need it.

Article is here.

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.
 
You have to commend Rand Paul for being frank.
So many of the politicians you see on Meet The Press and other media events are unwilling to be specific about what they would cut. They all use the worn out worthless statement of "cutting out wasteful spending". They are spineless.
 
did everyone actually read the article? he didn't single out Israel. he said he wants to cut ALL foreign aid. cutting ALL foreign aid would also include Israel. it is the biased media that singles out Israel in the headline to make it look like Israel is the only he is referring to.
 
Rand Paul is a jew hater....

aint that the usual comment when suggesting such things?

As for the principle of stop funding Israel.. great idea. It would save the US a few dollars, but the reality of the situation is that most money comes from the Jewish community in the US and through "good trade deals". Direct aid is small change, but highly symbolic.

And over all US direct aid is also.. small change. You could probably save much more by just stopping earmarks.
 
Last edited:
This thread may be somewhat controversial, but this isn't about abandoning Israel. If they are attacked, we have the capability to turn the nation that does so into a radioactive wasteland. But face it. Israel is a rich nation. Right now, we need the money more than they do. And beyond Israel, I like Paul's notion that we should be giving to America before giving to foreign nations. It's the American thing to do. We need to balance the budget, and as far as I am concerned, EVERYTHING is on the table, including money to nations that frankly don't need it.

Article is here.

Rand Paul is right, end welfare to all countries we give foreign aid to. When you are in the hole the last thing you do is give money away. It doesn't make any sense to be giving money away when you are in debt and even if we were not in debt we still shouldn't be telling the tax payers to work their asses off just so the government can give it away to other countries.
 
Last edited:
Rand Paul is a jew hater....

aint that the usual comment when suggesting such things?

As for the principle of stop funding Israel.. great idea. It would save the US a few dollars, but the reality of the situation is that most money comes from the Jewish community in the US and through "good trade deals". Direct aid is small change, but highly symbolic.

And over all US direct aid is also.. small change. You could probably save much more by just stopping earmarks.

At the same time it would be a good idea for the EU to stop the welfare bailouts of countries like Spain.
 
Rand Paul is right, end welfare to all countries we give foreign aid to. When you are in the hole the last thing you do is give money away. It doesn't make any sense to be giving money away when you are in debt and even if we were not in debt we still shouldn't be telling the tax payers to work their asses off just so the government can give it away to other countries.

I have no problem with getting rid of all foreign aid. That should also include military bases in places like Germany. Are we still there to stop Russian tanks. He would cut a paltry 18 billion from 600-700 defense budget. So he is just shifting money around not making the cuts we really need.

If he had said cut defense by 100-200 billion per year he would have been credible.
 
Aid to Israel as a percentage of our total foreign aid has been dropping in recent years. It represented approximately 5% in 2008, while it was over 15% in 2001.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s1298.pdf

Why people would focus on the 5% while ignoring the 95% is anybody's guess, but if arguments are truly driven by economics, then there is little reason to focus so heavily on Israel.
 
Aid to Israel as a percentage of our total foreign aid has been dropping in recent years. It represented approximately 5% in 2008, while it was over 15% in 2001.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s1298.pdf

Why people would focus on the 5% while ignoring the 95% is anybody's guess, but if arguments are truly driven by economics, then there is little reason to focus so heavily on Israel.

It is this new senator's way of getting cheap attention. What is new about a senator from the south taking a shot at jews or blacks? Probably make him a presidential candidate.
 
It is this new senator's way of getting cheap attention. What is new about a senator from the south taking a shot at jews or blacks? Probably make him a presidential candidate.

Epic fail of a post.
 
Aid to Israel as a percentage of our total foreign aid has been dropping in recent years. It represented approximately 5% in 2008, while it was over 15% in 2001.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s1298.pdf

Why people would focus on the 5% while ignoring the 95% is anybody's guess, but if arguments are truly driven by economics, then there is little reason to focus so heavily on Israel.

Because that 5% is the most controversial part, the bloke in the OP said to stop all foreign aid, it was just the reporter that focussed on Israel.
 
I have no problem with getting rid of all foreign aid. That should also include military bases in places like Germany. Are we still there to stop Russian tanks. He would cut a paltry 18 billion from 600-700 defense budget. So he is just shifting money around not making the cuts we really need.

If he had said cut defense by 100-200 billion per year he would have been credible.

I would be for shifting those troops stationed Germany and other countries to stationing them on the US border.
 
I would be for shifting those troops stationed Germany and other countries to stationing them on the US border.

Agree. We have something like 1000 foreign military bases that could also be reduced greatly. But we aren't going to see this ever happening no matter if it is herd of donkeys or herd of elephants running the show.
 
Aid to Israel as a percentage of our total foreign aid has been dropping in recent years. It represented approximately 5% in 2008, while it was over 15% in 2001.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s1298.pdf

Why people would focus on the 5% while ignoring the 95% is anybody's guess, but if arguments are truly driven by economics, then there is little reason to focus so heavily on Israel.

I think mostly its to stir up the people whose mouths are on Israel's scrotum in order to peg Rand Paul as a anti-Semite. The con-artists on the Trinity Broad Casting network, the con-artist masquerading as preachers as well as certian politicians can go look he opposes funding Israel so he must hate the jews or other republicans can go he must want Israel to go the Muslims.
 
Last edited:
Two words: Posse Comitatus

Irrelevant. The job of securing the borders is a job of the military. Some law enacted to appeases crybabies who lost the civil war is irrelevant to the fact the troops would be guarding the border not enforcing state and local laws. Besides that its not enshrined in the constitution and those crybabies who lost the civil war are no longer around,so if Posse Comitatus actually applied to the US border the law can be easily modified.
 
Last edited:
Rand Paul is right, end welfare to all countries we give foreign aid to. When you are in the hole the last thing you do is give money away. It doesn't make any sense to be giving money away when you are in debt and even if we were not in debt we still shouldn't be telling the tax payers to work their asses off just so the government can give it away to other countries.

You can cut aid, but you cannot end it unless there is a commitment to a more isolationist policy from the White House. Whether or not Congress would do this, the WH will not end all aid to Israel and think about that for a second.... since the 1948 war.
 
You can cut aid, but you cannot end it unless there is a commitment to a more isolationist policy from the White House. Whether or not Congress would do this, the WH will not end all aid to Israel and think about that for a second.... since the 1948 war.

Since when is ending welfare akin to isolationism?
 
Rand Paul is a jew hater....

aint that the usual comment when suggesting such things?

As for the principle of stop funding Israel.. great idea. It would save the US a few dollars, but the reality of the situation is that most money comes from the Jewish community in the US and through "good trade deals". Direct aid is small change, but highly symbolic.

And over all US direct aid is also.. small change. You could probably save much more by just stopping earmarks.

a "Jew hater"

any proof of that?
 
Rand Paul is right, end welfare to all countries we give foreign aid to. When you are in the hole the last thing you do is give money away. It doesn't make any sense to be giving money away when you are in debt and even if we were not in debt we still shouldn't be telling the tax payers to work their asses off just so the government can give it away to other countries.

I think we should but Spain loose. With their economy and employment outlook, I'm sure they'll have no problem.
 
Back
Top Bottom