Comments on: Do you think giving money to Pakistan is a good investment?

By: Armchair Goddess

Armchair Goddess — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:13:36 +0000

I’ve always been more in favor of elbow-grease to help underdeveloped nations (like the Peace Corps or volunteers)—sort of a teach them to fish rather than give them a fish approach, but dollars are a convenient short-cut and do not put our citizens at risk of attack during wartime. Foreign aid is about 2% of our overall budget each year—I believe we have something like a $17 trillion budget (the largest in the world so far).

It is in America’s interest to assist the Pakistan government, its economy, and its people, so that they are less likely to succumb to Taliban influences (poverty can be preyed upon when trying to recruit advocates). What I would be interested in knowing and monitoring is how these dollars are to be used. Will each U.S. foreign aid dollar be used in ways that strengthen the social safety nets available to those who now live in poverty: quality schools, decent housing, infrastructure maintenance and repair, etc.? I’d be okay with these uses. Will the government officials do as our Republican leaders have done and simply pocket the money or use it for their own campaign warchests, or give tax breaks to their wealthiest citizens at the expense of their ordinary citizens? If so, I would object to supplying even one dollar. My question would be what assurances and safeguards are in place to make sure each U.S.-provided dollar is used for exactly what these dollars should be used for; however, with all the experts on the region advising him, I wouldn’t want to second-guess our elected leader–especially not in wartime. He seems to know what he’s doing, so I’m backing his decisions on foreign policy issues. Generating good will among the impoverished citizens and government leaders would seem to be a beneficial decision. I’ve suggested a private round-table discussion involving our President and Vice President, both Pakistan’s and Afghanistan’s current leaders, a representative from the al Q’aida group (given safe passage to the summit), the current leader(s) of the Taliban, the UN’s Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, plus any supplemental leader to help bring things under control and who have a vested interest in peace for the region, to iron out differences and negotiate a truce of some sort, with Taliban (who used to be in power) agreeing to supplement or bolster the existing Pakistan government in some sort of role (but first move Pakistan’s nuclear weapons to a neutral location out of reach of any would-be terrorists).

By: bharathi bhaskaran

bharathi bhaskaran — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:56:37 +0000

‘investment’? good joke. when and how are they going to pay back? I feel pity for all the money that U S is pouring in. one of the reasons for the current economic crisis of U S. I am not prejudiced. pure economic theory. to invest in a troubled, politically unstable country can never be a prudent move my friend.

By: Mejoliza

Mejoliza — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:34:45 +0000

of course not …they are going to feed Taliban with that money.. instead of giving them aid they need.. they should be getting some assistants and those economical and social programs could be contracted to Us companies to assure those programs established in a safe manner than money moving and changing hands going to Al qaida or Taliban..

By: torchholder

torchholder — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:40:57 +0000

i asked obama why we gave so much foreign aid, when he was trying to come up with money. he never answered me. obviously, our president has nothing to do with foreign aid. greater powers than he
decide to give money we dont have to governments that dont deserve or need it.

taliban and al qaida was just a boys club until we went in there and raised so much havoc that the locals joined them in droves and funded them.

we took a small problem and turned it into a bigger one.
the longer we stay in there, the worse it will get.

By: fairygodmother

fairygodmother — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:52:25 +0000

I believe that we need to do what is needed from us as Americans and stand by what our president is deciding for all of us. I am sure if money is being given as an investment, it is for all a better way to go.

By: It's only me

It's only me — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:17:59 +0000

I think outbidding the Taliban with cash aid donations is a slippery slope, especially when we are in a lousy economic state.

By: guru

guru — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:21:39 +0000

No. Every nation, whether we like it or not, has the right to autonomy and self-rule. It is up to the citizens of Pakistan to decide what type of government and society that they want. it is up to the civilians to decide if they will allow extremist groups to thrive or survive.

The US has become too paranoid to function.

By: Jerry O

Jerry O — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:25:53 +0000

Actually, this is a continuation of a Bush initiative.

By: rotorhead

rotorhead — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:56:44 +0000

Probably better there than money given to ACORN.

By: merlin

merlin — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:52:46 +0000

Actually the recent news said the military got 500 million……..Where’s the rest………….

By: Call a spade a spade

Call a spade a spade — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:10:15 +0000

he should be giving our tax dollars back to US citizens

By: Barrak Hussein 0bama

Barrak Hussein 0bama — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:27:53 +0000

yes

everything that I (GOD/MESSIAH) do is a good investment

next i am going to pay off the elderly with $250 so they like my health care bill

0 ne
B ig
A ss
M istake
A merica