• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Now Obama Guarantees $1Billion Egypt Debt?!

As I understand he didn't spend a billion he just said that America thinks Egypt is good for it thus lowering their interest on their debt and saving them 100 million.

How does this work for wall st?
 
Dude, even if the US had to pay off, it would be our cheapest attempt to promote democracy in a foreign country in, what? A decade? Two?

And, thus far, not one US military member's life has been put on the line.

Which part do you object to, exactly? The spreading of democracy without the use of military force?
 
Upchurch said:
Dude, even if the US had to pay off, it would be our cheapest attempt to promote democracy in a foreign country in, what? A decade? Two?
Click to expand...
Well we spent hundreds of millions promoting democracy in Lebanon.

And the result? Hizbullah just gained control of the government.
 
thaiboxerken said:
So we should have invaded then instead?
Click to expand...
No, but we should definitely sanction them now. We certainly shouldn't be sending money to terrorist groups. If they want to be cozy with Iran and Syria they should be sanctioned just like them.
 
For some perspective, that's 1/27th the cost of one, mostly useless, military program. At a cost we probably won't have to pay in full or at all.


Eta: I say "useless" with love having helped work on that program in a very small way.
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
No, but we should definitely sanction them now. We certainly shouldn't be sending money to terrorist groups. If they want to be cozy with Iran and Syria they should be sanctioned just like them.
Click to expand...

'cos that's what you do when you promote democracy and get the "wrong" result.
 
logger said:
Ahhh 14 trillion in debt.

Do you have a checkbook?
Click to expand...

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that the U.S. is giving Egypt $1 billion. That's not the case at all. Read the link in the OP.
 
The Don said:
'cos that's what you do when you promote democracy and get the "wrong" result.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, yes. If the citizens of Lebanon wish to be ruled by a terrorist organizaton they will learn that there are consequences for that decision. Just like the people of Gaza learned that there are consequences for electing a terrorist group as their government.

Just because a country is a democracy doesn't mean they cannot be a pariah state.

eta: Why do you put "wrong" in scare quotes? Do you think electing Hizbullah was a "right" decision, or one the civilized world shouldn't have issues with just because it was a democratic choice?
 
Last edited:
The Don said:
'cos that's what you do when you promote democracy and get the "wrong" result.
Click to expand...

No, that's what we do when a moronic "democracy" becomes an enemy.

BTW, how did you people come up with this stupid notion that pretending to be a "democracy" by voting totalitarians into power grants the bogus "democracy" a Free Enmity Card? Could you please explain the undoubtedly unassailable logic behind that line of thought?
 
The list of tyrants who came to power at the will of the people is a long one.
 
I love how we promote democracy....unless those people elect the "wrong" people.
 
WildCat said:
Pretty much, yes. If the citizens of Lebanon wish to be ruled by a terrorist organizaton they will learn that there are consequences for that decision. Just like the people of Gaza learned that there are consequences for electing a terrorist group as their government.

Just because a country is a democracy doesn't mean they cannot be a pariah state.

eta: Why do you put "wrong" in scare quotes? Do you think electing Hizbullah was a "right" decision, or one the civilized world shouldn't have issues with just because it was a democratic choice?
Click to expand...

Right or wrong it was their decision. I dislike any extremist regime but I accept that if you give people the right to choose then you have to respect that choice.

I'm sure that an alternative government elected under duress because of the fear of reprisal from a superpower will prove to be very popular :rolleyes:

The United States has a long and proud history of deposing democratically elected leaders it doesn't happen to like. If you're going to do a job, do it properly, depose the democratically elected leader and replace them with a puppet that you can control. At least be honest about the objectives and desired result.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom