World policing a different approach

[donttread]

screw that. Lease the equipment. It works for cars. Dealer's make more money from leasing than sales. jes a thought.......lol

You mean lease war machines?

[Common]

European nations spend more on welfare programs so they can't afford to police the world. Or build militaries of note.

We did get African nations to contribute to peacekeeping missions on the continent. But they are raping all the women and girls.

Thats true and if they choose to spend all their money on refugees etc then DO NOT have a vote to send americans into war and have us pay for it on top of it.

[donttread]

You might be able to demand, coerce and beg more money from the other nations, but generally speaking it seems to be pretty much solely the U.S. government that is willing to send its citizens to die in foreign conflicts in any great numbers. Not to re-open the whole Iraq thing for the millionth time, but as I remember it the calls for the U.S. not to go into Iraq were almost universal, and even the invasion of Afghanistan was probably avoidable. As I say, you may be able to squeeze more gold out of some of those countries, but persuading them to send their children, brothers, husbands and fathers to die in a foreign country for someone else's benefit - not going to happen.

Under this plan, would how much monetary aid for military purposes is to be sent to another government be subject, to some extent, to the vote of the group? In other words, if the other members of the coalition decided that America's sending of 38 billion dollars to Israel was wrong, disruptive and counterproductive, would our government acquiesce to their judgment, or blow them off and do what it wanted to do? Pro-Israeli sentiment tends to be considerably less prevalent in most of Europe and in the West generally than it is in the U.S.

Extremely interesting point about the foreign miliary aid. I had not thought about that. Of course I am against much of the military aid we give because of the unstable groups and nations it goes to. To include over the years Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan ,Egypt , Israel, Hezbolla I believe and so on. I believe our weapons and or weapons bought with our money have been found being used against us and our allis. I'm essentially for phasing out military aid , especially that given on an ongoing basis. But in answer to your question I think the group could only control it's own money. For example if the member nations donated a chunk of what they now spend on foreigin aid to the organization istead, then the orgination as a whole would decide where the funds went.
As for Isreal they are allis, friends. But do you pay your friends car payments year after year after year?

[donttread]

Extremely interesting point about the foreign miliary aid. I had not thought about that. Of course I am against much of the military aid we give because of the unstable groups and nations it goes to. To include over the years Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan ,Egypt , Israel, Hezbolla I believe and so on. I believe our weapons and or weapons bought with our money have been found being used against us and our allis. I'm essentially for phasing out military aid , especially that given on an ongoing basis. But in answer to your question I think the group could only control it's own money. For example if the member nations donated a chunk of what they now spend on foreigin aid to the organization istead, then the orgination as a whole would decide where the funds went.
As for Isreal they are allis, friends. But do you pay your friends car payments year after year after year?

There is even a case to be made that we armed ISIS , possibly via the comically named "moderate rebels" So yeah we need to stop. Isreal has a kick ass army and they do not need our continued financial support. It just drives taxes down in their country and up here. I do think the aid should be tapered off , not suddenly cut.

[Peter1469]

There is even a case to be made that we armed ISIS , possibly via the comically named "moderate rebels" So yeah we need to stop. Isreal has a kick ass army and they do not need our continued financial support. It just drives taxes down in their country and up here. I do think the aid should be tapered off , not suddenly cut.

We did indirectly arm ISIL by arming "moderate" Syrian rebels.

[donttread]

Thats true and if they choose to spend all their money on refugees etc then DO NOT have a vote to send americans into war and have us pay for it on top of it.

First of all the refugees are such because of war not in spite of it, so your logic doesn't quite follow.
Secondly, if Europe doesn't feel a direct threat maybe we shouldn't intervene at all. They are right there and we are far more protected. So if Europe really felt they were in danger of invasion they'd pony up. Makes you wonder if our doom and gloom hype isn't just that ... hype/ for the war machine.
Hear the drums beating for war with NK as we speak, even though they are no different than they wer last year or the year before.

[Dr. Who]

Thats true and if they choose to spend all their money on refugees etc then DO NOT have a vote to send americans into war and have us pay for it on top of it.

You do realize that the bulk of these engagements are coming at the direction of America, more than other nations. The invasion of Iraq for instance, ostensibly the most expensive military intervention in recent years, was not mandated by any other nation and those who refused to participate were pilloried in the American press, hence the sudden appearance of freedom fries in the national vocabulary. It's not really they who are pushing these agendas, but they who are attempting to balance their UN commitments against the best interests of their own nations.

[Dr. Who]

Extremely interesting point about the foreign miliary aid. I had not thought about that. Of course I am against much of the military aid we give because of the unstable groups and nations it goes to. To include over the years Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan ,Egypt , Israel, Hezbolla I believe and so on. I believe our weapons and or weapons bought with our money have been found being used against us and our allis. I'm essentially for phasing out military aid , especially that given on an ongoing basis. But in answer to your question I think the group could only control it's own money. For example if the member nations donated a chunk of what they now spend on foreigin aid to the organization istead, then the orgination as a whole would decide where the funds went.
As for Isreal they are allis, friends. But do you pay your friends car payments year after year after year?

What is obvious is that the more recent rise of US 'intervention' (that is in the post USSR world) in the middle east is directly associated with leaders of countries that were trying to take back their own economic autonomy. That fact led to the encouragement and funding of Islamic dissidents to destabilize these emergent independent nations. It did not suit certain national interests to have oil interests outside of their own control and bucking the notion of fiat currency. Any Pinocchio nation that wanted to be a 'real boy' and cut its strings has been attacked and further destroyed by Islamic dissidents that are ironically well supplied with western weapons. Israel trades intelligence for protection, allowing them to continually resist any form of diplomacy with respect to the indigenous population whom they largely expropriated and foisted upon their Arab neighbors.

[donttread]

We did indirectly arm ISIL by arming "moderate" Syrian rebels.

Did we continue to arm them in one country while realizing the connection between the two in another ? We either have poor intentions or we really suck at this. Either way we need to stop.

[Peter1469]

Did we continue to arm them in one country while realizing the connection between the two in another ? We either have poor intentions or we really suck at this. Either way we need to stop.

That is part of the Benghazi story. We were running guns from Libya to the Syria rebels through the CIA annex.

I expect people knew that the guns were getting to ISIL, but I imagine that the higher ups who owned the program refused to believe it and just kept pushing the program.