Rand Paul says U.S. taxpayers are funding a ‘war on Christianity’

[her209]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...ayers-funding-war-christianity-185908146.html

"There is a war on Christianity," Paul told an audience of mostly evangelical Christians and Jews during a luncheon at the annual Faith and Freedom Conference in Washington. "Not just from liberal elites here at home, but worldwide. And your government, or more correctly, you, the taxpayer, are funding it. You are being taxed to send money to countries that are not only intolerant of Christians, but openly hostile. Christians are imprisoned and threatened with death for their beliefs."

...

"In Egypt, in Pakistan, they burn our flag—I say not one penny more to countries that burn the American flag," Paul said. "While they burn the American flag and the mobs chant 'Death to America,' more of your money is sent to these haters of Christianity."

He added: "It is clear that American taxpayer dollars are being used to enable a war on Christianity in the Middle East, and I believe that must end."

Should this be the baseline for the federal government providing foreign aid to countries now - whether they are Christian-friendly or hostile?

Foreign aid to every country should be cut off to all countries but not due to the faith/religious aspect. They're basically subsidies that benefit corporations that allow them cheap access to low wage labor or raw materials.

 

[soundforbjt]

He's just "preachin to the choir". People here burn the American flag, is he gonna cut off aid here?

 

[sandorski]

pandering

 

[BoberFett]

While I agree with the goal of cutting off foreign aid, it has nothing to do with religion.

 

[xBiffx]

If anything, US taxpayers are funding a war on Islam. But I am OK with that. :|

 

[jackschmittusa]

Anybody that advocates cutting off all foreign aid has no understanding of how it works nor the behind-the-scenes benefits we derive from it. And I am not going to type for an hour to educate you.

While we sometimes make foolish decisions about allocating it, overall it is a method of gaining influence and assistance all out of proportion to its comparatively cheap cost. It always comes with strings attached and many of the most powerful are not written down but understood and honored by the recipients more closely than the ones that are written down.

Foreign aid has a long history of being the cheapest alternative to achieving many goals. It is sometimes the only way to achieve goals that we really don't want to have a public international discussion about.

 

[hans030390]

"While they burn the American flag and the mobs chant 'Death to America,' more of your money is sent to these haters of Christianity."

America = Christianity. Got it.

 

[nextJin]

Anybody that advocates cutting off all foreign aid has no understanding of how it works nor the behind-the-scenes benefits we derive from it. And I am not going to type for an hour to educate you.

While we sometimes make foolish decisions about allocating it, overall it is a method of gaining influence and assistance all out of proportion to its comparatively cheap cost. It always comes with strings attached and many of the most powerful are not written down but understood and honored by the recipients more closely than the ones that are written down.

Foreign aid has a long history of being the cheapest alternative to achieving many goals. It is sometimes the only way to achieve goals that we really don't want to have a public international discussion about.

Without going too far into it to educate me could you give a brief statement on foriegn aid to the top 5 countries that hate us?

 

[jackschmittusa]

nextJin

"Countries that hate us" is too ambiguous to address. Who hates us in a country, the general population, the government, the leaders?

What kind of aid? Is it cash, food, medical supplies, weapons, technology, farm equipment? The list goes on. Looking at cash alone generates its own list: infrastructure, education, healthcare, suppression of radicals, defense, intel gathering, even clandestine bribery to enact policies that we favor or act as originators of ideas we want to see presented to a third party country that would reject out-of-hand anything thought to originate from us. Governments receiving aid have often acted as intermediaries for us with countries with whom we have no formal diplomatic relations. Governments may be convinced to turn a blind eye to our agents operating from their soil, overflights, etc..

Sometimes a benefit is as simple as overcoming (over time) ideas taught by some groups that the U.S. is nothing but an evil opponent. This can occur as more people see many of the things that they need and want are supplied by us.

Humanitarian aid may not only improve our standing in the world but often helps our own people feel that we are a force for good; that we really do give a damn.

As I said before, it is a very complicated subject encompassing myriad goals and opportunities. It can be hard to see the full value of aid as many of the goals and achievements are not discussed in the public sphere because it would be self defeating.

 

[raildogg]

If there was actual, real "Christianity" in the US, the US wouldn't be the mass murdering country it is and has always been. It's only focused on ambition while saving the so-called religious stuff for Sundays.

 

[her209]

nextJin

"Countries that hate us" is too ambiguous to address. Who hates us in a country, the general population, the government, the leaders?

What kind of aid? Is it cash, food, medical supplies, weapons, technology, farm equipment? The list goes on. Looking at cash alone generates its own list: infrastructure, education, healthcare, suppression of radicals, defense, intel gathering, even clandestine bribery to enact policies that we favor or act as originators of ideas we want to see presented to a third party country that would reject out-of-hand anything thought to originate from us. Governments receiving aid have often acted as intermediaries for us with countries with whom we have no formal diplomatic relations. Governments may be convinced to turn a blind eye to our agents operating from their soil, overflights, etc..

Sometimes a benefit is as simple as overcoming (over time) ideas taught by some groups that the U.S. is nothing but an evil opponent. This can occur as more people see many of the things that they need and want are supplied by us.

Humanitarian aid may not only improve our standing in the world but often helps our own people feel that we are a force for good; that we really do give a damn.

As I said before, it is a very complicated subject encompassing myriad goals and opportunities. It can be hard to see the full value of aid as many of the goals and achievements are not discussed in the public sphere because it would be self defeating.

All those things can be done without spending one cent. A treaty can be formalized where both countries find it mutually beneficial to enter into such agreements. Take your example of overflights - it would be in a neighboring country's interest to allow overflights because it keeps the problem child from spreading into their territory. As far as things like infrastructure, education, defense, etc., they should be paying for it, not the taxpayers giving the foreign government aid so they can turn around and buy it from US companies that are favorable to and enriching the politicians that gave them money in the first place.

 

[Darwin333]

LOL! Oh the irony...

His biggest point was we are sending money to countries that burn the American flag yet burning the American flag is a constitutionally protected act of protest right here in the United States. So he is pissed because other countries might enjoy some of the same freedoms we have???

Also, how does he make the leap from burning the American Flag to them hating us because we have Christians? What the fuck does the US flag have to do with Christianity???

 

[Darwin333]

He's just "preachin to the choir". People here burn the American flag, is he gonna cut off aid here?

Even better is that the Supreme Court has ruled that burning the flag is free speech and therefor protected under the Constitution of the United States. Does the senator hate freedom now or does he just hate when other countries have the same freedoms we do?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._Johnson

 

[Incorruptible]

Ignoring the anti-Christian bigots Rand Paul is right.

The US government is giving money to many countries who are anti-Christian. All foreign aid should be ended. We need to stop stealing from poor people in the US to give to rich dictators.

 

[Darwin333]

Ignoring the anti-Christian bigots Rand Paul is right.

The US government is giving money to many countries who are anti-Christian. All foreign aid should be ended. We need to stop stealing from poor people in the US to give to rich dictators.

What about foreign aid to anti-muslim countries?

 

[brycejones]

We need to stop stealing from poor people in the US to give to rich dictators.

How would you ensure any cut in foreign aid would benefit poor people in the US? I'm curious how you would implement that kind of policy.

 

[thraashman]

He's just "preachin to the choir". People here burn the American flag, is he gonna cut off aid here?

Considering it's Rand Paul, that's probably one of his goals. He's the type of person who believes if you're poor you should die in the streets. He's kinda a bastard, like his racist father.

 

[Jhhnn]

How would you ensure any cut in foreign aid would benefit poor people in the US? I'm curious how you would implement that kind of policy.

Cut taxes at the top, obviously, so it'll "trickle down".

 

[Incorruptible]

What about foreign aid to anti-muslim countries?

I am not anti-Muslim unlike some posters here. Cut all foreign aid.

Considering it's Rand Paul, that's probably one of his goals. He's the type of person who believes if you're poor you should die in the streets. He's kinda a bastard, like his racist father.

No, You're describing yourself.

 

[jackschmittusa]

her209

You have no clue!

Many countries have done many things for us that they would never publicly sanction. Not that I agree with the policy, but I nominate you to be the ambassador charged with establishing treaties for "extraordinary rendition". And remember, you can offer no monetary incentive.

There are dozens of current and past scenarios where the help we request poses various kinds of risk which then begs the question from the other countries "What's in it for me?".

And you tell the good guy new leader that it doesn't matter that the succession of bad guys that came before him never invested in anything for the people that he has to find a way to pay for everything they need, no matter how broke his country is. Then watch his friendly and cooperative (to us) government evaporate as unfriendly countries supply aid and foster an unfriendly replacement government.

All of those countries you consider to be bad guys would jump for joy if we ceased all foreign aid. They would be unfettered in their attempts to gain favor and influence in other countries and mold them into allies unfavorable to us.

Calling for an end to foreign aid is aiding and abetting our enemies. Plain and simple!

 

[zsdersw]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4pB5_0AUVk

 

[nehalem256]

Considering it's Rand Paul, that's probably one of his goals. He's the type of person who believes if you're poor you should die in the streets. He's kinda a bastard, like his racist father.

Actually I think you would be describing the poor that would by dying in the street

 

[brycejones]

How would you ensure any cut in foreign aid would benefit poor people in the US? I'm curious how you would implement that kind of policy.

Incorruptible are you afraid to respond to this question?

 

[woolfe9998]

her209

You have no clue!

Many countries have done many things for us that they would never publicly sanction. Not that I agree with the policy, but I nominate you to be the ambassador charged with establishing treaties for "extraordinary rendition". And remember, you can offer no monetary incentive.

There are dozens of current and past scenarios where the help we request poses various kinds of risk which then begs the question from the other countries "What's in it for me?".

And you tell the good guy new leader that it doesn't matter that the succession of bad guys that came before him never invested in anything for the people that he has to find a way to pay for everything they need, no matter how broke his country is. Then watch his friendly and cooperative (to us) government evaporate as unfriendly countries supply aid and foster an unfriendly replacement government.

All of those countries you consider to be bad guys would jump for joy if we ceased all foreign aid. They would be unfettered in their attempts to gain favor and influence in other countries and mold them into allies unfavorable to us.

Calling for an end to foreign aid is aiding and abetting our enemies. Plain and simple!

You're absolutely right.

Broadly, we have three general approaches to foreign policy. First, we can be isolationist and not try to influence other nations toward courses of action we prefer or against those we don't prefer, pretending that we live in a vacuum. At the other extreme, we can use our military force, or threats of such, to achieve our objectives. Finally, we can use the carrots and sticks of foreign aid versus sanctions. Given that it seems sensible to use diplomacy to achieve our aims, it ought to be obvious that diplomacy without carrots and sticks isn't going to be very effective.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Ignoring the anti-Christian bigots Rand Paul is right.

The US government is giving money to many countries who are anti-Christian. All foreign aid should be ended. We need to stop stealing from poor people in the US to give to rich dictators.

ROFL. You never cease to amuse trolluptible. When the fuck did you start giving a runny shit about the poor? :awe: