1. This reminds me when some folks were claiming that tax increases on the wealthy would only raise billions of dollars, hardly make a dent in the deficit, and hardly be worth doing.
Yet here we are talking about 55 million dollars. I never advocate for waste, but if you're going to have principles, have principles both ways.
2. Per the link, the $55 million contribution will provide critical health, education, and humanitarian services to five million Palestinian refugees in the region.
Beyond humanitarian aid never being a complete waste of money, I imagine it would be prudent to look beyond the surface and judge whether it's a cost effective way to keep a headache from growing into a splitting migraine the US doesn't want. This is chump change if it helps keep the status quo in the ME. Frankly I don't give a flying fvsk about Israel or Palestine, but having the refugees fall below the line of poverty to utter hopelessness is a recipe for more violence.
If this money keeps them barely going along and helps maintains the current peace there, then it's a great investment.
<edit> What's the economic cost if there is another flare up in the ME, people on both sides are killed, and other nations like Iran start making threats? Oil prices spike, US consumers are hurt, and economic growth is hindered. The proper role of the State Department is to take strategic and tactical steps to ensure the welfare of Americans - frankly I want them to make these cheap investments. What I don't want them to do is to be nation building or other idiotic and massively expensive work.
Facebook
Twitter