Monday, February 13, 2012

Obama proposes $800 million in aid for "Arab Spring"

WASHINGTON | Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:39pm EST

(Reuters) - The White House announced plans on Monday to help "Arab Spring" countries swept by revolutions with more than $800 million in economic aid, while maintaining U.S. military aid to Egypt.

In his annual budget message to Congress, President Barack Obama asked that military aid to Egypt be kept at the level of recent years -- $1.3 billion -- despite a crisis triggered by an Egyptian probe targeting American democracy activists.

The proposals are part of Obama's budget request for fiscal year 2013, which begins October 1. His requests need the approval of Congress, where some lawmakers want to cut overseas spending to address U.S. budget shortfalls and are particularly angry at Egypt.

Obama proposed $51.6 billion in funding for the U.S. State Department and foreign aid overall, when $8.2 billion in assistance to war zones is included. The "core budget" for the category would increase by 1.6 percent, officials said.

Most of the economic aid for the Arab Spring countries -- $770 million -- would go to establish a new "Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund," the president said in his budget plan.

Analysts said it was difficult to tell how much of the proposal was actually new money.

"As presented it's very difficult to determine if the Arab spring fund is new wine in new bottles or old wine in new bottles," said John Norris, a former U.S. foreign aid worker now at the Center for American Progress.

The Middle East and North Africa Incentive fund "will provide incentives for long-term economic, political, and trade reforms to countries in transition -- and to countries prepared to make reforms proactively," the White House budget document said.

The proposal said this approach "expands our bilateral economic support in countries such asTunisia and Yemen, where transitions are already underway."

It would also build on other programs for the area, including up to $2 billion in regional Overseas Private Investment Corporation financing, up to $1 billion in debt swaps for Egypt, and approximately $500 million in existing funds re-allocated to respond to the region last year, the budget document said.

It did not say how the Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund would be divided between countries, or give any other details of the plan.

Egypt has long been among the top recipients of U.S. aid, getting about $1.6 billion annually, mostly in military assistance. In fiscal 2012, $250 million of aid approved for Egypt was economic; $1.3 billion was military and there was a $60 million "enterprise fund" approved by Congress.

No U.S. assistance is moving to Egypt at the moment, U.S. lawmakers and their aides said last week. Some legislators favor cutting off aid to Egypt entirely if it does not drop accusations against American democracy activists and lift a travel ban on them.

Obama continued the practice of putting proposed foreign assistance for war zones in a separate account. This account, known as the "Overseas Contingency Operations," includes $8.2 billion for the State Department and foreign aid.

It includes $3.3 billion for Afghanistan, $1 billion for Pakistan, and $4 billion for Iraq, where U.S. troops have left the country but the State Department has picked up some of their functions such as police training
.

For once, I honestly don't know what to say?  This nation is BANKRUPT does he not get that?  What the bloody hell is wrong with him?  The money needs to stay here in the states not given to other nations.

We need it! We can use it and to all my liberal readers, that's your tax dollars at work as well, how do you feel about that?

35 comments:

Silverfiddle said...

We need to be storing up nuts for the coming Arab Winter...

dmarks said...

Silver: The Arab Spring is bringing forth plenty of nuts. I hope there is room at Gitmo to store them.

Leticia said...

You guys! LOL!

Teresa said...

This is a waste of money. We could be using this money to pay off China. We need to stop aiding Muslim extremists.

Bloviating Zeppelin said...

I'll make this clear and concise:

The WORLD depends upon the American Taxpayer.

If it doesn't come from YOU and ME, then it isn't funded.

Globally.

You want to talk about a Global Tax?

How about a so-called "Global Minimum Tax"?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/white-house-economic-adviser-we-need-global-minimum-tax_626749.html

Get used to it.

It's coming.

BZ

Jersey McJones said...

Who among you was against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? If any of you were, then fine, mock all you like. Otherwise, you sound like petty harpies.

JMJ

Magpie said...

Yeah do it the Republican way:

Thousands of American soldiers dead, endless occupations costing trillions, hyper-debt and an Iran made more powerful than ever.
Look how well all that turned out.

Always On Watch said...

See THIS, which I posted before BHO's announcement.

He is funding the West's destruction -- or, at least, war beyond horror!

And, as my post link above shows, giving this money, particularly, is in violation of a treaty that we signed.

Always On Watch said...

Leticia,
Happy Valentine's Day to you.

Ducky's here said...

Tip money. Especially when you compare it to what the Israeli welfare queens are raking in.

But defense contractors rake in good dough on this type of stuff. Remember who owns your conservative butts. Hint: You don't.

Leticia said...

Teresa, we could, but Obama hasn't even considered it. Nothing deters him from spending and spending money we just don't have.

BZ, you are talking to the wind about tax payer money, liberals have no concept or understanding.

Jersey, for a time I thought the wars were necessary and had no problem with my tax money being spent there. I am NOT happy that I have loved ones there now serving and protecting those who probably wish them dead.

Magpie, it wasn't the Republican party, why don't you look at your messiah in office.

AOW, it makes me sick to my stomach. And a very Happy Valentine's day to you, too.

Ducky, no we don't. We are at the mercy of your stupid fascist president.

Liberalmann said...

"Stupid facist President." Well, you just described yourself in there, lol. Wanna cracker, polly?

dmarks said...

Jersey said: "Who among you was against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? If any of you were, then fine, mock all you like. Otherwise, you sound like petty harpies."

Why? Big difference. In Iraq and Afghanistan, we fought against the terrorists. That is truly "fine". With this aid, we bankroll the terrorists.

------------------

Magpie: The occupations are coming to a close, and only a little over one trillion was spent (not "trillions". We stopped two major aggressive terrorist powers. Indeed, look how it how well turned out.

-------------

Ducky, it all comes down to Jew-bashing for you, doesn't it? And no, defense contractors don't own us

Magpie said...

It WAS the Republican party, Leticia.
8 years of Cheney-Bush devastated America. That fact is half the reason Obama is even in office. That administration was a catastrophe.

Obama has killed the guy behind 9/11 (which happened on Dubbya's watch) and toppled the creep behind Lockerbie with zero US casualties.

I don’t look for 'messiahs' – I’m not a believer – but if you want one... then in any comparison he’s a better bet than any Republican clown on offer.

Leticia said...

Magpie, come on already, get off the "Bush's" fault you sound like a broken record.

Magpie said...

Yeah but my tune is rational and factual. I'm not calling your president a secret Muslim or the anti-Christ or someone who hates white people.
It WAS Bush's fault, and it is the fault of all those who thought he was anything more than a political family's failed and inadequate progeny.
More Americans died horribly than they needed to because of his incompetence and Neocon agenda.

dmarks said...

Magpie said: "It WAS Bush's fault, and it is the fault of all those who thought he was anything more than a political family's failed and inadequate progeny.
More Americans died horribly than they needed to because of his incompetence and Neocon agenda."

Obama took the economy Bush left him and added 20% to unemployment and increased the natiaonal debt by 50%.

Bush was clearly the better candidate in 2000 and 2004, and he had much better ideas than his political opponents.

He told the truth and saved lives, and he wasn't a "Neocon" at all (look up what the term means).

----------

As for "more than a political family's failed and inadequate progeny", one need look no further than Albert Gore Jr. Yes, he was a Jr. You know, the boob who lied and said he created the Internet.

dmarks said...

Magpie said: "Obama has killed the guy behind 9/11 (which happened on [President Bush's] watch)"

It only happened on Bush's watch because Clinton ignored the problem of Bin Laden. Bush made the mistake of continuing the Clinton policies in this. But he learned after 9/11, and retaliated against the terrorists.

And it was only due to Bush that Obama was able to get bin Laden. The information obtained under Bush's effective interrogation techniques, and groups such as the Seals which Bush nurtured and supported.

Magpie said...

You know full well Bush ignored the briefs on the threats of imminent attack.
I never said Bush himself was a neocon, he’s not even that smart.
You know full well Bush handed Obama an economy in free-fall.

You should know full well that information gained by TORTURE is suspect and that none of it contributed to the finding of Bin Laden, which again happened under Obama after Obama made TORTURE non-standard operating procedure.
By the way two Australians were TORTURED under the Cheney-Bush regime and neither was found to have any material connection to 9/11. Local gun toting thugs would give people up just for the bounty.
At the end of WW2 – which I assume you also blame on Obama or Clinton – the US executed Japanese soldiers who used waterboarding on US soldiers on the grounds it was a war crime.

If you believe for a second that the economy would be in better shape under John (“the economy is fine”) McCain and the cosmic airhead from Alaska you are delusional.

Teresa said...

There were no intelligible and verifiable specific threats before 9/11. Clinton was handed Bin Laden on a silver platter by the government in Sudan and he refused to prosecute him. This paved the way for 9/11.

There was a Democrat controlled congress from 2006 to 2010 and the Democrats are the ones who royally screwed up the economy and ignored Bush's calls to investigate Fannie and Freddie. Progressives are race hustlers and users of the poor. The Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to give loans to the poor because they were poor and not based on financial eligibility. The economic catastrophe was caused due to progressives pushing affirmative action at all costs. In 2008 it cost many of us and our economy a heck of a lot.

John McCain wouldn't be demonizing successful businesses and Obamacare would not have been implemented under McCain. A sensible type of health care may have been instituted under McCain. He would not be using the EPA to institute parts of Cap & Trade which is strangling our economic growth. All these things I mentioned above, especially Obamacare, is the reason that businesses are not hiring and our economy hasn't improved very much. Obama and his progressive minions are the reason why so many people are unemployed and underemployed. Sarah Palin is much smarter than Obama. Obama is a puppet. Palin actually thinks and doesn't need a teleprompter to tell her what to say.

dmarks said...

Magpie said: " You know full well Bush ignored the briefs on the threats of imminent attack."

As Clinton did before him. He made the mistake of keeping a bad policy left to him by a liberal president

"You know full well Bush handed Obama an economy in free-fall."

I know full well Bush handed Obama a situation where there was a lot less debt than there is now, and a lot more people had jobs.

And it was in free fall as much as it was because Obama was elected. This was a signal to businesses that a hostile President was about to take over, and they downsized fast.

"You should know full well that information gained by TORTURE is suspect"

I'm not talking about torture. I'm talking about the valid information that led to "getting" Bin Laden which came from effective interrogation tactics.

"...Obama after Obama made TORTURE non-standard operating procedure."

Bush made it this way also.


"By the way two Australians were TORTURED under the Cheney-Bush regime"

They weren't tortured.

"At the end of WW2 – which I assume you also blame on Obama or Clinton"

No, I only blame Obama and Clinton for what they actually did.

"the US executed Japanese soldiers who used waterboarding on US soldiers on the grounds it was a war crime.

"If you believe for a second that the economy would be in better shape under John (“the economy is fine”) McCain"

I not only believe this, it is a FACT. McCain had proposals to make the economy better. Obama has done nothing but make it worse. Including the "stimulus" which ended up being a handout to wealthy already-employed union thiugs.

"and the cosmic airhead from Alaska you are delusional."

No, I just happened to be informed.

dmarks said...

By the way, only three have been waterboarded. Your Australians are not on this list.

Some facts on this very rarely used interrogation technique:

from this site

"Many Americans are simply confused about the real definition of torture. Since so little sacrifice is required of most Americans today and because so few have ever experienced combat, they equate momentary discomfort or fear with torture. They are not the same.

My definition of torture is simple: It involves physical or mental abuse that leaves lasting scars. Cutting off fingers, toes, limbs – that would be torture. Forcing prisoners to play Russian roulette – that would be torture. Sticking hot pokers in the eyes of prisoners – that would be torture.

But a few seconds of dripping water on a prisoner’s face? That’s not torture to me."

The international community agrees. Any attempts to charge those in the US who waterboarded terrorists have gone no-where... laughed off by international courts and relevant organizations as lies by cranks.

Yeah, waterboarding is unpleasant. But I don't plan on participating in mass atrocities, so I don't plan on being on the receiving end of it any time soon.

Magpie said...

Christopher Hitchens, who said waterboarding was not torture, had it done to him and lasted mere seconds before recanting. The video is on YouTube.
And remember he did it knowing he could stop at any time.

It’s not just “unpleasant”. It’s way beyond that, and repeated experiences of it would make you psychotic.

I could do it to you and have you say anything I want, and you would say anything to make me stop. Which makes it not only immoral but useless.

Some of the torture was done at black sites and it wasn’t ‘just’ waterboarding either.

“But I don't plan on participating in mass atrocities, so I don't plan on being on the receiving end of it any time soon.”

Then you better hope against reality that only the bad people are assumed to be bad until proven otherwise. And why would you worry in any case if it was merely.. "unpleasant"?

dmarks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dmarks said...

It's hoping for reality, not against it. 3 waterboarding subjects among 7 billion people of Earth. I think I have a good chance of never doing anything to warrant joining this elite few.

Teresa said...

Any person who is willing to blowing up themselves for their cause can handle waterboarding.

Its immoral to sanction the deaths of numerous innocents when that could have been avoided by using the interrogation technique, waterboarding.

Was Christopher Hitchens trained to kill thousands and have the mental ability to be willing to blow himself up in the process? Had he undergone training like the Seals do? Hitchens was a wuss.

Teresa said...

Any person who is willing to blow up themselves up for their cause can handle waterboarding.

Teresa said...

Just like a liberal to stand up for the terrorists and not give a darn about saving innocent lives.

Magpie said...

What if you’re not a terrorist, Teresa? What if you’re someone some terrorist pointed a finger at to misdirect and get some reward money?

“Just like a liberal to stand up for the terrorists and not give a darn about saving innocent lives” isn’t an argument, Teresa, it’s just a tantrum and slur. You don't what I do when not debating politics with the smart and ignorant.

What else comes from that way of non-thinking? Hmmm? “Just like a Jew….”? “Just like a nigger…”?

Teresa said...

"What else comes from that way of non-thinking? Hmmm? “Just like a Jew….”? “Just like a nigger…”?"

Your the person who said this. Of course this shows your thought process or lack thereof, your group think.

This is also evidence that you are a racist, anti-semitic, bigot.

Teresa said...

Believe it or not the military does investigate allegations of terrorism. What a shocker for a liberal to be unable to grasp that concept.

Leticia said...

Teresa, no matter how much you try to convince the liberals they always believe that we are the idiots or "loons" as one reader likes to call us.

Magpie said...

So now I'm rascist and anti-Semitic because I'm against torture - even though I might be Jewish for all you know.
I didn’t call you anything. I just pointed out where your thinking leads.

Thank you for proving my point.

Teresa said...

Yeah... Who said this? - '"What else comes from that way of non-thinking? Hmmm? “Just like a Jew….”? “Just like a nigger…”?"'

You proved my point. Liberalism is a disease. And you are the one who said these things so I at least hope that you have a change of heart.

You didn't have a point, obviously. Try using some common sense sometime.

Magpie said...

Do you not understand the use of quotation marks?

I think you do, and are just being obstuse, but just for your benefit I'll use them again.

"Liberalism is a disease".