Does the U.S. really have allies in the middle east?

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]For one thing it was his analogy. Second...the principle should be the same. You cannot run in the red all the time. Not a business. Not a home. Not a government.

LJS9502_basic

I'm not concerned with creditors. I'm concerned with fixing the domestic issues which cost money. Money that is going over seas.

$33bn is going overseas. That's a tiny portion. There's no reason to cut it.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]For one thing it was his analogy. Second...the principle should be the same. You cannot run in the red all the time. Not a business. Not a home. Not a government.

LJS9502_basic

I'm not concerned with creditors. I'm concerned with fixing the domestic issues which cost money. Money that is going over seas.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] You can't run in the red all the time, but the government can for a while, and when it comes to the federal government, they should run a deficit for as long as they have to. Our government is very good at paying back its debts, which is why the U.S. federal government is able to borrow money at such low interest rates. Right now balancing the budget and trying to cut to spending would do more harm than good. Creditors aren't worried that the federal government isn't going to be able to get them their money back - we're not strapped for cash (there is a bit of fear that our politics will prevent creditors from actually getting their money back, but that's another issue). -Sun_Tzu-

I'm not concerned with creditors. I'm concerned with fixing the domestic issues which cost money. Money that is going over seas.

Why, Hooverite magic of course!

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Firebird-5"]

I see you've ignored my point. You said you studied economics, yet you don't realise that this kind of investment doesn't pay off overnight. You advocate cutting foreign aid spending (only a small $33bn), when this will only hurt relations and any kind of market entrance. If nobody enters the market at all, the problem only grows worse. Do I have to explicitly state everything? These points have been in my posts for a very long time!

Firebird-5

Please read the post above. yours. You must have missed that lesson in your economics class

[QUOTE="Firebird-5"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Again....one has to fix domestic issues before one can continue to support other countries. When you are running in debt..it's time to reign in spending. Not spend more because somewhere down the line that country might finally pay off. We're not working from a surplus here dude. That is a distinction you refuse to acknowledge. And second.....foreign aid does not always do what you seem to think it will do. Many countries given foreign aid have failed to respond to such aid.

LJS9502_basic

Please read the post above. yours. You must have missed that lesson in your economics class

I also addressed the fallacy you responded to my point with. You have so far, ignored it.

Speaking for my country, The United Arab Emirates, I can state that the relation we base with US is not that of a military one, more precisely an economical one. We basically have a currency that is pegged with the US dollar, you can use dollars here. We also live pretty much like American standard life. We are taught American curiculum in schools (At least I did) and use American high school books.

The government here depends execlusively on American protection and thier military weapons. Same uniforms, same equipment just different flags ...to the point that soldiers who were sent to Afganistan were attacked due to their resemblance to US soldiers.

Also, our ports are of extreme significance to the US... but we are basically a puppet state to the United States.

The US is definitely not considered an enemy here. The government here does not voice opinions on the US, but if there is anything we as people are critic about is the US foriegn policy.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] You can't run in the red all the time, but the government can for a while, and when it comes to the federal government, they should run a deficit for as long as they have to. Our government is very good at paying back its debts, which is why the U.S. federal government is able to borrow money at such low interest rates. Right now balancing the budget and trying to cut to spending would do more harm than good. Creditors aren't worried that the federal government isn't going to be able to get them their money back - we're not strapped for cash (there is a bit of fear that our politics will prevent creditors from actually getting their money back, but that's another issue). -Sun_Tzu-

I'm not concerned with creditors. I'm concerned with fixing the domestic issues which cost money. Money that is going over seas.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Firebird-5"]

Please read the post above. yours. You must have missed that lesson in your economics class

Firebird-5

I also addressed the fallacy you responded to my point with. You have so far, ignored it.

[QUOTE="Firebird-5"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]*sigh* I think you might want to reread my post since I addressed that idea of yours. If you don't have the money ...you shouldn't spend it. Second I'm wondering if you've ever studied the outcome of countires that have received aid. One need only to look at Sudan to see throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it.

LJS9502_basic

I also addressed the fallacy you responded to my point with. You have so far, ignored it.

I did, you simply didn't understand it. Which is OK, but then you said you studied economics, which confused me because I thought you understood. Let me explain.

If you enforce a policy of austerity in order to 'restore confidence in the market' (which didn't work), you just lengthen the downturn. Roosevelt's New Deal was based on the policy of increasing defecits to stimulate the economy during downturns... which began a golden era of economic growth. Your 'solution' of a. reigning in spending at this time and b. cutting all foreign aid is unsustainable, and quite frankly, silly.

I did, you simply didn't understand it. Which is OK, but then you said you studied economics, which confused me because I thought you understood. Let me explain.

If you enforce a policy of austerity in order to 'restore confidence in the market' (which didn't work), you just lengthen the downturn. Roosevelt's New Deal was based on the policy of increasing defecits to stimulate the economy during downturns... which began a golden era of economic growth. Your 'solution' of a. reigning in spending at this time and b. cutting all foreign aid is unsustainable, and quite frankly, silly.

Firebird-5

This makes a lot of sense, however I not sure that's allowed on this forum. You may get modded*

*Joke.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]The US needs to start cutting expenses. Not increasing them. You are aware the middle cIass is disappearing? This is not a good sign. The middle cIass is the backbone of any successful country.

I'm not concerned with creditors. I'm concerned with fixing the domestic issues which cost money. Money that is going over seas.

LJS9502_basic

Speaking for my country, The United Arab Emirates, I can state that the relation we base with US is not that of a military one, more precisely an economical one. We basically have a currency that is pegged with the US dollar, you can use dollars here. We also live pretty much like American standard life. We are taught American curiculum in schools (At least I did) and use American high school books.

The government here depends execlusively on American protection and thier military weapons. Same uniforms, same equipment just different flags ...to the point that soldiers who were sent to Afganistan were attacked due to their resemblance to US soldiers.

Also, our ports are of extreme significance to the US... but we are basically a puppet state to the United States.

The US is definitely not considered an enemy here. The government here does not voice opinions on the US, but if there is anything we as people are critic about is the US foriegn policy.

TehFuneral

[QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

Speaking for my country, The United Arab Emirates, I can state that the relation we base with US is not that of a military one, more precisely an economical one. We basically have a currency that is pegged with the US dollar, you can use dollars here. We also live pretty much like American standard life. We are taught American curiculum in schools (At least I did) and use American high school books.

The government here depends execlusively on American protection and thier military weapons. Same uniforms, same equipment just different flags ...to the point that soldiers who were sent to Afganistan were attacked due to their resemblance to US soldiers.

Also, our ports are of extreme significance to the US... but we are basically a puppet state to the United States.

The US is definitely not considered an enemy here. The government here does not voice opinions on the US, but if there is anything we as people are critic about is the US foriegn policy.

LJS9502_basic

Expansionary fiscal policy is perfectly reasonable. I agree with you that the US has a debt problem, but there's no reason why that can't be managed, instead of the alarmist 'SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING' approach of the GOP (did you see paul ryan's 'path to prosperity'? things more toxic than lehman brothers).

Speaking for my country, The United Arab Emirates, I can state that the relation we base with US is not that of a military one, more precisely an economical one. We basically have a currency that is pegged with the US dollar, you can use dollars here. We also live pretty much like American standard life. We are taught American curiculum in schools (At least I did) and use American high school books.

The government here depends execlusively on American protection and thier military weapons. Same uniforms, same equipment just different flags ...to the point that soldiers who were sent to Afganistan were attacked due to their resemblance to US soldiers.

Also, our ports are of extreme significance to the US... but we are basically a puppet state to the United States.

The US is definitely not considered an enemy here. The government here does not voice opinions on the US, but if there is anything we as people are critic about is the US foriegn policy.

TehFuneral

So out of curiosity, where does UAE's true loyalty go? All those sound like mere mutual benefits that can replace the US in the light of a better support.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

Speaking for my country, The United Arab Emirates, I can state that the relation we base with US is not that of a military one, more precisely an economical one. We basically have a currency that is pegged with the US dollar, you can use dollars here. We also live pretty much like American standard life. We are taught American curiculum in schools (At least I did) and use American high school books.

The government here depends execlusively on American protection and thier military weapons. Same uniforms, same equipment just different flags ...to the point that soldiers who were sent to Afganistan were attacked due to their resemblance to US soldiers.

Also, our ports are of extreme significance to the US... but we are basically a puppet state to the United States.

The US is definitely not considered an enemy here. The government here does not voice opinions on the US, but if there is anything we as people are critic about is the US foriegn policy.

Firebird-5

Expansionary fiscal policy is perfectly reasonable. I agree with you that the US has a debt problem, but there's no reason why that can't be managed, instead of the alarmist 'SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING' approach of the GOP (did you see paul ryan's 'path to prosperity'? things more toxic than lehman brothers).

None of those are really allies. They are simply accomodations of convenience.

Israel is perhaps the worst ally of the bunch of them, although they are by far the most skilled at playing the US.

SUD123456

[QUOTE="Firebird-5"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Don't worry...we criticize foreign policy here as well. Anyway I'm out. To think continued spending when ill afforded to do is the correct path means there isn't anything to be said to change the minds of those that believe such. Have a great day.

LJS9502_basic

Expansionary fiscal policy is perfectly reasonable. I agree with you that the US has a debt problem, but there's no reason why that can't be managed, instead of the alarmist 'SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING' approach of the GOP (did you see paul ryan's 'path to prosperity'? things more toxic than lehman brothers).

If you want to act without reason or a vision for the future then so be it, you're the one who votes. But realise that it is not good for the US or the world as a whole.

I wouldn't even consider Saudi Arabia or Israel real allies.. Israel circumvents UN sanctions and pretty much is able to do as it pleases which only leads more hatred to the US with no oversight what so ever.. Saudi Arabia is an extreme Islam monarchy which flies in the face of the war against extremist zealots.. We are only "allies" with them because of oil, and as so we conviently ignore their human rights violations and other draconic problems.sSubZerOo

But you do realize that Saudi Arabia was established by Western means, no? Particularly, the UK and US.

Can you really condemn their actions while your country has created them?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]I wouldn't even consider Saudi Arabia or Israel real allies.. Israel circumvents UN sanctions and pretty much is able to do as it pleases which only leads more hatred to the US with no oversight what so ever.. Saudi Arabia is an extreme Islam monarchy which flies in the face of the war against extremist zealots.. We are only "allies" with them because of oil, and as so we conviently ignore their human rights violations and other draconic problems.Victorious_Fize

But you do realize that Saudi Arabia was established by Western means, no? Particulary, the UK and US.

No they were established by a agreement in WW1 in which Britain allowed a bunch of tribal states to combine for a state if they rebelled against the Ottoman Empire.. The US has no part in that creation.. It doesn't matter it was a simple agreement of mutual benefit.. Thats about it. Furthermore just because Britain created them doesn't make them sun shine and lolipops.. The US and Britain have created and supported numerous brutal dictatorships and or governments.

[QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

Speaking for my country, The United Arab Emirates, I can state that the relation we base with US is not that of a military one, more precisely an economical one. We basically have a currency that is pegged with the US dollar, you can use dollars here. We also live pretty much like American standard life. We are taught American curiculum in schools (At least I did) and use American high school books.

The government here depends execlusively on American protection and thier military weapons. Same uniforms, same equipment just different flags ...to the point that soldiers who were sent to Afganistan were attacked due to their resemblance to US soldiers.

Also, our ports are of extreme significance to the US... but we are basically a puppet state to the United States.

The US is definitely not considered an enemy here. The government here does not voice opinions on the US, but if there is anything we as people are critic about is the US foriegn policy.

Victorious_Fize

So out of curiosity, where does UAE's true loyalty go? All those sound like mere mutual benefits that can replace the US in the light of a better support.

We do not pledge loyality to any current superpower. We are a neutral state. We pledged our loyality to our late president Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan. During the formation of the UAE, one of our goals was to unite neighboring countries. We would have been united with Qatar and Bahrain but it did not happen. Our vision then shifted to the GCC and Arab League to strengthen further ties, but still it did not go as smoothly. Frankly, now, our government is only concerned in providing a better life for its citizens.

We have one ally in the Middle East - Israel.

But we might lose them too, if Obama keeps it up the way he's been going lately.

We have one ally in the Middle East - Israel.

But we might lose them too, if Obama keeps it up the way he's been going lately.

topsemag55

We have one ally in the Middle East - Israel.

But we might lose them too, if Obama keeps it up the way he's been going lately.

topsemag55

I am all for it.. They are a detriment to the US policy within the Middle East.. They were only ever useful political within the region during the Cold War. Now they have been a constant mark of hatred by the rest of the Middle East in which has hurt US policy immensely.. Israel furthermore constantly has gone against US wishes in settling in the West Bank.. Israel needs the US more than the US ever needs Israel now..

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]

[QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

Speaking for my country, The United Arab Emirates, I can state that the relation we base with US is not that of a military one, more precisely an economical one. We basically have a currency that is pegged with the US dollar, you can use dollars here. We also live pretty much like American standard life. We are taught American curiculum in schools (At least I did) and use American high school books.

The government here depends execlusively on American protection and thier military weapons. Same uniforms, same equipment just different flags ...to the point that soldiers who were sent to Afganistan were attacked due to their resemblance to US soldiers.

Also, our ports are of extreme significance to the US... but we are basically a puppet state to the United States.

The US is definitely not considered an enemy here. The government here does not voice opinions on the US, but if there is anything we as people are critic about is the US foriegn policy.

TehFuneral

So out of curiosity, where does UAE's true loyalty go? All those sound like mere mutual benefits that can replace the US in the light of a better support.

We do not pledge loyality to any current superpower. We are a neutral state. We pledged our loyality to our late president Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan. During the formation of the UAE, one of our goals was to unite neighboring countries. We would have been united with Qatar and Bahrain but it did not happen. Our vision then shifted to the GCC and Arab League to strengthen further ties, but still it did not go as smoothly. Frankly, now, our government is only concerned in providing a better life for its citizens.

That's good to hear. UAE is a fine country indeed.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

We have one ally in the Middle East - Israel.

But we might lose them too, if Obama keeps it up the way he's been going lately.

-Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="topsemag55"]

We have one ally in the Middle East - Israel.

But we might lose them too, if Obama keeps it up the way he's been going lately.

fillini

[QUOTE="fillini"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Netanyahu is a much bigger threat to that relationship than Obama is. -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="fillini"] Netanyahu has only responded to Obama's actions. He hasn't done anything to endanger the U.S./Israeli relationship. Obama's ignorance has.

fillini

The amount of times U.S. has backstabbed Pakistan I really wouldn't call them an ally. Majority of Pakistanis hate U.S., it's probably same with other ME countries.

Harisemo

Reverse the roles of backstabbing and you'd be correct.

The US does not have real allies; just vassals.

DraugenCP

The U.K. is quite a real ally.

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

None of those are really allies. They are simply accomodations of convenience.

Israel is perhaps the worst ally of the bunch of them, although they are by far the most skilled at playing the US.

fillini

Because they only seem to damage the US reputation by using US support as an excuse and/or backup whenever something from the UN comes up.

They are overusing the power given to them without taking into consideration the consequences.

Is it really that much of a mystery?