• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged USAID: is it really a bunch of crazy leftists? / Trump Was Absolutely Right to Shut Down USAID

Sherkeu said:
It is a side effect we can tolerate to get ◊◊◊◊ done. Shut it all down.
I was a fan of Millei from the moment he won.
This is how the bloat gets slimmed. ¡Afuera!
Some things gets hurt in the process but it must be done for the prosperity of everyone long term.
Click to expand...

Darat said:
Have you looked at the state of Argentina? That is your role model?

ETA: Just went to check to see if a miracle has happened and I missed it - nope Argentina still has an annual inflation rate of over 100%.
Click to expand...

@Sherkeu Why is Trump still giving money to foreigners who can't run their own economy?
 
Last edited:
At Inside Medicine Jeremy Faust spoke with Dr. Atul Gawande about his documentary Rovina's Choice, "a highly impactful film that humanizes the toll of the Trump administration’s tragic decision to destroy most of USAID—which, with the stroke of a pen, spelled the deaths of what will likely end up being millions of people around the world...We close by asking viewers to like, share, and subscribe so we can elevate voices like Dr. Gawande’s, and we give clear directions to watch Rovina’s Choice on YouTube or at The New Yorker—framing it as essential viewing to grasp the human cost of dismantling USAID."
 
At X Nicholas Kristoff wrote, "I'm sympathetic to President Trump's desire to disable ISIS fighters in northern Nigeria, but I'm skeptical that firing a dozen tomahawk missiles -- at a cost of at least $30 million -- will be much of a setback for jihadis there. Meanwhile, Trump's USAID cuts kill far more Nigerians than ISIS does, and that $30 million would have saved large numbers of lives if directed to malaria, TB, RUTF or other interventions. And $30m devoted to education might in the long run have been more of a setback to jihadis. So Trump is right that militants are a real threat in Nigeria, but this strike seems performative and far from the best use of scarce funds."
 
Chris_Halkides said:
At X Nicholas Kristoff wrote, "I'm sympathetic to President Trump's desire to disable ISIS fighters in northern Nigeria, but I'm skeptical that firing a dozen tomahawk missiles -- at a cost of at least $30 million -- will be much of a setback for jihadis there. Meanwhile, Trump's USAID cuts kill far more Nigerians than ISIS does, and that $30 million would have saved large numbers of lives if directed to malaria, TB, RUTF or other interventions. And $30m devoted to education might in the long run have been more of a setback to jihadis. So Trump is right that militants are a real threat in Nigeria, but this strike seems performative and far from the best use of scarce funds."
Click to expand...
That ought to give some supporters some cognitive dissonance to untangle.
 
Most interesting claim I've seen is that USAID was mostly a front for CIA operations. Things like infiltrating agents via vaccine programs and the like, plus other stuff. The argument seemed pretty solid to me, but I haven't bothered to check receipts.
 
theprestige said:
Most interesting claim I've seen is that USAID was mostly a front for CIA operations. Things like infiltrating agents via vaccine programs and the like, plus other stuff. The argument seemed pretty solid to me, but I haven't bothered to check receipts.
Click to expand...
If it were true, there wouldn't be receipts.

I find it highly plausible though. From trusted anonymous sources, I understand that at least some of the USAID things were very likely CIA or related agency funding for buy-offs, bribes, etc. Most CIA work isn't movie-land guns and assassinations.
 
theprestige said:
Most interesting claim I've seen is that USAID was mostly a front for CIA operations. Things like infiltrating agents via vaccine programs and the like, plus other stuff. The argument seemed pretty solid to me, but I haven't bothered to check receipts.
Click to expand...

Emily's Cat said:
If it were true, there wouldn't be receipts.

I find it highly plausible though. From trusted anonymous sources, I understand that at least some of the USAID things were very likely CIA or related agency funding for buy-offs, bribes, etc. Most CIA work isn't movie-land guns and assassinations.
Click to expand...

You've both been watching too many cheap espionage movies. :sneaky:
 
Norman Alexander said:
You've both been watching too many cheap espionage movies. :sneaky:
Click to expand...
I was involved in at least two USAID projects that covered India and South Asia and a few countries in East Africa, the Agricultural Biotechnology Support Project and the Agricultural Innovations Partnership mainly working to build and upscale University-Farmer relationships. And I can confidently state that if the CIA was involved it would have been a waste of time. There was nothing that they would have not got from publicly available resources.
 
Sadly such conspiracy claims have for decades harmed projects that were very good for people. Coincidentally since Nigeria has recently been the topic of the thread it has often been a breeding place for such conspiracies. In Kano at the start of the 21st century a boycot of the polio vaccine started, with political and religious "leaders" endorsing it for their personal benefit. It resulted in a massive increase in polio cases and it wasn't confined to Nigeria, several other African countries that were considered polio free had new cases. Interestingly in this instance we can clearly see why such a conspiracy found fertile ground in Kano, look up "unethical drug trial in Kano by Pfizer" for the details.
 
No question USAID has been used as a vehicle for bribery and for propping up regimes.
But then, it's near impossible to conduct foreign aid without making arrangements with the powers that be.
 
isn't the elephant in the room here that despite cancelling all these programs that may or may not have been abused by the cia at times government spending hasn't gone down?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom