From: spike66 (spike66@attbi.com)
Date: Sat Apr 12 2003 - 13:26:19 MDT
Damien Sullivan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 06:09:37PM -0700, Brendan Coffey wrote:
>
>>$1.3B is not a "tie" with $1.98B. That's a 52.3% difference. The US's
>>aid to Israel in 2003 will be $2.1B. And $12B is over 3x the US'
>>total foreign military aid allocation. Damien is conflating total
>>foreign aid figures with foreign military aid figures...
>
> See? Biggiest recipient of foreign aid, then I talk about total foreign aid,
> with the numbers of Israel and Egypt which I've always heard. The later
> numbers seemed low, which I guess is explained if people switched to only
> talking about military aid. -xx- Damien X-)
The reason foreign aid figures are so divergent is that
it is unclear what should count. I would count all
military expenditures incurred in toppling a dysfunctional
regime, but not count expenditures incurred promoting
trade, which is just good business practice.
Freeing a nation of terrorists and its murderous
dictator is far more helpful to that nation than food or
medical supplies. In that sense, Iraq is the biggest
recipient of foreign aid in recent history, Afghanistan
second, and Israel waaay down the list.
spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 12 2003 - 13:36:02 MDT