Quote:
Originally Posted by kirklancaster
You are genuinely missing the point Withano.
And that point is - NOT that our Foreign Aid billions MIGHT be being DIRECTLY spent on buying weaponry by the Pakistani Government but that, if they can AFFORD Nuclear Weapons, then they can afford to help their own people in need, and so by us continuing to pump money into the Pakistani Government's grubby little hands, we are doing NOTHING to make them re-think their priorities.
There is an argument that OUR own Government has its priorities wrong by renewing Trident while our poor citizens get poorer, and our homeless problem and other problems degenerate, but WE do NOT receive Billions of pounds in Foreign Aid handouts from other countries.
|
Actually, you missed the point by not reading through the thread (again

). I completely acknowledge that foreign aid would not go towards weaponary, that was simply the leading point in the argument from the opposing side. I agree, its utterly irrelevant, and frankly distasteful... Not to mention, simply incorrect.
My opinions on the second point you brought up can also be found on the thread. (Really should read through it before jumping in for a fight

).. Should foreign aid go towards countries that can afford weapons? In
my summary yes, lets not kill off innocent children because we dont like their prime-minister.
If you did read through the thread

, you would have saw that you and I would have similar opinions had the title been 'is [any country] distributing their wealth appropriately', but in a hurry for an argument or a hasty conclusion, you missed this. The thread is about foreign aid, and I'd like to think that you wouldnt want to discontinue or limit funding to Pakistan to teach the country a lesson? I'm sure that isn't what you're implying, that would give the thread an entirely new dark route, which I wouldnt walk you down.
I'm sure follow-up questions that you have to any of this can also be found on the thread, I don't care too much for repeating any of it, so get reading

.