The USA bombs a country and then demands money. - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Ongoing wars and conflict resolution, international agreements or lack thereof. Nationhood, secessionist movements, national 'home' government versus internationalist trends and globalisation.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14787227
The US bombs a country and then demands money. lol
Perverse or what? Well that's capitalism for you.

A recurring demand by the United States that Cambodia repay $500m in "war debt" has prompted fury in the Southeast Asian nation.

The loan started out as $274m in the 1970s, which the US says was used for food supplies, but Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen has called it "dirty money" and said it was used to buy weapons.

Sen said the US had no right to demand repayment of a debt that was "blood-stained" from US bombing of Cambodian territory during the Vietnam war.

"The US created problems in my country and is demanding money from us," he said, according to local media. "We also don't demand that the US pay for the damage and destruction caused by the war. We just want the US to be responsible for the problem of the debt."

Sen called on US President Donald Trump to cancel the debt late last year, but Washington ignored pleas to cancel the decades-old arrangement.

Between 1972 and 1974, the US Department of Agriculture financed $274m in purchases of US cotton, rice and flour by the US-backed Khmer Republic, then an ally in the war to stem the spread of communism in Southeast Asia.

During that time, the US dropped more than 500,000 tonnes of explosives on Cambodia's countryside.

Journalist Elizabeth Becker, who covered the Cambodian genocide in the 1970s, told Al Jazeera it was immoral for the US to ask for repayment.

"US would not drop it. It would have been so easy to forgive the repayment, it would have been easy to refinance it for education like they did in Vietnam," she said.

"The US intervention in Cambodia was easily the most controversial that we had in that era. They [US] dragged Cambodia into the Vietnam War for hopes that by expanding it they could win, the complications now are that even 50 years later, the Khmer Rouge legacy is horrible."

Al Jazeera


EDIT
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/03/a ... 12914.html




.
Last edited by anarchist23 on 19 Mar 2017 11:31, edited 2 times in total.
#14787319
That's right, the 'capitalist' idiots know the price of everything & the value of nothing.

I'm sure the Vietnamese are anxiously waiting for the bill to arrive for the stockpiles of Napalm dropped on their population by the yanks in the early 60's.
I could not think of a dimmer idiot anywhere in the world, until the President of The USA 'TRUMPED' my own deliberations.

I am going to nominate Donald TRUMP as the densest material in the universe, that's bound to reward me with a Nobel Peace Prize for the 'discovery' , sic.

I'm sure that George OSBORNE & 'spread sheet' Phil HAMMOND are close on his heels.

I think that we in the UK are likely to be luckier than the American people though, our current bunch of idiots are due to be replaced in 2020 by another bunch of idiots, possibly, but, don't hold out much hope, marginally more acceptable in the 'nuclear' option context.
#14787321
Nonsense wrote:I could not think of a dimmer idiot anywhere in the world, until the President of The USA 'TRUMPED' my own deliberations.


Personally, I thought that George Bush jnr had the distinction of the dimmest idiot in the history of US politics but then DT came along. Life is full of surprises. lol
God Bless America. no one else will
#14787415
MistyTiger wrote:Cambodia is a poor country. How could they ever repay the debt, even if they wanted to? :?:


I used to think that John Bolton or Donald Rumsfeld or Dan Qayle were the clumsiest, dumbest men in Politics. I was wrong.

Image


The dumbest man in politics was the the congressman from Georgia that objected to putting more military on the Island of Guam because he thought it would tip over and capsize. That is a dumb crazy liberal Democrat for you.
#14787481
anarchist23 wrote:Personally, I thought that George Bush jnr had the distinction of the dimmest idiot in the history of US politics but then DT came along. Life is full of surprises. lol
God Bless America. no one else will


It begs the question about 'democracies', how do the electorates manage to so comprehensively to get it 'wrong' every time?

Politicians are PIGS, they always have their snouts in the Capitalist trough, once elected, they serve TWO masters, that should NOT be allowed, serve the PEOPLE who elected & pay for your salary, or get the fudge out of it to pursue your true goal of sniffing out the money in the capitalist pig trough.

The REALITY is, half the politicians in the world or more, could not get work or hold down a job, were it not for the lottery of politics that elected them, thus giving them the opportunity to indulge in their pet project of being as corrupt as the legal blind-eye will allow them to be.
#14787489
Politicians are PIGS, they always have their snouts in the Capitalist trough, once elected, they serve TWO masters, that should NOT be allowed, serve the PEOPLE who elected & pay for your salary, or get the fudge out of it to pursue your true goal of sniffing out the money in the capitalist pig trough.

But going into politics is actually the most effective way of sniffing out the money in the capitalist pig trough. After all, would someone like Peter Mandelson or the like ever have been successful if they had to compete as entrepreneurs or businessmen? I seriously doubt it. Mandelson's main area of expertise appeared to be accepting interest-free loans from businessmen in return for political influence. He appeared to regard this as the payoff for the whole dreary business of pretending to represent the interests of the grubby proles who elected him. But it has ever been thus - politicians were doing this shit even in the time of ancient Rome, and they'll likely still be doing it when the Sun finally goes nova and sterilises the Earth. Capitalism just makes it more obvious, that's all.
#14787500
Potemkin wrote:But going into politics is actually the most effective way of sniffing out the money in the capitalist pig trough. After all, would someone like Peter Mandelson or the like ever have been successful if they had to compete as entrepreneurs or businessmen? I seriously doubt it. Mandelson's main area of expertise appeared to be accepting interest-free loans from businessmen in return for political influence. He appeared to regard this as the payoff for the whole dreary business of pretending to represent the interests of the grubby proles who elected him. But it has ever been thus - politicians were doing this shit even in the time of ancient Rome, and they'll likely still be doing it when the Sun finally goes nova and sterilises the Earth. Capitalism just makes it more obvious, that's all.



I think it's worse now than it was in ancient Greece & Rome or even in the pre-modern era of recent times because before the right to be elected was opened up to everybody in the modern era, only the rich could be elected into office without a salary and they had to contribute from their own money to become eligible. Of course they still tried to use the office to enrich themselves but in different ways than merely taking petty bribes. Today I believe we have politicians who are a lot more hungry & consequently cheap.
#14787514
Hindsite wrote:
The dumbest man in politics was the the congressman from Georgia that objected to putting more military on the Island of Guam because he thought it would tip over and capsize. That is a dumb crazy liberal Democrat for you.


His reason for the objection seems stupid but I agree with objecting to putting more military on Guam or any island in the Pacific or anywhere in the world. With so much money towards the military, just how much money is left for the Americans back home for infrastructure spending and improvement?
#14787734
MistyTiger wrote:His reason for the objection seems stupid but I agree with objecting to putting more military on Guam or any island in the Pacific or anywhere in the world. With so much money towards the military, just how much money is left for the Americans back home for infrastructure spending and improvement?


Right, it's all about choices, as in priorities, in a capitalist society, it's the people who pull the capitalist cart along the road to the fat cat paradise laden with riches & it's the corrupted politicians on the take who created the situation.

Like Cervantes ,'Don Quixote' on his trusty steed, with a carrot dangling before him, the steed moves along in the false hope of reaching that carrot, never to obtain the reward, but always to pay the cost of carrying his master.

So too with the dishonest promise by politicians like Theresa MAY in the UK, FALSE promises 'to make a country that 'works' for all', notice, like CAMERON, NO PROMISE TO MAKE YOU 'BETTER-OFF'.

Under 'TORY' government's, any 'gains' (carrots)are ALWAYS outweighed by the 'losses'(inflation-remember V.AT increase from 15-20% in the 2010-11 budget?).

In 2010, the UK was well & truly sick to the teeth of MP's fulfilling their hyper-inflated 'sense-of-entitlement' with the Westminster expenses system.
'New Labour' lost that election, what replaced it is far worse, but like previous 'TORY' administrations, they, the people, have grasped the small morsels of tax cuts(created from welfare cuts) worth nothing, because any gains made have been swallowed up by inflationary price increases everywhere, EVERYONE suffers from that, in particular pensioners & those on benefits.

One may ignore the last two groups, but just remember, in a capitalist system, it's not just the 'malingerers' that pay the price with low benefits or those on pensions that worked for 50 years for a pension that doesn't cover one's rent at today's prices.

NO, 'YOU' who think it doesn't matter, WILL regret it, for YOU too will suffer eventually.

In America, as in this country, there government has the wrong priorities, made by making incorrect choices.

TRUMP is embarking on massive military spending, that is wrong, a governments responsibilities are to guarantee FAIR SHARES FOR ALL, NOT just the FEW.
That military spending is typical 'Republican' pork barrel politics, that military spending is 'defending' what one may ask?

A society that is deeply divided, a nation of 'HAVES' & 'HAVE NOTS', both in the UK & USA.

Such 'democratic' societies are not societies that have values worth voting for.
Last edited by Nonsense on 20 Mar 2017 14:43, edited 2 times in total.

ATTEMPTED STABBING OF US MARINE VET BY ANTIFA h[…]

What did you think of the Panorama "document[…]

The Evolution Fraud

Living things provide abundant evidence of their[…]

Your lack of an argument is noted.