The world doesn't need another Marshall Plan. The "world" needs to start caring enough about itself and its neighbors to start solving its own problems. Besides, we're not solving any problems, if anything we're causing more. Let's get out and make everyone happy.

__________________
In this country, we don't need reasons to make things legal; we need reasons to make things illegal. - Startup

Wouldn't a better version of your wish then be something like "stop America meddling with the issues of other countries"? That would include the aid part, but also other aspects, e.g. the possible invasions etc.

__________________

Nope. Because once we're there it is our business. Currently, the US has troops in nearly 130 countries around the world. They perform a variety of duties from combat operations to peacekeeping to training foreign militaries. Troops have been stationed in Japan, Germany and South Korea for 50 years. Ostensibly to serve as those nations defensive forces. These countries can defend themselves. We can do a lot of other things with the billions that we spend "protecting" these countries.

We never should have gone to Iraq. We should have pulled out of the UN as soon as we realized that the UN just wanted us to be their dog and was never really serious about preventing Iraq from having WMDs.

If all of these countries, including Iraq, wanted a nuke, we should've sold them the technology. If they want to use that nuke on her neighbors, including Israel, that's their decision and wouldn't/shouldn't have affected us in the least. If they attempt to use it on us, we would've lost a few million people and then wiped that country off the map. Then, we would've gone back to our own business - let the survivors clean up the mess that they allowed to happen.

Let Israel fight for herself, she's shown time and time again that she can.

When we give a country aid, we expect a return on our investment. We expect that the money will be used to good effect. This makes us interested. When the money doesn't work, or when we don't get the effect we wanted, we start meddling in their governments. Cut off the aid and you cut off our interest.

Nope, my wish stands. I'm more concerned about us. I'm selfish that way. When 3000 Americans have to die just because we think Saddam Hussein has to be contained, I say the sacrifice wasn't worth the goal. When 700+ (and counting) Americans have to die just to bring a little democracy to a bunch of people not willing to fight for it, I say we have to value American life at least as highly as that group of people values theirs. When billions of dollars are taken from American taxpayers to buy food for a group of people who repay us by dragging our dead soldiers through the streets, I say that our priorities are out of whack.

We never have to invade anyone. We can destroy any country with the push of a button from the safety of our own borders. If we're attacked, our retribution would be instant and an undeniable victory. We might lose a few million in the exchange, but the war would be over a day after it began. It's only when we're concerned about our interests in that country that we attempt to preserve some of it and thus preserve out interest. Remove the interest and you remove the need to preserve the country.

We need to stop caring about what the rest of the world does to itself and concern ourselves with what Americans are doing to Americans. Turn that Aggression Spending (as opposed to Defense Spending) into dollars to feed and house the poor, if you wish (I would prefer other uses). Take that foreign aid and make it domestic aid. Build America into an insurmountable, undeniable economic super-power. If you want to play with us economically, then be willing to play by our rules. Have free elections, a free society, free markets. If you don't, no problem, play with someone else. If so, we can have a long and profitable relationship, for both of us, for a long, long time.

__________________
In this country, we don't need reasons to make things legal; we need reasons to make things illegal. - Startup

So, i take it you still think Saddam was behind 9/11?
Ok, you don´t need to say anything else, we get the picture.
Who´s the conspiracy freak now?

__________________
"Quincitilius Varus, give me back my legions!"
Emperor Augustus of Rome.

Once again, your unbelievable ability to create shines through. When did I EVER say Saddam was behind 9.11?

__________________
In this country, we don't need reasons to make things legal; we need reasons to make things illegal. - Startup

Though Swamp-Things interpretation of your quote was wrong, doubt that what you were saying - that 9/11 (that's where the 3000 deaths come from, isn't it?) was a consequence of the US' Iraq policy - is correct.

Yes, it was, as stated by Osama bin Laden.

After Gulf War I, we placed troops in Saudi Arabia, under the auspices of the UN, in order to contain Saddam Hussein. (Remember, the rest of the UN members continue to claim that this containment was working.) The attack on 9.11, perpetrated by al Queda and bin Laden, was retribution for having our infidel troops on Muslim holy land.

There was no reason for those troops to be there. Hussein signed a cease-fire agreement in which he told the UN that he would disarm. We should've realized within the first 7 years that he was not going to disarm and that the UN was not going to make him disarm. If the UN wasn't concerned about it (whose members live much closer to Hussein than we do) then we shouldn't have been concerned about it. If we had removed those troops then there wouldn't have been as compelling a reason for al Queda to attack us.

Remove all troops from all foreign countries and protect this one. If everyone else wants to go to hell in a handbasket, we can make ourselves rich by selling them the technology to get there, and rich again by selling them the technology to rebuild their societies. It's a win-win for us, with no downside. Right now, it's a lose-lose situation with nothing but downside.

__________________
In this country, we don't need reasons to make things legal; we need reasons to make things illegal. - Startup

Oops, seems I thought around one corner too little. I stand corrected.

Well, the number of unemployed would rise incredibly, since the US wouldn't need many ground forces anymore. And what about military spending being a big economical boost? ;)

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Why is this continually popping up?
The highjackers were saudis in their majority, and the US army was occupying Saudi Arabia for much longer than they had to. Osama´s beef with the US was the 50.000 thousand US troops stationed in the Saudi desert, not Iraq. Osama and his ilk hated Saddam as much as the americans did. When the US began the first Golf war, he was probably hoping for the US to finish the job, and get rid of him, so that he could begin to set a permanent base of operations there. It was only ti´ll after the Gulf War, when the US refused to leave the bases in Saudi territory that Osama really turned on the US. It was only untill after the Gulf War that the bombings all over started. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. It was all a Saudi affair. Had the US left Saudi Arabia after the war, 9/11 might not have happened. Why did they stay? Why are they still there today? Saddam is gone, so why do they keep their bases there? They now have a whole country transformed into a giant US base, so why do they need the Saudis, knowing that their presence is causing serious trouble, and might ultimatly lead to the downfall of the government?
Iraq might have been the perfect excuse for the US to install themselfs in Saudi land then, but it´s not an excuse now. Nor was it in 2001, on 9/11.
If Osama had any problem with what was happening in Iraq, he would have made those planes fly 10 years earlier.

__________________
"Quincitilius Varus, give me back my legions!"
Emperor Augustus of Rome.