Our taxes may pay for new utility services that effect a region of our state that we don't live in. They may pay for a new bridge over a river that we have never crossed in our lives and may never even once in the future. They may pay for highway repairs on a highway that we never traverse. They may pay for new cars for a police department in a city or town we don't live in.
But, no matter, these are still our neighbors and the people that we live within our state. They may receive services, but this is not to dump tax dollars into their pockets for no other reasons than to enrich them with no real tangible benefit to us that we could not get without giving them those dollars. Such situations happen within our state, and these people aren't just getting financial aid so they can make billions more themselves without a drop of that coming back to us. Helping poor seniors, the homeless, poor people get back on their feet or supplement their income because they simply aren't making enough to live on is one thing.
But these people aren't getting billions in aid as individual entities in the span of a year or two to make billions more free and clear. These people aren't getting millions in aid as individual entities in the span of a year or two so they can make millions more free and clear. These people aren't getting hundreds of thousands in aid as individual entities in the span of a year or two so they can make hundreds of thousands more free and clear. Heck it isn't even tens of thousands and barely touches in the thousands as individual entities, and it isn't so they can take it to just run off an make more free and clear. It's aid for the needy.
When we think about interests like oil companies, mining concerns and factories located overseas for the purposes of exploiting cheap labor we rarely think about those things as money being sucked straight from our pockets and dumped into the concerns, interests, ambitions, designs, goals and selfish desires of entities of that really do not benefit us – the United States of America - as a nation at all. In fact, we rarely think of these things as making things potentially worse for us in anyway, but that is often what they do.
For example, we spend billions in the Middle East on foreign bases and all that goes into a number of services, like the upkeep of infrastructure, contractors for grounds keeping, contractors for laundry services, contractors for food services, contractors for office supplies, contractors for electronics, contractors for vehicles and more. We hear on the news that these bases with numbers like 36,000 plus in Japan, 53,000 plus in Germany, 10,000 plus in Italy, 9,000 plus in the UK and 15,000 plus in Kuwait are there to protect us from terrorists.
Really? Seriously? Like, Italian terrorists? Really? German terrorists? Japanese terrorists? In 2012? Uh huh...
We know president Obama rode into office in 2008 on a promise of being the president of peace. In fact there are still cars riding around with Obama '08 bumper stickers with the peace signs in the “O.” He was supposed to be the difference from Bush. Yet, when the opportunity came, he tried to stay in Iraq, has promised never ending support for Afghanistan and has promised to ramp up our military bases in the Pacific to keep in check our number one threat … our number one foreign trading partner. Wait, huh? So the guys we supply more money in business to than they get from their own country, and that holds the largest amount of US debt second only to the US government, are about to bomb us? Huh. And is Santa Claus supposed to bomb over half his reindeer?
I mean some people might look at the 15,000 plus in Kuwait and say, “well it's the Middle East, we should have troops there.” Fine, let's look at that.
We went into Kuwait during the first Gulf War back in January of 1991. That ended in February of 1991 when starving Iraqi soldiers were surrendering in droves. The military dictator we installed back in the late seventies, Saddam Hussein (oh yeah, we did that), turned on his allies and tried to annex Kuwait. We went in, put a stop to it and set up a large base there. Yet, since then the biggest and most rapidly growing threat was Al Qaeda, and we knew it. Large troop numbers were never needed to fight them as they operated in small cells and stayed mobile and very low profile until they struck. We trained them to do that back when they were called the Mujaheddin, and we were bankrolling their fight against the Soviets with the hopes they would eventually help destabilize the USSR (oh yeah, we did that too).
Most of the radical extremists that joined them were coming out of radical madrasahs in Saudi Arabia. That's right, the close allies of the US and the Bush family had the most radical extremists terrorists coming out of their nation. In fact, fifteen of the nineteen hijackers on 9-11 came from Saudi Arabia. If troop presence determined how well we were able to fight terrorism, don't you think we'd have more troops there? Shouldn't that be a dangerous nation? Currently we have 200 plus troops there. Yup two-zero-zero. It's considered such a threat the US military is involved in running two golf courses in Saudi Arabia. ( http://www.alternet.org/story/82009/the_military-leisure_golf_complex) Whoa, watch those nasty link side bombs! Why isn't president Obama calling for more troops in Saudi Arabia?
We take out terrorists with drones, smart bombs and got Bin laden with a small group of SEALS. Remember all those daisy cutters dropped in Hella Bora, or whatever it was called? They couldn't even unearth dinosaur fossils. The Taliban are a bad oppressive theocratic government that harbored the terrorist group Al Qaeda, but they aren't terrorists, they're a government on the run that currently runs their own virtual state in a part of Pakistan called Waziristan. Officially we have no US bases in Pakistan officially, but have about six small bases. For troops, you might ask? Nope, they are small air fields for drones. ( http://gizmodo.com/5886642/these-are-all-the-us-drone-bases-in-pakistan) They don't need over 50,000 troops in Germany to take out terrorists, or they'd be closer to Pakistan – permanently.
We have the huge bases to point guns at nations that have oil, mining concerns, cheap labor factories and more that wealthy corporations benefit from. We don't get dime one from oil profits and they haven't hired Americans to work those fields in decades. No, those are manned mostly by cheap labor imported in from the poorest countries in the world, like Nepal, Bangladesh, etc. We fund their private security by having our military sitting there - excuse me, by paying for our military to be there. They can afford their own security mind you, they just would rather get it for free via us.
Our “endless support” for the Afghani government? Well that is us paying for guns to be pointed at any people that would try to muscle in on wealthy corporate mining claims. ( http://www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com/golfcourses.html) Our ramping up our presence in the Pacific by the guy that said he would be the president of peace from the supposed party of hippies? That is to point guns at any people that might threaten cheap labor factories owned by wealthy corporations. China are our greatest buddies really, and they keep North Korea in check, and will in al likelihood help usher them into the fray eventually, when it is politically expedient of course. We pay billions to protect the corporate interests of mining concerns and never get any of their profits put into our bank accounts to reimburse us for the tax dollars we pay to ensure they don't have to pay private security companies to do the same thing. We pay billions to protect cheap labor factories that are there because they don't want to pay Americans decent wages here, and we never see dime one from their profits put back in our savings accounts. They could afford their own security, but would rather have us pay for it.
Clearly, this is not done because it benefits us. So who does it benefit? It benefits the politicians that pass the laws allowing it because those corporations fill the campaign coffers for those campaigns. Wealthy oil companies, mining concerns, cheap labor concerns and of course defense contractors donate to these campaignsm, and so they pass laws sending money to them and into their accounts. There are no nice guys in Washington DC, just people with really well rehearsed smiles.
It's you and me that pay for all this. Is it fair? When will it end? Why should we have to keep paying for it? It's like the endless fighting between Israel and Palestine. Just when we think it might be over, and we can stop getting hit with the blowback from their conflict, not ours, it comes back to bite us reminding us of the huge price we are paying for something that really has less to do with us, than the failing education system our children here in the US are suffering from, for example. Since when did making Exxon Mobil wealthier become more important than our children's futures? How on earth did we ever get so fooled?
To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.