ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel


Updated on May 19, 2011

Money for peace?

After what happened in Pakistan, with the concealment of Osama Bin Laden for close to five years, is the U.S. going to trust any government, civilian or military, again?

There is no doubt that the Obama administration, like several U.S. administrations before it, is doing its best to conduct foreign policy matters to portray America as being a peace loving nation, and that its intentions are to make friends with all nations for all to live in peace.

That, to put it mildly, is a noble cause, and nobody in his right mind will say "No" to such foreign policy. However, is not such foreign policy an idealism?

One can even go farther to say that it is not only an idealism; but it is a myth. A utopia that can never be achieved by any one nation, no matter how hard it tries.

At this point in world affairs, everybody can assume that trustworthiness has been jettisoned out of the window, so to speak, not by just one single nation, but by all nations, including, of course, the United States of America.

The United Nations Organization was formed on the premise that peace must be the objective of all its members, and that the requirement to accomplish that milestone must be for all industrial countries to stop the development of weapons of war of any kind, including nuclear weapons.

It, UNO, was to continue the task of the League of Nations; and that was to ensure that war or wars never broke out again. (That idea has been found impractical; but that should be another story).

What took place in Pakistan must be clear to the U.S. Government that, idealism, however and whatever it was intended for, did not work; and as such, it must be stopped.

With all the foreign aid going to that country, there must at least be just one person there who would be honest, and even truthful, to the U.S. Yet, it did not occur to any Pakistani to be that type of a person.

It could therefore be assumed that the people there have taken all the money pouring into their country as "payola" that could be afforded by all U.S. administrations, in the name of peace, and for maintaining friendly relations.

As such, they could choose to be loyal or disloyal; or even dishonest to the U.S. Simply put, they could not care less whichever choice they made. All Pakistani leaders should be ashamed of themselves, with respect to Bin Laden hiding out in their country for five long years without their knowledge.

Now, it is not just Pakistan. It is happening almost everywhere, and it is about time for America to stop making peaceful gestures all around the globe at the expense of its own citizens. Free money to these countries, in many circumstances, is not appreciated. Moreover, they need schools; Americans also need schools. They need hospitals; Americans also need hospitals, and so on and so forth.

In other words, America cannot continue to hold itself hostage by doling out all its resources in the form of aid to help other countries, some of whom are not even its friends. It (U.S.) cannot afford to pursue a unilateral doctrine of helping other countries and getting nothing back.

Peace, after all, was what the UNO was created for, and therefore all its members must be made responsible for its upkeep.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.