4 ms·

Destroying USAid weakend US' soft power abroad. NATO's members turning against each others in a non-sense economic war. Weakening all federal agencies meant to

by boudin 2y ago

Destroying USAid weakend US' soft power abroad. NATO's members turning against each others in a non-sense economic war. Weakening all federal agencies meant to bring stability in society. Trump spreading bluntly the propaganda from the Kremlin. Putin couldn't have written a better scenario to get rid of his main opposition. It's quite clear that Trump is just a puppet, but there's nothing new here. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-house https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers...

rayiner 2y ago
[flagged]
- dashundchen 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - rayiner 2y ago
    You didn’t “debunk” anything. You have no understanding of the history of State Department involvement in that region over decades, and are just reflexively assuming Elon is lying.
    - dashundchen 2y ago
      Trump and Musk are lying about that grant. Show me proof of their claims that entire $29 million grant went to to that agency was spent on work in Bangledashi elections as Musk/DOGE claimed, despite no federal contract indicating that. Show me the proof that DOGE "saved" that money after the contract was almost done and money was almost entirely granted. Show me the proof that it went to an agency of two people as Trump claimed. You can't show me proof of any of those things because they are lying. You either ignorantly or willfully continue to repeat that lie, likely for partisan reasons.
      - rayiner 2y ago
        The grant is documented here: https://www.highergov.com/grant/AID388A1700003/ https://www.highergov.com/grant/AID388A1700003/ Bangladeshi officials confirmed, moreover, that USAID bypassed official government channels in providing that money: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/usaid-bypassed-govt-channels-to-fund-29-million-political-project-bangladesh-official/articleshow/118545702.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/usaid-b... There is no legitimate reason for the U.S. to be supporting political organizations of any sort in another country, bypassing official government channels. It’s not a partisan point at all. My family came to America from Bangladesh because of USAID. I have every reason to hope the money was really going for childhood nutrition or vaccines or a legitimate expenditure like that.
- kristjansson 2y ago
  > Is interfering in bangladeshi elections “soft power?” Don't act like then entire purpose of USAID and the entire definition of soft power is whatever 0.08% of one year's budget you've been told to hate today. Distributing HIV medication is soft power. Sending food aid is soft power (and good farm policy). Supporting democratic elections is soft power. If it's unarmed and promoting American interests and values it's soft power.
  - hollerith 2y ago
    There are some things Washington should avoid doing even if it promotes American interests.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    > Don't act like then entire purpose of USAID and the entire definition of soft power is whatever 0.08% of one year's budget you've been told to hate today.... Supporting democratic elections is soft power. Don't talk down to me--I grew up around USAID and almost certainly know more about it than you. Nearly all our family friends are USAID or World Bank people. Virtually all of the people talking about USAID didn't know shit about it until it became another vector to play out their impotent rage at Trump. Interfering in other countries' politics undermines American soft power and the mission of USAID. All the things you and I both like--vaccinations for kids, maternal health, etc.--require working with governments to executive effectively. Interfering with domestic political affairs completely negates that. Governments will not trust a putative AID organization that is also bankrolling activist organizations in their countries. And approximately zero people in Asia/Africa/the Middle East have uniformly negative feelings about the U.S. meddling in their internal politics.
    - kristjansson 2y ago
      Fair, I was a bit ungenerous. So you believe - what? USAID shouldn’t engage in politics, and agree enough with a recent viral tweet to use it as your example, and to insinuate that anyone talking about USAID is just acting out their TDS. But also that USAID _should_ be doing the humanitarian work that comprised the overwhelming majority of its efforts and is quite literally being decimated. And that no benefit should accrue to the US? Or none in the form of a more aligned government or political system than history has allowed to take root?
throwawayq3423 2y ago
If Trump was taking direct orders from Putin, what would he be doing differently?
dionian 2y ago
Congress can easily fund USAID if they have the votes.

by boudin 2y ago

rayiner 2y ago

[flagged]

dashundchen 2y ago
[flagged]
- rayiner 2y ago
  You didn’t “debunk” anything. You have no understanding of the history of State Department involvement in that region over decades, and are just reflexively assuming Elon is lying.
  - dashundchen 2y ago
    Trump and Musk are lying about that grant. Show me proof of their claims that entire $29 million grant went to to that agency was spent on work in Bangledashi elections as Musk/DOGE claimed, despite no federal contract indicating that. Show me the proof that DOGE "saved" that money after the contract was almost done and money was almost entirely granted. Show me the proof that it went to an agency of two people as Trump claimed. You can't show me proof of any of those things because they are lying. You either ignorantly or willfully continue to repeat that lie, likely for partisan reasons.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      The grant is documented here: https://www.highergov.com/grant/AID388A1700003/ https://www.highergov.com/grant/AID388A1700003/ Bangladeshi officials confirmed, moreover, that USAID bypassed official government channels in providing that money: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/usaid-bypassed-govt-channels-to-fund-29-million-political-project-bangladesh-official/articleshow/118545702.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/usaid-b... There is no legitimate reason for the U.S. to be supporting political organizations of any sort in another country, bypassing official government channels. It’s not a partisan point at all. My family came to America from Bangladesh because of USAID. I have every reason to hope the money was really going for childhood nutrition or vaccines or a legitimate expenditure like that.
kristjansson 2y ago
> Is interfering in bangladeshi elections “soft power?” Don't act like then entire purpose of USAID and the entire definition of soft power is whatever 0.08% of one year's budget you've been told to hate today. Distributing HIV medication is soft power. Sending food aid is soft power (and good farm policy). Supporting democratic elections is soft power. If it's unarmed and promoting American interests and values it's soft power.
- hollerith 2y ago
  There are some things Washington should avoid doing even if it promotes American interests.
- rayiner 2y ago
  > Don't act like then entire purpose of USAID and the entire definition of soft power is whatever 0.08% of one year's budget you've been told to hate today.... Supporting democratic elections is soft power. Don't talk down to me--I grew up around USAID and almost certainly know more about it than you. Nearly all our family friends are USAID or World Bank people. Virtually all of the people talking about USAID didn't know shit about it until it became another vector to play out their impotent rage at Trump. Interfering in other countries' politics undermines American soft power and the mission of USAID. All the things you and I both like--vaccinations for kids, maternal health, etc.--require working with governments to executive effectively. Interfering with domestic political affairs completely negates that. Governments will not trust a putative AID organization that is also bankrolling activist organizations in their countries. And approximately zero people in Asia/Africa/the Middle East have uniformly negative feelings about the U.S. meddling in their internal politics.
  - kristjansson 2y ago
    Fair, I was a bit ungenerous. So you believe - what? USAID shouldn’t engage in politics, and agree enough with a recent viral tweet to use it as your example, and to insinuate that anyone talking about USAID is just acting out their TDS. But also that USAID _should_ be doing the humanitarian work that comprised the overwhelming majority of its efforts and is quite literally being decimated. And that no benefit should accrue to the US? Or none in the form of a more aligned government or political system than history has allowed to take root?

throwawayq3423 2y ago

If Trump was taking direct orders from Putin, what would he be doing differently?

dionian 2y ago

Congress can easily fund USAID if they have the votes.