Bribing Good Behavior

| | Comments (0)

Child psychologists warn against it. Psychiatrists warn against it. President Bush criticized Clinton for it with N. Korea. So, why has bribing good behavior become the Bush administration's central foreign policy theme?

The President said this week he will send more aid to Colombia as a reward and assistance for its anti-drug efforts. The Administration has funneled billions of dollars into dictator Musharraf's regime in Pakistan for its assistance. Could Afghani's be far from the American handout? Soldiers on the ground in Iraq hand out 100's of thousands of dollars a month for good or helpful behavior. The U.S. has offered to reinstate monetary incentives to N. Korea in return for their backing off nuclear weapon development and proliferation.

The Romans followed this pattern with the Goths from the North. It was Rome's undoing. Once the word got out amongst Visigoth warlords that they would be handsomely rewarded by Rome if they attacked the Romans and defended conquered territory, attacks against Rome accelerated and lands belonging to Rome fell right and left. The more Rome bribed warlords to join with Rome, the more warlords came forward to threaten Rome.

This same scenario may easily be underway today, and may also be the root motivation of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other nations to nuclearize in hopes of deals like N. Korea has received, or Yemen and Syria where turning a blind eye to terrorists flowing through their country into Iraq holds out the promise of American tax dollar payments to their heads of government in return for efforts to stem the flow of terrorists into Iraq.

Bush knows he hasn't the military manpower to stop the flow of weapons or weapons development, thus bribery is being used instead. But what will happen when the bribes stop coming? How many domestic programs like roads, bridges (in very bad shape), and social programs, should the American tax payer yield to GOP spending cuts in order to send tax dollars to foreigners for acting appropriately?

Should the draft be off the table? Have some of our Generals been right all along that we need far more troops in Iraq to accomplish our mission? Is it more beneficial to the American tax payer to incentivize terrorist growth and weapons proliferation by bribing individuals and governments to stop, or would our money be better invested in quadrupling our troop strength and forcing curtailment of such dangerous behavior?

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Contact

Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.25

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by David R. Remer published on November 23, 2004 12:06 AM.

Congress and Fallujah. was the previous entry in this blog.

United: A chance! Divided: No Chance! is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.



Offsite Links