really?
I just noticed a headline blurb in the Times:
"Despite a finding by the State Department, the Obama administration will allow military aid to Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and Yemen."
That left me wondering why we were giving military aid to those countries in the first place. Seriously. In addition to their use of child soldiers, at least two (Congo and Sudan) are directly linked to genocide, and all four are terrible and corrupt. Here, I think, is a budget line item that I'd be happy to cut. Hell, I can't think of a country, with the possible exception of Iraq (under the pottery barn clause) that *should* be receiving military aid...
"Despite a finding by the State Department, the Obama administration will allow military aid to Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and Yemen."
That left me wondering why we were giving military aid to those countries in the first place. Seriously. In addition to their use of child soldiers, at least two (Congo and Sudan) are directly linked to genocide, and all four are terrible and corrupt. Here, I think, is a budget line item that I'd be happy to cut. Hell, I can't think of a country, with the possible exception of Iraq (under the pottery barn clause) that *should* be receiving military aid...