• Afghanistan Asks U.S. for $537 Million Bailout
    21 replies, posted
Liberation = Dependence? [URL]http://www.mediaite.com/online/afghan-government-asks-u-s-for-537-million-bailout/[/URL] [QUOTE]“Too Big To Fail” has never been applied to a besieged nation torn apart by sectarian factions, but let’s try it here: Afghanistan’s government recently asked the US for a $537 million bailout to pay its bills, and they’d like it within the next “five to six” days. “We hope they will pay for us, and we are asking at once,” [B]Alhaj M. Aqa[/B], the director general of the treasury at the Ministry of Finance, [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/afghan-official-says-the-government-has-nearly-run-out-of-money-needs-us-bailout/2014/09/16/73d9e0fe-3daa-11e4-b0ea-8141703bbf6f_story.html?Post+generic=%3Ftid%3Dsm_twitter_washingtonpost"]told [I]The Washington Post[/I][/URL]. “They are asking me when I need it, and I told them this week or we will have a problem.” ADVERTISEMENT Thanks to a disputed presidential election back in April, which has deterred foreign investors and halted domestic spending (leading to a 25% fall in tax and tariff revenue), the Afghani government has burned through its reserve money and needs nearly a half billion immediately to keep up its infrastructure: [I]The government was barely able to cover its September payroll for more than 500,000 national and provincial employees, he added. And with its October payroll deadlines approaching, Aqa said the country’s financial challenges are now “critical”… [/I] [I]If additional money is not allocated, Aqa said, the government will have to begin deferring payment of bills for items ranging from fuel for government vehicles to official stationery. [/I] [I]The fiscal crisis could also hamper the government’s ability to feed more than 350,000 Afghan soldiers and police, Aqa said. Salaries for police and army personnel are not at risk because they are paid directly by the U.S.-led coalition. [/I] Currently, the US has spent nearly $104 billion in Afghanistan, which runs on an annual budget of $7 billion, which is not a lot of money.[/QUOTE]
I think the US should pay or provide a low interest loan. Afghanistan not being able to pay its troops would only make things worse for everyone there. They should also provide advisors to help afghanistan rebuild itself as a sustainable economy.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45996237]I think the US should pay or provide a low interest loan. Afghanistan not being able to pay its troops would only make things worse for everyone there. They should also provide advisors to help afghanistan rebuild itself as a sustainable economy.[/QUOTE] Other countries need to learn how to take care of themselves. You can't throw money at a problem an expect a corrupt nation such as Afghanistan to fix themselves and spend it wisely, the US should worry about themselves in most cases.
[QUOTE=Death Assured;45996267]Other countries need to learn how to take care of themselves. You can't throw money at a problem an expect a corrupt nation such as Afghanistan to fix themselves and spend it wisely, the US should worry about themselves in most cases.[/QUOTE] After you invade and stay in a country for that long I think you owe them some help afterwards
[QUOTE=Complifused;45996314]After you invade and stay in a country for that long I think you owe them some help afterwards[/QUOTE] still they can't just go to Washington and demand $600M by next wednesday, we're not just a piggy bank for a corrupt regime, yes there should be something done and if it will help then we should do some form of credit but we can't just toss them a bag of money
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45996237]I think the US should pay or provide a low interest loan. Afghanistan not being able to pay its troops would only make things worse for everyone there. They should also provide advisors to help afghanistan rebuild itself as a sustainable economy.[/QUOTE] I think the US should pay or provide students within its own country with a very low interest, long term loans to help the younger population pay for school before they pay out to countries which kill our citizens
[QUOTE=Sableye;45996356]still they can't just go to Washington and demand $600M by next wednesday, we're not just a piggy bank for a corrupt regime, yes there should be something done and if it will help then we should do some form of credit but we can't just toss them a bag of money[/QUOTE] 537 million isn't a whole lot for us when compared to other expenditures that do considerably less. We have somewhat of a duty to keep Afghanistan afloat, because chances are if we don't we'll be spending far more money in the future correcting the outcome.
Send Mitt Romney over there. If he can save the olympics, he can save Afghanistan
[QUOTE=Death Assured;45996267]Other countries need to learn how to take care of themselves. You can't throw money at a problem an expect a corrupt nation such as Afghanistan to fix themselves and spend it wisely, the US should worry about themselves in most cases.[/QUOTE] and letting the country collapse as the army switch sides to terrorists or local militias as teaching them how to take care of themselves? Especially with ISIS being so popular right now. A disenfranchised army with poor discplin and a feeling of a abandonment is literally the last thing you could possibly want.
[QUOTE=Sableye;45996356]still they can't just go to Washington and demand $600M by next wednesday, we're not just a piggy bank for a corrupt regime, yes there should be something done and if it will help then we should do some form of credit but we can't just toss them a bag of money[/QUOTE] Corrupt regime? I think you're confusing Afghanistan for somewhere else. [QUOTE="Code3Response"]I think the US should pay or provide students within its own country with a very low interest, long term loans to help the younger population pay for school before they pay out to countries which kill our citizens[/QUOTE] What the hell are you talking about? Afghanistan doesn't kill our citizens. I think you're getting the Taliban and organized terrorist militias confused with the actual Afghan federal government.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;45996463]Corrupt regime? I think you're confusing Afghanistan for somewhere else.[/QUOTE] Afghanistan is consistently ranked as the most corrupt nation on Earth on almost every level of government.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;45996463]Corrupt regime? I think you're confusing Afghanistan for somewhere else. [/QUOTE] Joke yes?
[QUOTE=Complifused;45996314]After you invade and stay in a country for that long I think you owe them some help afterwards[/QUOTE] Eh, you can maybe make this argument about Iraq but Afghanistan was already in anarchy in 2001. The US basically replaced one Islamist poverty regime with another. Except at least now Afghan women don't have to live inside of bags.
$540 million is quite frankly not a lot of money for the US govt. [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/study-iraq-afghan-war-costs-to-top-4-trillion/2013/03/28/b82a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html"]The actual wars there (and Iraq) cost 4-6 [I]trillion[/I] USD[/URL]. That is 0.01% (or 0.000108 times) the total cost of the war. (assuming 5T) [editline]16th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Trebgarta;45996741]Some still do, so if US-installed regime is corrupt as fuck, what was the point? Couldn't they provide a better one?[/QUOTE] When you shoot your way into a country you don't then get to choose the finer aspects of it's new leadership.
[QUOTE=Explosions;45996679]Eh, you can maybe make this argument about Iraq but Afghanistan was already in anarchy in 2001. The US basically replaced one Islamist poverty regime with another. Except at least now Afghan women don't have to live inside of bags.[/QUOTE] The west back gov passed laws legalising rape against wives. Its better than what it was, but afghan has a long way before its out of the dark.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45996237]I think the US should pay or provide a low interest loan. Afghanistan not being able to pay its troops would only make things worse for everyone there. They should also provide advisors to help afghanistan rebuild itself as a sustainable economy.[/QUOTE] With what money? We can't even pay our domestic debts, where the hell are we going to pay their debts from?
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;45996895]What, do you roll dice? Seriously, US installed the regime, how come didnt they choose?[/QUOTE] no they didn't the US left a gaping hole in afghanistan and then sat far away while shouting "helpful hints" about how it should be filled
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;45996895]What, do you roll dice? Seriously, US installed the regime, how come didnt they choose?[/QUOTE] US chose the warlords. When they invaded they chose to use the warlords to make the job easier. They made certain promises to get their allegiance and help. These promises included the warlords maintaining power after the war, through government or through private armies keeping tribal traditions. These warlords are all (there might be one or 2 I've not heard of) corrupt as fuck. When they got into power they set about removing anybody who could threaten them, be it old rivals or people investigating corruption. Not wanting to risk their job, life or the stability of the country nobody in afghan opposed them. It was that or have a longer, bloodier war which would probably result in the same thing, everybody hating each other and a whole lot of corruption. Amanullah Khan tried to modernise afghanistan and failed, the soviets tried (very good educational reforms, equal rights for women) and failed, we the west have tried and its proving difficult. I think it will be a long slow process which will involve little gain to show at the beginning, like a long term investment. The people need to feel respected and trusted, given pride in their nation which has been taken from them by decades of abuse from other powers. A short term, bomb some shit, install a gov, get out strategy just won't work. [editline]16th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=BrainDeath;45997082]no they didn't the US left a gaping hole in afghanistan and then sat far away while shouting "helpful hints" about how it should be filled[/QUOTE] Use these! [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651[/url] Use these! [url]http://www.stripes.com/news/report-u-s-wasted-60-billion-in-contracting-fraud-abuse-1.153787[/url] Use these! [url]http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/11/09/world/asia/09afghanistan/09afghanistan-articleLarge.jpg[/url]
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;45997196]From what I get, first there is a commie rev in Afghanistan, which was progressive like in .[/QUOTE] You can trace it back further. The British and Russians playing power games trying to oppress the Afghans and use the country as a pawn in their empire things. Then Afghan's industrial revolution, where Amanullah Khan tried to quickly bring it up to speed with progressive laws, education and equaler rights for men and women (in education at least). He tried to impliment change too fast and it offended the conservatives and fundamentalists. Eventually there was an uprising because people thought he had betrayed his country by trying to become more european. I believe that had he succeeded he would be like the Mustafa Kamal of Afghanistan.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.